User talk:Mysdaao/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Article moved to live site

Hello again. I just moved my article (after making your suggested changes) from my user space to the live site and when typing the name into the 'search' area, could not find it. I asked at the Help Desk and got the reply, "No, it's there, I found it. Our search engine is unreliable." Well, if I can't find it, how will anyone other than administrators be able to find it? I also Googled it and was given the 'User/Sputtnik' link - not what I want. Could you help me here? Also, is there anything I can do to make it show up in the first few searches on Google rather than 'John Biddle (Unitarian Minister)...(while my article is two pages back)?? Finally, what exactly do I need to 'redirect' when moving my article? Thanks so much, Mysdaao. Sputtnik (talk) 04:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia's search is not updated immediately after changes are made. It usually updates its index once a day. See Wikipedia:Searching#Delay in updating the search index for this information. When I search for "John Biddle" now in Wikipedia, John Biddle (yachting cinematographer) is the sixth result, so people will be able to find it now.

The only thing you can do to change Google's page rankings that might help is to create links to the article. Google's performs its indexing and ranking based on other webpages' links. So if there are more Wikipedia pages related to the one you worked on, you can create relevant links to the article. Other than that, I don't think there's anything else you can do from Wikipedia to change the results of Google's searches.

I'm not sure what you mean by the last question. If you move a page, the old page title will automatically be changed into a redirect to the new page title. If you want to create a new redirect, create a page like you would any other and add only #REDIRECT [[John Biddle (yachting cinematographer)]] to the new page. Wikipedia:Redirect has a list of ways redirects are used.

If this does not answer all your questions, just let me know. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 12:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, Mysdaao. I guess my concern is not so much the placement, but on Google, the page comes up as 'User/Sputtnik...', the person must click on that, then click on the link after that. If they try the inset .jpg link on Google, it goes only to his picture. How can I get that link on Google to simply read 'John Biddle (yachting Cinematographer'? Also, what is the highest resolution you can have for an image in 'non-free media'? My 'File:Biddle Location.jpg' photo is only 38KB, but there's a tag on it that says basically 'please downsize'. Thanks! Sputtnik (talk) 18:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

We don't have a lot of influence over search engine results. But Google does reindex pages regularly. When its reindexes next, it should see that John Biddle (yachting cinematographer) now has many more mentions of John Biddle and has more links to it than User:Sputtnik/John Biddle (yachting cinematographer), putting it higher. I expect Google's results will change on its own. But you can request User:Sputtnik/John Biddle (yachting cinematographer) be deleted to help, if you want, by adding {{db-u1}} to the top of the page.

There isn't an overall guideline for the size of non-free media because each image has to be treated differently. Criteria 3b on Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria says, "An entire work is not used if a portion will suffice. Low- rather than high-resolution/fidelity/bit rate is used (especially where the original could be used for deliberate copyright infringement)." In other words, it should be the size necessary to clearly illustrate the subject but no larger. Because John Biddle (yachting cinematographer) is displaying the image in the infobox at a width of 225px, File:Biddle Location.jpg doesn't have to be any larger than that.

Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 01:04, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...

For cleaning up after me. It was a left over from this template I made ten minutes earlier :) Thanks, and happy editing! --Soetermans | drop me a line | what I'd do now? 22:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Happy editing to you too! --Mysdaao ^talk 01:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome.

Thanks for the welcome message. It's my first. And thanks for answering my accounts merging question so rapidly. I appreciate it. It's great to have a real human being to contact if I get myself into trouble. All the best to you.

MKevH (talk) 01:58, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'll be glad to help out with any other questions you have. Just let me know! --Mysdaao ^talk 03:24, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi

I need to know how can I make a new page on a new celebrity? Hope you have a great day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BrendaKing (talk • contribs) 13:36, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Brenda. First search Wikipedia to see if an article on the person exists already. If you don't have references for the article you want to create, find some because Wikipedia articles need reliable sources that are independent of the subject in order to meet notability guidelines for people. Without sources that show notability of the person, the article may be deleted. Please read Wikipedia:Your first article for more information you'll need. When you think you are ready to create the article, use the Article Wizard to help you create the page.

In the future, please sign your messages on talk pages by adding four tildes (~~~~) at the end of the message. This will automatically add your username and the date and time of your message which will make it easier for other users to follow a discussion.

Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks and you have a great day too! --Mysdaao ^talk 14:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thank you so much. I will defineltly come back to you if I have any other questions. =)

BrendaKing (talk) 14:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)Brenda

Two More Questions Sorry. =)

Ok. I have to more questions how can I upload pictures to an article because it won't let me? I found a person of the internet that has worked in movies and released an album, do I have to have major references for it?

BrendaKing (talk) 14:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)Brenda K

Brenda, you will be able to upload images when you are autoconfirmed, which happens automatically when your account is at least four days old and has made at least ten edits on Wikipedia. You can't upload an image of a person to Wikipedia if it copyrighted. If you found the picture on a website, it would most likely be a copyright violation to use it on Wikipedia. If you took it yourself and are willing to release the image to be used freely, then it is no problem.

It depends what you mean by "major" references. The article has to have sources to show significant coverage from reliable sources. In other words, it needs references that are mostly about the person, and not just mention the person briefly, that come from published sources not associated with the person. You may want to read Wikipedia:ENTERTAINER and Wikipedia:Notability (music) for specific notability guidelines applying to actors and musicians. If the person meets any of those guidelines and has references to verify that, then the article is probably appropriate for Wikipedia.

Let me know if I can help with anything else. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 15:24, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Delete or Redirect

Hi, I just had a question about deleting pages, and you've helped me out before, so I thought I might ask you.

Looking through orphaned articles, I found this article: (If You Want It) Do It Yourself, and I'm pretty sure it fails the notability criteria, especially with reference to WP:NSONG, but I feel like if the article were deleted on these grounds, someone would be completely justified to re-create it as a redirect to the album the song is off. Should I go through a proposed deletion and then create a redirect, or simply change the page to a redirect with a note on the talkpage explaining what I've done? At this point, I'm leaning towards the latter, but if you could give me your opinion that would be great. Thanks! -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 09:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

If the title can be a redirect, then it's not necessary to do go through the deletion process. You can just change the page to be a redirect to Experience Gloria Gaynor. Redirecting is listed as an alternative to deletion at Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. Please let me know if I can help with anything else. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 15:09, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for helping me out again. -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 00:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! --Mysdaao ^talk 03:24, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello Pig

You posted that "does not site sources" thing on the Hello Pig album page.

Not trying to be rude but: How do you site a source when the source was me getting my copy of Hello Pig and putting to onto the page from there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skunkbot (talk • contribs) 22:20, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

You don't have the cite the album as the primary source because it is also the subject. But that source is not enough. Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable secondary sources in order to verify the information and show notability. The article as it is now may be deleted without reliable sources to demonstrate notability. Please also read Wikipedia:PRIMARY and Wikipedia:Verifiability for these policies. News about the release and reviews of the albums are the way that most Wikipedia articles about albums meet these guidelines. Please let me know if there are any questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 03:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

What do I have to prove? That the album exists? Or that the track listings are exactly as I quoted? I've looked but haven't found any reviews that list the tracks or everything about the album —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skunkbot (talk • contribs) 13:27, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles have to demonstrate notability of the subject with reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. You don't need to find a review that also contains a track listing. Reviews are more important to show coverage, but more references to the track listing will be helpful too. Discogs and allmusic are very common sources used to verify track listings in album articles.

In the future, please sign your messages on talk pages by adding four tildes (~~~~) at the end of the message. This will automatically add your username and the date and time of your message which will make it easier for other users to follow a discussion.

Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 13:59, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

And where do I put these links? The reviews one's a no-brainer since there's a place where that goes. I just think "here's a random link to some website" seems a bit odd. Skunkbot (talk) 16:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

The easiest and most common way to add external links to an article is to add a new section as the last section in the article, called either "External links" or "References", add add the links in that section. Standard names for sections are described at Wikipedia:Layout. If you wanted the link to be a reference for specific information in the article, then you can also use inline citations within the text. Information on that method can be read at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. --Mysdaao ^talk 18:12, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Image upload

I would like to know what browser and OS did you use to upload the image? --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 16:01, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Windows XP Professional Service Pack 3 and Mozilla Firefox 3.5.7. What were you using when you tried to upload the image? --Mysdaao ^talk 16:05, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

WIndows 7 Home Premium X64, IE8. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 16:13, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

	You've been given a cookie, because you went the extra yard to give me sound advice three different times today. You're the kind of Wikipedian that makes WP a good place to be. Bon appétit, TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 21:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
	Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching! Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

I love cookies! Thank you so much! --Mysdaao ^talk 22:26, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Re:Help

Oh, so is just that? Sorry I confused it with something else. ^^;

Let me ask you something: when you want to revert the last edit done by another user you go to an older version from the history page, then edit and save that, right? But is there a easier way, or the rollback option is only for admins? Sentōkisei (talk) 15:05, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

There are several ways to revert edits done by other users. The manual way is to select an earlier version from the page history, click the "edit this page" tab, and save it.

There's also an "undo" link next to every edit on the page history. Clicking on that link will undo that change, but it doesn't always work on older edits.

The rollback feature is not just available to administrators. It can be requested by non-admins at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Rollback, but it's only for reverting vandalism, so it will only be approved for users who have a history of fighting vandalism already.

Information on these methods is documented at Help:Reverting. Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 16:02, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick answer and the links, I'm reading them now. ^^ Sentōkisei (talk) 20:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I need some advice

Hi. Can you give me some advice on a bit of a confrontation I'm involved in? I won't say too much before you look at it so as not to bias your opinion, but could you have a look at Talk:Mike Rann#Recent Polls and tell me what you think? Also, just note this edit. Thanks! -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 11:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

And this edit. -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 12:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Also, I've got some concerns about this block placed on Gordon Moyes. It looks like User:Timeshift9, who is involved in an editing dispute on this page, put a note on User:Orderinchaos' talk page here, and then Orderinchaos placed a full block on the article to end the edit dispute. Doesn't this violate the first bullet point of Wikipedia:Administrators#Misuse of administrative tools, especially given that Timeshift9 and Orderinchaos apparently have a history (see [1]), and know each other personally (see Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts/archive61#Issue with administrator User:Orderinchaos)? I'm not sure what I'm supposed to do with all this, I'd appreciate some advice. -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 12:59, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

You have given me a lot of discussion and history to look through, so I'm trying to understand it all in a short amount of time. If my comments show that I missed or misunderstood something, I apologize. After reading through as much as I can, here's what I think.

On Talk:Mike Rann#Recent Polls, you were right in your conclusion that there wasn't consensus for the change you proposed. I, like you it seems, have concerns with some of the things Timeshift9 said in the discussion. You asked some direct, reasonable questions about topic-wide consensus about polls, and it wasn't responded to. Like you, I also had a concern about when he, in my opinion, implied that he didn't like that debate was being brought up by users when little had been changed for awhile. As it says at Wikipedia:Consensus, consensus can change. He made statements about what consensus is and pondered whether you were trying to circumvent it, but you were only attempting to propose your changes and reach a consensus one way or another. By the end, he seemed more and more exasperated with debating the issue, and comments like "You continue to fail in your understanding of WP:SYN. Luckily others are not so unfortunate" were unhelpful and showed to me that, after a certain point, he didn't feel he had to explain himself or elaborate if his views were challenged. But this doesn't change the outcome. Even if you disregarded his comments, there still were enough users not supporting your change to reach consensus. He may have acted inappropriately, but there's no reason to dwell on it. Other users have brought up issues with his behavior, from what I can see. His actions don't warrant administrator attention now. My advice is that when you come across editors who act in an uncivil way in a minor incident, the best thing to do is forget about it and not respond in kind.

On Gordon Moyes, I can't find anywhere Orderinchaos gave his reasoning for changing the protection level here, so we shouldn't assume why he did it. As far as I can see, he wasn't involved in disputes on the article because he has hardly edited it, so I don't see that he violated Wikipedia:Administrators#Misuse of administrative tools. To me, it's not a conflict of interest that he knows Timeshift9 well, as long as he was not heavily involved in editing the article in question. If you're concerned, the best thing to do is ask him about it on his talk page.

I hope my comments can help. If you have any more questions or want to point out something else to me, please do so at any time. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 04:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You're right, both about the talk page discussion and about the block. Yet again, thanks for your help! -- Lear's Fool (talk | contribs) 05:27, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! Please let me know if you need any more help in the future! --Mysdaao ^talk 13:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

PLEASE

PLEASE DON'T TYPE ANYTHING THING BAD OR INAPPROPRIATE

THANK YOU,

MYSDAAO --Brady Drake (talk) 01:49, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I wrote that message on your talk page because of edits you made to Template:Singapore topics, which appear to be vandalism. My message was not bad or inappropriate. I saw some unconstructive edits that belong more on Wikipedia:Sandbox, and I was trying to help you become an editor that contributes constructively to Wikipedia. Please let me know if you have any questions about what I have said. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 03:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

thank you

Thank you for the warm welcome. Jubilant in Jerusalem (talk) 14:46, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Please let me know if I can help in any way! --Mysdaao ^talk 14:49, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Signatures

Thank you for your help re: signature on articles. I am new to editing, going this for a class assignment. Your help is greatly appreciated.House.thomas (talk) 15:04, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I have another tip I'd like to give you. When starting a new topic on a talk page, it is best to create a new section to clearly divide separate discussions. The easiest way to do this is click the "new section" tab on the top of the page. Replies to an existing discussion can be made under the existing comments in the same section. Just add : at the beginning of a new comment to add indentation to show your new comment is a reply. You can read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines for more guidelines on how to use talk pages. Please let me know if you have any questions on this. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 20:27, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

vandalizm of user dapi

please look the discussion page, than u see that his changes are vandalizm and not another opinion. he dont respondes after his changes are identified as wrong. he reverts my edits without checking what happend. he is reverting everything. please take a look.Blablaaa (talk) 17:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

This unser is misusing sources, misquoting and in particular, offering one sources for losses and strength on the Battle of Kursk that have been disputed for years. Hopefully other admins (already involved) will deal with him. Dapi89 (talk) 18:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Blablaaa, I have looked at the discussion page for Battle of Kursk. You misunderstand what vandalism is. Please read Wikipedia:Vandalism especially the section What is not vandalism. If Dapi89 is trying in good faith to improve the encyclopedia, then those edits are not considered vandalism even if you think they are wrong. Also please read Wikipedia:Ownership of articles to understand that all Wikipedia content is edited collaboratively, and nobody should act like the owner of an article. If you have a dispute with another editor, you should follow steps described at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution, such as asking for outside input about the article at Wikipedia:Requests for comment. --Mysdaao ^talk 18:40, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

ok he donts want to improve please look these edits, hes reverting everythin what i do, totally irrlevant what i edited or if it is cited [[2]] . its simply vandalizm, please look his edits. i make edits and add refs to the article he is reverting everything. he is talking about disputed source but when he is asked to explain his doubts he says nothing, there 100 open questions he is not asking on of them. its horrible. please look his edits... . in this case dapi has no good faithBlablaaa (talk) 19:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

hes even deleting the maps which i added, its horror... he talkin insane stuff, hes using numbers which are totally discredited , it costs me hours to explain him on the discussion page. hes ignoring, he only responds to questions when he thinks he can "win" the discussion. horror, no good faith.... Blablaaa (talk) 19:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Again, the actions of Dapi89 are not vandalism. It is Wikipedia policy that content that can be challenged by verified by reliable sources. Dapi89 has removed content because he or she believes the source you used is not reliable, and you have done the same to content Dapi89 has added because you believe the source Dapi89 used is not reliable. You are both performing the same type of actions on the article, and it is not vandalism, but it is edit warring, and both of you should stop. I am not taking sides in this, but users can be blocked for edit warring. If you believe you have tried to discuss the issue with the user and cannot reach a consensus, then the next thing is to try steps at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. I strongly suggest you wait for more users to give their feedback at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Glantz/House Kursk, or ask for general comments on the article dispute at Wikipedia:Requests for comment. --Mysdaao ^talk 19:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

ok then with proof [[3]] here he gives the explanation "revert. STOP adding figures to losses that had been contested for years using ONE historian. Restored Glantz as trustworthy sources)"

so while he removes the numbers of frieser zetterling and frankson, he removes the refs for the panther and tiger tanks. he removes this :"In the assemblyarea of the III Panzercorps a bridge was destroyed and the attack was delayed, for example." he removes this :"German leaders decided to deliver some infantry and tank divisions from the 9th Army to the 2nd Tank Army...... " he removes this picture [[4]] and much more.he removes an edit which adjusted a little inaccuracy. he removed more than 100 hundres words describing the southern pincer. he removed a second map. he simply removed everything what happend the last day . he simply copied the code of his older version because he cant undo 10 edits. he copied the one day old code to revert everything what happend not even checking what happend. he was to lazy do restore the infobox which is the real content dispute, so he decided to "copy paste". again: no vandalizm ? please check the link above and all his changes. in only want to improve the article but when i do 30 edits the next day he reverts and my work is gone.... Blablaaa (talk) 22:41, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

I wish you had listened to my earlier advice, so you probably wouldn't have been blocked. But I am glad to see on your talk page that you are now willing to collaborate with Dapi89 on the article to reach a consensus.

Based on what I see on your talk page, I have a few suggestions that I hope you consider. It seems that when users didn't respond quickly, you were assuming they weren't willing to collaborate or weren't trying to help. But you were giving very little time, sometimes a day, for them to respond. Users here are volunteers and they all have different schedules. Discussions, like on Talk:Battle of Kursk and Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Glantz/House Kursk, can take days or even weeks. Please don't assume non-responsiveness means they are ignoring you, unless you have waited for a much longer period of time.

Also, when you were advised to seek a third opinion, that user meant go to Wikipedia:Third opinion and request outside input from there, not just ask people for help on your talk page. Users who look at that page have more experience with resolving disputes and are more qualified to help you. That is why I and others were continually advising to go to the pages listed on Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and seek help from those that can help you better to resolve your differences. If you need assistance in the future with a content dispute, that is where you should go first.

Please let me know if you have any questions on this or anything else. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 14:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

thank you for drawing my attention to 2.2 Wikipedia:Perennial proposals#Prohibit anonymous users from editing not what I wanted to see, anyway I was unaware of the prefernce setting for edit summaries, I have now checked that box in my user preferences. Thank You Mlpearc (talk) 04:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! I'm glad I helped you find something useful for you. --Mysdaao ^talk 02:13, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Recurring unreferenced edit

You've advised me before, and I was wondering if you could add your two cents to a problem that I am encountering? I've been discussing it with another editor as well. It involves a small independent film, released in 1964 called One Potato, Two Potato. This film was made in my hometown, and has been somewhat lost from public view until a recent TNT presentation. The film was a Cannes award winner for Barbara Barrie, and features several actors early in their careers. Since, I have some personal knowledge of this film, I have been interested in learning more, and improving its minimal Wiki article. One of my contributions so far, has been to clarify the cast listing, placing the names in the order that they actually appear on the film. This has also led to some other interests, as I have created a page for one of the actors, been in contact with the cinematographer, and am interested in doing some research on the Producer, who actually went on to become a well-known porn producer.

In any event, the problem that has occurred is that a guy named Joe Pizzie has taken it upon himself to include his name, and the name of another girl in the cast list without any reference. It was reverted several times, but he keeps putting it back in, under several different user accounts. Upon the other users recommendation, I placed a comment on the film's talk page about this practice, and actually got a response from him explaining that he was, as I expected, an extra in the film. As you can see from the Talk:One Potato, Two Potato, he explained where his part was. You can also see from my response that I viewed the scene, and offered a possible solution to this problem. Instead of responding to me, he simply ignored my advice, and replaced the listing, which I had just reverted.

In looking at the scene, it shows an elementary school playground, with a teacher walking a judge out to meet one of the young students (the subject of the story). The 'extras' are, of course, a large number of students playing on the playground, swinging, playing catch, running around, etc. None of them have speaking roles, or close-ups, except for a small group playing the counting game that the film is named for. They are simply counting, and none of them appears to match Mr. Pizzie's description. Even the teacher doesn't speak. All of the other kids in the background are so far away, or moving so fast, that it is impossible to recognize anybody.

There is supposedly a newspaper article about the use of local extras in the production of this film in this small town in Ohio. I have made some contacts to try and locate that article, and have already collected some articles about the film that were published in the New York Times. If the article exists, I can easily see creating a section for this article about the 'extras' and the town's cooperation in the film's production.

My question, I guess, is how to deal with this person, that is adamant about including his name, and that of some other person, in this article without any consideration to the requirements of Wikipedia? Is this destined to become an edit war? Yunchie (talk) 19:08, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

I've looked at the discussions on Talk:One Potato, Two Potato and User talk:StephenBuxton, and I agree with what Stephen has said. This is a content dispute, and you should take some measures described in Wikipedia:Dispute resolution, probably starting with Wikipedia:Third opinion or Wikipedia:Requests for comment. This seems like it requires some input from uninvolved editors in the community to work out. It won't become edit warring as long you focus on forming a consensus on the article's talk page. Also be sure to to continue notifying the user on his talk page to invite him into discussions in order to be sure he knows about the issues and can be involved.

If you do seek outside help, please be patient because different users have different schedules. You can't always expect a response within a few days, but don't assume you're being ignored. I've seen attempted dispute resolutions fail because one user doesn't get a response quickly enough and assumes the other user isn't trying, and then they go back to edit warring. New users especially may not check Wikipedia as often as us, and more time could be needed to reach a consensus.

As for the content itself, I agree with what you want to do. Wikipedia:Verifiability is policy on Wikipedia. A new user might not understand Wikipedia policy, so an explanation of the policy and/or link to it would probably help him and explain your viewpoint better. In my opinion, an extra does not belong in the cast list, even if a reference was found. The guidelines at WP:FILMCAST say that if a character would not be mentioned in any reasonable plot description, the actor should not be in the cast list unless there can be an additional explanation for the importance and role of the character. A separate section for the town's cooperation, including the use of extras, is appropriate if there is a reliable source for this information.

Please let me know if I can give further help in any way. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 14:25, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. The ideas, and resources that you and Stephen have provided, have pointed me into a proper course of action. My plan is to, again, revert the edit, citing Wikipedia:Verifiability, as well as to place a request on the user's talk page to please respond to my comments. If this strategy goes nowhere, then I will utilize the third opinion or RFC. Yunchie (talk) 17:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

That sounds like the right course of action to me. Let me know if I can help out in any way. --Mysdaao ^talk 18:26, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

thank you

re this:

Writing new article - where to work

In order to work on a draft, a user subpage is the suggested place. It is easy to create one for a draft. You can do so either at Help:Userspace draft or by using Wikipedia:Article wizard 2.0. Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao talk 14:30, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

many thanks, much apprctd.. will have a go

--AgRince (talk) 14:36, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. Let me know if I can help out in any way! --Mysdaao ^talk 14:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Cape Coral, Florida

Hey there, Could you please help me to get rid of all the flags on the Cape Coral page? I edited the whole page and don't think that any of them are still necessary. What do you think? Capewik (talk) 03:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Which flags do you mean? I see the United States flag and the Florida flag in the infobox on Cape Coral, Florida, and I also see the Florida flag again on the bottom of the article in the navigational boxes. I don't think any of them should be removed. Which ones do you want to remove and why? --Mysdaao ^talk 13:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

thanks for the cookies and the delightful welcome. Be assured that i shall plague you at times for help. Wiki is wonderful but, especially to the technically challenged, huge and unforgiving.Security1234 (talk) 15:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. You can always come to me with any questions.

By the way, this site is called Wikipedia, not wiki. A wiki is any website using wiki software; there are thousands of them. Also, it's a standard practice to put comments on a new topic in a new section at the bottom of a talk page. I have added a section heading above your comment to separate it from other sections. In the future, the easiest way to do that on a talk page is to click the "new section" tab at the top of the page. If you're interested in learning more, you can read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines.

Again, welcome to Wikipedia, and let me know if I can help out in any way! --Mysdaao ^talk 15:43, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for the cookies and for getting back to me. I have been able to edit right on the wikipedia page and add an external link! Two cheers for the good girls! I can't add photos until I've had an acct. established for 4 days AND made 10 edits or more...is that what I hear you're saying?...(sorry if that is a stupid question). Also...can I change the very top line that introduces the page? It seems that there is no place to edit that. Lastly,do I have control over where I can place pictures? I appreciate your help. jenn reeder Jennreeder (talk) 18:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennreeder (talk • contribs) 18:48, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! I'm glad to help you in any way I can. Please don't worry if you think a question sounds stupid. There's a lot of things to learn about Wikipedia, and it takes anyone time to understand it all.

You are correct that you can't upload images to Wikipedia until you've had an account for at least four full days and made ten edits or more. When that has happened, you'll be able to upload images by clicking the link that says "Upload file" on the left side of any page. After an image is uploaded, you can add it anywhere on a page. Wikipedia:Picture tutorial has information on how pictures can be inserted into Wikipedia pages.

The words you see on the top of the page (St. Joseph Academy (Cleveland, Ohio) in this case) is the article's page name. An article's page name can only be changed by moving the page. Moving pages is another action that you won't be able to do until your account is at least four days old and has made at least ten edits. Once that happens, there will be a tab called "move" on the top of pages, and clicking that tab will let you move the page in order to change its name.

Please let me know if you have any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 19:43, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you!

You have been so helpful. Thank you so much for getting back to me and so quickly. One more question...is there a way to add video clips to the front page? Will the "move" button appear once I've been an administrator for 4 or more days? Thanks again! What a great experience wiki has been so far b/c of you. Sincerely, jenn —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennreeder (talk • contribs) 20:07, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Jenn, by "front page", I'm going to assume you mean the page St. Joseph Academy (Cleveland, Ohio). (Some people say front page when they mean Main Page, the front page of Wikipedia.) You can upload videos to Wikipedia and use them in articles, but there are restrictions. Videos have to be in Ogg format because it's open and royalty-free. Also, Wikipedia doesn't like to use copyrighted material unless there's a good reason to do so. If you (and I mean you personally Jenn, not your school) created a video, then you can upload and use it. But if your school or someone else created it, then you'd have to get their permission to use it and then send a copy of that permission to Wikimedia, the organization that runs Wikipedia. It is not a simple process. Please read Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission if you plan to do this and Wikipedia:Creation and usage of media files#Video for general information on the use of videos on Wikipedia.

An administrator on Wikipedia is a user who has been given access to special tools (like blocking users, protecting pages, deleting pages, etc.) beyond the abilities of regular users like you or me. Most users on Wikipedia are not administrators, including me. But to answer your question, the "move" tab will appear once you've been a user for four or more days.

Two more things. First, this website is properly called Wikipedia, not wiki. Please don't abbreviate Wikipedia as Wiki. A wiki is a type of website that allows anyone to edit its pages. There are thousands of wikis, and Wikipedia is just one of them. It's a minor point, but it bothers some people, so I wanted to let you know about it. Second, when you reply to a comment on a talk page like this one, you don't have to create a new section like you did. Instead, just click the link that says "[edit]" next to the section, and write your comment under the comment you wish to reply to. For example, if you are going to reply to what I've written, click "[edit]" next to the section name "Thank you!", and write your reply under my comment. This helps keep a discussion together so it can be read and understood more easily. If you're interested, you can read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines for this and other guidelines on how to use talk pages.

I'm glad I've been able to be helpful. Please don't hesitate to let me know if I can help in any other way. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 21:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I guess this is where I add my comments then right? Thank you for your help with the video question and telling me the wiki/wikipedia thing. I didn't know. Sorry if that offended some. Learning curve. Thank you also go clearing up the administrator question. Lastly, a conflict of interest blurb comes up on our page now. I'm not sure why. There is SOOO much information here using Wikipedia and I can't possibly read through all there is to know. I tried to decipher what may have been causing the conflict and I don't know what's causing it. We're trying to give accurate information about the school while not "promoting" it. Any way to learn what is causing the conflict? Appreciate your help. JennJennreeder (talk) 20:18, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Jenn, you wrote in the correct place to reply. I'm not sure if you mean the message left on User talk:Jennreeder or on St. Joseph Academy (Cleveland, Ohio), but either way, the reason is the same. Orangemike left the messages because you have a conflict of interest with the article. You wrote on the Wikipedia help desk that you work for Saint Joseph Academy. This is a conflict of interest because you are associated with the subject of an article you are editing. Wikipedia:Conflict of interest has all the information on this. In summary, users are strongly discouraged from editing an article on a subject they're associated with, and if they do, they should exercise great caution. It's not strictly forbidden, because it's strongly discouraged because it's more difficult to make changes that are neutral and not copyright violations when you have a conflict of interest. If you have more questions on the message, you should ask Orangemike on his talk page, User talk:Orangemike. Please let me know if I can be of assistance too. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 20:01, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I didn't realize that I was in violation. Of course I don't want to misuse Wikipedia and was conscious of what we put in there---trying to give only factual information instead of self-promotion. After reading the conflict information, I'm still uncertain as to what content was a conflict of interest. If we remove whatever seems like it's promoting, will the conflict tab up top go away? And how do I find out who set up this article to begin with? Is the fact that I work there the conflict? Again, the information is mainly factual and not seemingly different than any of our catholic area schools that have articles. Please advise...and thank you. OrangeMike was not nearly as clear or as friendly about. Sorry if what we did was outside the lines. Just trying to learn and understand. Thanks! JennJennreeder (talk) 04:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Jenn, the fact that you work for St. Joseph Academy (Cleveland, Ohio) and are editing it is the main source of the conflict. The reason this is discouraged is because it is more difficult for a person like you, who is connected to the subject of the article, to write in a neutral way and use the necessary reliable sources. Orangemike has cleaned up the article and removed what I thought was the non-neutral content, but he still left the COI message up. A message like that one is also called a "tag", and it will remain on the article until any user removes it when they feel the issue(s) have been addressed. Because Orangemike first brought up the issue, the best thing for you to do is to ask him about it by writing a message on his talk page, User talk:Orangemike. He can better help you understand why he considers the article to be non-neutral and what can be done about it. I understand there are a lot of rules and guidelines on Wikipedia that new users often inadvertently break. The important thing is that you're trying to learn and follow them, and you're asking the right questions do that.

You can look at an article's page history in order to determine who first created the article by clicking the "history" tab on the top of the page. That shows who made every edit to the article and when. The article on the school was first created by Backburner001. It's not really important who first created an article, because no one owns an article on Wikipedia. All pages are edited collaboratively, so Backburner001 has no more control or insight into the content that any other user. Also, the user is inactive and hasn't edited for more than a year, so he or she is probably not going to be able to be involved any way.

You've used the term "we" a few times. Does this mean there is more than one person using your account? If so, I'm afraid you've inadvertently broken another rule. User accounts can only be used by one person, and sharing them is not allowed. If this has happened, the other people should create their own accounts to edit, and then there will be no more issue. Please see Wikipedia:Username policy#Sharing accounts for this policy.

I hope you're not getting frustrated by all the rules on Wikipedia. It may seem like a lot, but it just takes time to understand how things work here. The most important thing to understand is that articles are edited by the community, and community discussion is part of the process here. You seem very willing to ask questions and learn, and that is very important. Like I said, you should ask Orangemike about the article on User talk:Orangemike and see what he has to say, but feel free to ask me more questions too about anything. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 14:34, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Helpme

Hey, thanks for your help earlier. It shows up when I click the link but when I log out and log back in as SuperSonicSpeed, it doesn't work unless I click the link you gave me. When I click the links at the top of the screen it says for ChaosControl1994. EDIT: I'm using Firefox as my default browser. I can log in as SuperSonicSpeed in IE8 but I'm forced to log in as my old username in Firefox. SuperSonic SPEED 19:58, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually don't worry, I sorted it by deleting the browsing history. Everything is working A-OK. Thanks for your help :) SuperSonicSpeed (talk) 20:16, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad I could help. Please let me know if you ever need anything else. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 20:59, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Re:Help

I somehow added the page "Monticello media" when it should have been "Monticello Media". I did add the page "Monticello Media" but how do you erase the "Monticello media" page?--Smoothdancingirl2000 (talk) 14:42, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

I've requested the deletion of Monticello Media in order to move Monticello media to the correct title. I did this with the template {{db-histmerge}} by following the instructions at that page. In the future, please don't recreate a page if all you want to do is change its title. If you want to change the title of an article, please do so by moving the page. After your account is autoconfirmed (which happens automatically after your account is at least four full days old), you will see a tab called "move" that you can use to move an article and change its title. You can also make a request for a page to be moved at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 14:51, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

OK thankyou very much!--Smoothdancingirl2000 (talk) 14:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! Let me know if there's ever anything else I can help you with! --Mysdaao ^talk 14:54, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Tables

Hello, thanks for your message. I've just put a question on the helpdesk page as I had tables from various sections mixing with one another but couldn't find why. Now it seems the problem was solved by someone else but I'd like to know how I can include tables properly because it's not the 1st time i have this kind of "undesired table fusions" and I have lots of statistical soccer tables to add on wikipedia.

Thanks for your help! Bruno Brunolenny (talk) 18:29, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Bruno, if you're referring to your question at Wikipedia:Help desk#Separate tables in separate sections being unappropriately associated when page is published about a table on FIFA World Cup qualification, I answered your question there and told you that it was me who fixed the table in the article. This edit I did fixed it because tables in Wikipedia end with |}. Because what you added didn't end with |}, the table continued and mixed with the other one until I changed it to end with |}. If you need any more help with tables, please read Help:Wikitable and Help:Table first, and then let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 20:13, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Help

I want some help as to how I can become useful here. You've been reverting all my edits. I thought that they were making Wikipedia better. Can you teach me to write articles and make changes to articles? LordPiratez (talk) 22:39, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I will be happy to help you as much as I can. Have you read the introduction to Wikipedia and the Wikipedia editing tutorial? That is the first place to start. After that, please tell me what area you would like to help out with. There are many, many different ways to make Wikipedia better. You can create articles that are requested, cleanup and maintain existing articles, add pictures that are requested, clean up vandalism on Wikipedia, join a WikiProject for a topic you're interested in, or help out in many other ways. If you tell me how specifically you'd like to contribute to Wikipedia, I can help you better to find what you're looking for. I also suggest you read Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia and see the list of tasks that need to be done at Wikipedia:Community portal/Opentask. When you have a better of idea of what work you're interested in doing on Wikipedia, let me know and I can try to teach you what you want to know. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 13:36, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Let me read through those pages first. LordPiratez (talk) 15:59, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

I've read through the pages to which you liked. I wish to "create articles that are requested". Will you please teach me how to go about this? LordPiratez (talk) 16:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Can you please tell me how? I can't wait to start being useful. LordPiratez (talk) 20:36, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

LordPiratez, please understand that Wikipedia is a volunteer service. Everyone has their own real life schedules and is contributing to Wikipedia in their free time. I will try to answer you as promptly as I can, but four hours is a short amount of time, and you can't always expect a response from users this quickly. It's normal to have to wait between a few days to a week to receive a reply from active users.

To get started, go to Wikipedia:Requested articles and find a requested article that you'd like to create. The requested articles are categorized by topic, so if there's a topic you're more interested in, you can look in that topic. When you find an article you'd like to create, make sure that it doesn't already exist. If the link in the list is a red link, then that page doesn't exist. But if it's blue, then the page exists and you need to look for another requested article. Also search Wikipedia for the article in case it exists under a different title. If you find that the article you want to create already exists, don't recreate it under a different title.

Once you've picked an article you want to create, the next step is to start to write it. Because this will be your first article, I suggest you read Wikipedia:Your first article. I'll summarize the important points. You need to use references for the information that will go into the article by finding reliable sources. This is done to be sure that the content is verifiable and notable enough to be included in Wikipedia. But don't copy and paste the information from a source into the article because that is likely a copyright violation, and the article may be deleted because of that. Instead, read the information and write it in your own words.

When you are ready to start working on the article, you can either create it in the article namespace (by clicking the red link you found in Wikipedia:Requested articles) or by creating a userspace draft at Help:Userspace draft. You can also create a page through either method using the Wikipedia Article Wizard. A userspace draft is a subpage of your userpage that is used to work on Wikipedia content before making it into an article. If you create a userspace draft, you can work on it as much as you want and then move it to become an article when you think it's ready.

After you create the page either as an article or a userspace draft with the content you want, it is a good idea to ask for other users' feedback on what you wrote at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback.

Once the article is created, it can be read and improved upon on by you and other users just like any other article in Wikipedia. I'm happy that you're eager to help make Wikipedia better, and I look forward to seeing your contributions. Please let me know if there are any more questions I can answer for you. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 21:07, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Mea culpa. I really did not realize Wikipedia was volunteer service. I will definitely find an article to start working on. Thanks so much for your help! LordPiratez (talk) 05:22, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! Let me know if you ever need any more help with anything! --Mysdaao ^talk 13:18, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Just popping by to say thanks for sorting out that table earlier on Taunton, fixing that was the last step to getting it to good article status :) DharmaDreamer (talk) 16:46, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! I wasn't even aware of the good article nomination of Taunton, but I'm glad I could help! --Mysdaao ^talk 18:45, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Request for adminship

May I suggest that you withdraw your request? At the moment, you are standing at 13/11/15 (54.2%). The minimum to pass is 70% so you would need another 13 supports with no further opposes (giving 26S and 11 O = 70.2%). This is possible, but I'd say it is unlikely. My advice would be to withdraw (there is no shame in this, it shows good judgement!) and either wait someone else nominating you in a few months' time, or self nominate in a few months time. It is of course your choice, and whatever you decide, I wish you well -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 10:05, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank for your advice. It was clearly the right thing to do after LordPiratez took the nomination back, but it would've been the right course of action otherwise. Maybe another time. --Mysdaao ^talk 16:16, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Although I did not support that RfA, I do encourage you to try again after you've prepared more in a few months. Maurreen (talk) 16:20, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your encouragement. I truly appreciate it. --Mysdaao ^talk 16:28, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Apology

Thank you for your assumption of good faith with me, but unfortunately, others like Fastily and Coffee tend not to assume good faith and enjoy biting the newcomers. However, perhaps not assuming good faith would bring one much more success in life and more importantly Wikipedia. When you taught me the ways of Wikipedia, and I nominated you, an uproar erupted, solely by virtue of your assumption of good faith. I now wish to offer a formal apology for my disastrous doings on Wikipedia and making you the laughingstock of the community. Please forgive me, as I have ruined your entire career on Wikipedia, and I advise that you no longer assume good faith when dealing with newcomers. This way, you will never fall into a plight such as you did with the RfA. Thank you again for supporting me, and please accept my apologies. Thank you, LordPiratez (talk) 15:37, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

I think you overestimate the effect of what happened. Out of several hundred thousand active editors, 40 participated in the RfA, and some of them did support the nomination. An unsuccessful nomination is not going to have a negative impact on my other activities on Wikipedia, unless I let it, which I don't intend to do, so there's no need to apologize. Besides, I have too many good things going in my real life now, so my work on Wikipedia occupies less of my thoughts than other, more important, things in life. I'm more concerned with how this has affected you. I hope this experience hasn't discouraged you enough to think about quitting Wikipedia. You've contributed a lot to Wikipedia, and I know you can contribute a lot more if you continue. I think the advice at Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers#What to do if you feel you have "bitten" or have been bitten will be good reading for you. --Mysdaao ^talk 01:10, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll stop

I'll stop, as I was only testing your security. Seems like you guys have this place on lockdown. Honk2234 (talk) 01:38, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. --Mysdaao ^talk 01:42, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Technical help

Hi Mysadaao,

You have in the past given me technical help so I want to run a problem past you. I can't figure out why Reference #7 of User:Pink Bull/draft doesn't format correctly. The weblink "refuses" to hyperlink to the Title, like all the other references. While you're at it, perhaps you can also advise regarding the wisdom of linking to articles hidden behind a paywall. Thanks, --PinkBull 22:30, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

The link isn't displaying correctly because of the double quotes in the URL. Having " in a URL causes it not to display properly on Wikipedia. If you replace both " with %22 in the URL, the link will display correctly. This need is described in the template's documentation for the url parameter at Template:Citation#Parameters.

External links to websites that require a paid subscription should only be done if the article is on the website itself or if the link is part of an inline citation, because then it's the only way to verify the information. Because the links to websites requiring registration in your draft are all inline citations necessary to verify the information, they're perfectly fine. You can read the guidelines on these types of links at Wikipedia:External links#Sites requiring registration.

Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 23:19, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much! You're the best!--PinkBull 23:33, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! --Mysdaao ^talk 02:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Warren Williams, Australian Rock Pioneer

Hi Mate, Thanks for taking the time to respond to my request for help. Chuck however fixed my immediate problem and as he is experienced in the area, I might work with him to put up a page on Warren Williams (not H). If you had an interest in Warren Williams try his name into eBay Australia Search. Cheers. 143.238.104.4 (talk) 09:40, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about it. Let me know if you think there's anything I can help with. --Mysdaao ^talk 12:25, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Jake mcgee

A tag has been placed on Jake mcgee requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Tommy (message) 01:51, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Look, that article already exists. The capitalization is different and that is it. Another type of disambig. would be needed for it to even exist, but I think it falls under the A7 category of deletion. Thank you

I appreciate the notification, but I did not create the article that was at Jake mcgee. I had moved it to Jake McGee and later turned that into a redirect to an already existing article. If someone else changed Jake mcgee from a redirect into an article, then I think you should've reverted it back into a redirect, instead of requesting its deletion, and notified that user. Twinkle notified me because it thinks I was the article creator from the page history, but I was not, and this message was not relevant to me. --Mysdaao ^talk 12:26, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mysdaao. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Help desk.
Message added 23:01, 25 March 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

[[User:Immunize|Immunize]] ([[User talk:Immunize#top|talk]]) (talk) 23:01, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Thankyou

That is prefect perfectEugene-elgato (talk) 01:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! Let me know if there's anything else I can help you with! --Mysdaao ^talk 01:47, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

User:Mystique 309

... is a sock and I've blocked indef. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lila Cheney 336. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 20:13, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. --Mysdaao ^talk 21:11, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

references

I need to add references to a page that I created in order not to have it deleted. How will I add the references?

I have the references for Model United Nations Development Programme , the page that I created but I just do not know how to do it.

Offspring31 (talk) 15:16, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

{{helpme}}

As Mysdaao does not appear to be around and you used the helpme template, please read Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. You can also take a look at this visual guide. At its most basic anything you place inside reference tags will appear in the references section. For example adding after some text in the article <ref>citation text</ref> will produce a citation in the references section with whatever you wrote between the <ref></ref> tags. Note that the helpme template is normally placed on your own talk page. By the way, the article is not marked for deletion and doesn't appear to have ever been. I will go take a look at the references now.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Offspring31 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Something for you...

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Your help to me was an action of great kindness Thank you. Althought I can not quite remember what you did XD. Sghfdhdfghdfgfd (talk) 09:21, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words! You are probably referring to this help. Just let me know if you ever need any help in the future! --Mysdaao ^talk 12:11, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Rishikeshan

I want images of simple english wikipedia. I imported a xml dump to my MYSQL. It don't contain images. I am a windows user. Is there wikiX or other tools for huge image downloads? Is there any image repositories? Is there any ZENO file image extractor? Is the image dump project discontinued or not started? There is only one image dump is available for Deutsche_Fotothek.tar [[5]] but I dont know that language. please Don't say me anything about compiling because I am only 14 at age and the lowest aged programmer (vb, vb.net, asp, asp.net, qbasic, php(not much), vbscript, c++(not much), mono, mod_mono, apache httpd, MYSQL and IIS). (Wikix is provided in only source form). Do other websites provide image Dumps/Collection of wikipedia? Is there any fully downloadable image containing non profit wikipedia mirrors? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rishikeshan (talk • contribs) 12:38, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

The XML dump doesn't contain images, but it contains image names. Wikix is the only way I've ever known to download images from Wikipedia. If you don't know how to compile C code, then you won't be able to use it. Wikipedia used to provide its own image dumps, but they stopped that and took down all previous image dumps. They also stopped allowing bulk image downloads. See Wikipedia:Database download#Images and uploaded files. What you want just can't be done because Wikipedia doesn't allow it. --Mysdaao ^talk 14:59, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

flashforward

Dear Mysdaao,

Thank you for making pages for the episodes of FlashForward. Could you make the page for the episode "The Garden of Forking Paths?" I tried to do so, but it didn't work because the page said there was a 'session loss in data,' or something like that. If you could do this, I would continue to edit it for you and everyone's convenience. Thank you.

-therealdavo2 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Therealdavo2 (talk • contribs) 02:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I did not create the articles for the episodes of FlashForward. I only edited them. If you look at the page history by clicking the "history" tab on each page and look at the bottom, you can see who first created each page.

The "loss of session data" message happens if you spend a long time editing without previewing every once in a while. It does not mean you cannot create the article yourself. If it happens again, just press Back on your browser and try again. As a precaution, it is a good idea to save your text somewhere else on your computer if you are doing a lot of work at once.

Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 12:23, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Removing Broomstick

Hi Mysdaao, Thank you for your kind offer to help. I was asked to make edits to a client's wikipedia page. It was built before I ever got to it. I've only edited the lead paragraph at this point. It all seems fairly easy. However, there is a broomstick with the message "This article's introduction section may not adequately summarize its contents. To comply with Wikipedia's lead section guidelines, please consider expanding the lead to provide an accessible overview of the article's key points. (March 2010)". How do I remove this? Who put it here? Thanks! WWTC WonderWomanTC (talk) 20:06, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

That message is there because a user added the maintenace tag {{tooshort}} to the top of the article. You view the article's page history to see who added it, but it's not necessary. If you believe the issue in the message has been addressed, all you have to do to remove it is edit the article and remove {{tooshort}} from the top. If you do so, please explain why you are removing the tag either in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. For more information, you can read Wikipedia:Tagging pages for problems. Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 19:28, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Archiving fix

Thanks for fixing my error on User_talk:Spitfire19#Two_Things re. archiving; oops. Didn't set it right when pasting over from User:chzz/help/archive. I check back, of course, but thanks for fixing it quick.  Chzz  ►  17:26, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm glad I could help. --Mysdaao ^talk 18:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

References

Can you use"personal communication" as a verifiable reference? 122.148.40.164 (talk) 22:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

No, you can't use personal communication as a verifiable reference. Material in Wikipedia must be attributable to a reliable published source, and personal communication isn't considered reliable or published. Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 00:33, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I think you misundserstand

I started an article for no smoking signs and then someone redirects the page telling me to contribute to the existing article, so, I am simply adding the information into the article I was told to do so, smoking ban.--Wizard the Man (talk) 13:53, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Your edit was vandalism because it was an obvious hoax. An article here is not the place to add humor. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and must have accurate information. That is why I reverted your edit. Please let me know if you have any questions on this. --Mysdaao ^talk 15:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Thing for you

see ->

Sophie ^(Talk) 12:28, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Sophie! Just let me know if I can help in any other way! --Mysdaao ^talk 13:29, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

Hi there, I changed the name because I was/am Sghfdhdfghdfgfd, I got it unsurped because trying to remember Sghfdhdfghdfgfd off by heart is quite hard. If you go to User:Sghfdhdfghdfgfd the page redirects to my new talk page

PS, see Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations/Completed/19#Sghfdhdfghdfgfd_.E2.86.92_Sophie

Sophie ^(Talk) 13:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I didn't realize. Thanks for letting me know! --Mysdaao ^talk 14:45, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Wow, thanks

Thank you for the cookies. They look delicious! :D The Pebble Dare (talk) 16:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! --Mysdaao ^talk 18:50, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Question

Hi Mysdaao,

We've interacted in the past when you seemed to be my go-to-person when I began editing. I would like to know what you think of me perhaps becoming an administrator here on Wikipedia. I haven't looked into the process in detail, but wanted to hear your assessment first. Thanks, --PinkBull 23:33, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I advise giving it more time before trying to become an administrator. Here are my reasons. Your edit count is fairly high but not as high as many users will be looking for. You have a lot of experience with AfD but not other project areas of Wikipedia. Finally, while you've been doing a lot of vandalism fighting, you don't have rollback rights, and what you wrote here to request that your previous rollback rights be removed will be looked at. I think you're definitely on your way to becoming an administrator someday, but I suggest waiting some more time, requesting rollback again and getting comfortable with it, and starting to participating in some more project areas of Wikipedia. RfA can be a harsh process, so if you do decide to try to become an administrator, I wish you well, but be prepared to be strongly criticized by some. Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 13:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Subsequent to getting Rollback removed, I downloaded Twinkle, which has a rollback feature. I already have somewhat significant experience in vandalism fighting, new page patrolling, and afd discussions. What other areas of Wikipedia would be conducive to administrative experience?

Also, from what I'm discerining you're not an administrator. I find that quite surprising since you're the most wiki-knowledgeable editors I've come across. Any reason for that? Sorry if I'm being a bit too nosy. --PinkBull 19:32, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Twinkle does allow you to revert more easily but it is not the same as the rollback feature, which is automatically granted to administrators who don't already have it. I can see that you have a lot of experience fighting vandalism, but I just think it will be better for you if you ask for rollback again. Otherwise it will seem like you are uncomfortable with admin tools because of this.

Besides the areas you already participate in, some other places that would give you more experience would be in the areas of speedy deletions, other users' requests for adminship, and joining one or more WikiProjects.

No, I am not an administrator. I was nominated once but it was not successful (see Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mysdaao), partially because the user who did nominate me was new, which I naively thought was not supposed to be relevant, but it clearly was. Since then (not because of what happened with my nomination) things have happened in my life that have reduced the amount of time I have for personal activities, including Wikipedia. My participation on Wikipedia has been reduced lately, and I expect that will continue. Although I plan to continue contributing, I have no plans or desire to become an administrator now. --Mysdaao ^talk 13:01, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. I just read your RFA and it's really unfortunate how that played out. For the record, I will be glad to nominate you for administrator, if and when you are interested.

Do you know how rollback would work for someone who already has twinkle? The rollback tool allows a user to revert with literally one click. The rollback tool that comes together with twinkle requires a second click, asking the user to edit-summarize or cancel. If I were to get rollback rights, do you if that would change my current rollback to the one-click rollback or I will stay with the current twinkle-rollback?--PinkBull 18:05, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

If you have both rollback feature and Twinkle, by default you will see buttons for both the rollback feature and Twinkle's rollback buttons. All of them will work independently. You can configure Twinkle to hide its rollback links and only use Wikipedia's rollback feature to avoid confusion. This is what I have done. If you'd like to do this, go to Wikipedia:Twinkle/doc and look for the showRollbackLinks parameter. --Mysdaao ^talk 19:16, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I would prefer the other way around and use only Twinkle's rollback feature.--PinkBull 19:30, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Request for special permission (Rollback)

I want a rollback permission. How to get it? What are the qualification of an administrator? Rishikeshan (talk) 12:45, 5 June 2010 (UTC)rishikeshan

To request rollback permission, either contact an administrator in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to grant rollback requests or go to Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. But because you have no prior experience fighting vandalism, you probably won't be given the rollback feature. You should gain experience fighting vandalism without it for awhile, and then later on try to request it.

There are no official qualifications for being an administrator. Users seeking to become an administrator go though a nomination process at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship where the community decides who will become an administrator. Different users look for different things when deciding, but common things that are looked for are Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. If you are thinking about trying to become an administrator, please wait until you have much more experience.

Let me know if there is anything else I can help you with. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 15:23, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

question

Okay I know blogs are not realy a RS. But he is the problem The source we have show fax for new icarly episodes adds them but then a few weeks later or so takes the new episodes down. I was just wondering could we use http://iicarlyy.blogspot.com/. I know it is a blog site but here is the thing. the person who runs the site and the victoious site gets the episodes off show fax and puts them on there. the new episodes would be under the section upcoming episodes on the bottom of the page. Now if this is fine, How would I use this without it getting takien down when I put the new episodes up. Also What is the difference between http://danwarp.blogspot.com/ wich is used for the main icarly pages and dan's other shows. thanksChecker Fred (talk) 17:01, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't know much about those blogs, but from looking at them they're not acceptable as sources of information on Wikipedia. They're both fansites and there's no way to verify from the sites alone that the information is correct. If there's another site that used to have the information but later took it down, I suggest you check the Internet Archive which keeps archived copies of web pages by going to http://www.archive.org. Please let me know if you have any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 18:20, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello

I'm new here, on the English Wikipedia and now I'm very interested how to create articles but there is one problem. My mother language is german and I always don't know how to create articles with a perfect English. Are there links where I can get help? Jonathan Snack (talk) 12:51, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language is the best place to go for questions about English grammar and usage. If you're doing a translation of material from another language to English, people at Wikipedia:Translation can help you. But you shouldn't worry about it too much. If you do your best to contribute in English, it doesn't have to be perfect. Someone else will improve it for you.

If you're more comfortable in German, I also suggest joining the German Wikipedia, which is at http://de.wikipedia.org.

Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 13:34, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Question

Hypothetically, if someone made the edit "2+2=5" somewhere it would be inappropriate, let's say in the mathematics article, even if it had a consensus and verifiable, reliable, neutral references, would it be ok to edit war if necessary to revert it, if all other options in trying to fix it were exhausted? I'm at that point now with an issue i'm on it feels like, this is the first time it's happened to me in my 4,200+ edits now, and i'm not sure what to do now. Do I let the encyclopedia be just a little bit worse and cut my losses? Do I risk being blocked in order to do what I think would help the encyclopedia? I know i'm thinking about it too much, but still, on the grander scale of things in terms of wiki-philosophy, I'm wondering what you thought. Doc Quintana (talk) 17:11, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is based on verifiability, not truth, and it is never appropriate to edit war. Philosophically, it is not up to us as Wikipedia editors to decide what information is correct, but to look at information that is already out there in published, reliable sources and use it to create an encyclopedia. Since you say all other options are exhausted, I'm assuming that means you tried to discuss it with other editors who are involved (if not, you should). If consensus is against you, then there is one more option you should follow, let it go. You can't win every battle, and while Wikipedia is important, it's still just an encyclopedia and should be put in perspective. If you feel there's nothing else you can do on a particular issue or topic on Wikipedia, try editing something else.

If you want to give me more specifics on what's going on, I can probably respond better. But given what you've told me, this is the best I can do for your general situation. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 18:20, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Controversies surrounding Royal Dutch Shell ‎

I have removed some but there is just so much junk there. where can I ask to get some more help ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajmeton (talk • contribs) 13:09, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

The first place you should go to for more help on the article is the discussion page for the article, Talk:Controversies surrounding Royal Dutch Shell. Users edit at different schedules so you may have to wait some time for a response. For help from other users with making the article more neutral, you can go to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard and start a new section there. Finally, for general help, you may go to Wikipedia:New contributors' help page or Wikipedia:Help desk. Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 13:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi

I just created an account on the Wikipedia. May you please help me how I can possibly edit many articles? Thanks! Darun Mister (talk) 15:20, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

I'd be happy to help. I left a welcome message on your talk page with information that should help you get started. If you'd like more help or have any more questions, just let me know what specifically you'd like help with. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 18:06, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much for that! ;) Darun Mister (talk) 19:32, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Cummins UK Page

Hi am having problems with my Cummins UK page. I can't find many references on teh internet as CUmmins UK have been very popor about getting the name heard and spoken about. Al the infomration have provide is accurate to my knowledge, Can you help please!!

Regards,

Harvy

Harvymoore (talk) 10:29, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

I can't find any reliable sources either for Cummins UK, which means it probably doesn't meet the notability guidelines for Wikipedia. Reliable sources aren't required just to verify information but to demonstrate notability. Companies are considered notable enough to be included in Wikipedia if there has been significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Please see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for these guidelines. If, as you say, Cummins UK has been very poor about getting name recognition, that's an indication that it may not belong in Wikipedia. An option for you is to merge the content into Cummins. Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 13:21, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Help desk

• Sorry,but I didn't understand what you wanted to say about the square border around the text.Could you please tell me about it more clearly?Best.Max Viwe | Wanna chat with me? 16:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

When there is a leading space, which is a space at the beginning of a line, Wikipedia displays the text inside that border.

Look at the code for this section to see that there is a space at the beginning of this sentence, which causes it to be displayed this way.

For more help on this, please see Help:Wiki markup#Limiting formatting/escaping wiki markup, and let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 17:01, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.:)Max Viwe | Wanna chat with me? 17:02, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome! --Mysdaao ^talk 17:04, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks but Problem in archiving

Regards.Firstly,thank you for your help.I added the archive tag but there are no links to my,even i tried to give direct links but it didn't worked.It just appears like:

[[Archive <1>]]
or
[[User talk:Coercorash/Archive 1]]

will you please fix it?

Coercorash^TalkContr. 15:49, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the direct links you tried to add. There are no archive pages right now, so there's no point in adding links to them. When an archive page is created, it will automatically display on your talk page in the new template. Just wait until the first one is created and you'll see what I mean. Please let me know if there are any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 16:03, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello Mysdaao!Hope You're ok. Now,after 1 and a half days latter,the archiving template is not working.I've set it archive my talk page daily,as you know,but it's not working.Will you please help me?

Coercorash^TalkContr. 02:42, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I think it wasn't working because you set the archive page parameter to be "[[User talk:Coercorash/Archive 1]]", when it's expecting something like just "User talk:Coercorash/Archive 1". I've changed it, so hopefully this will fix it now. Let me know if it doesn't or you have any more questions. Thanks! --Mysdaao ^talk 12:55, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Nothing happened.I think there's some problem with MizzaBot II.

Coercorash^TalkContr. 18:01, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I found somewhere what might be the problem. Apparently empty parameters can cause errors with the bot. I removed an empty parameter, and hopefully that should fix it. If not, I'll ask the bot creator to look at it for you. --Mysdaao ^talk 19:00, 7 July 2010 (UTC)