I cannot find the answer anywhere. Yet it is such a simple question. HOW DO YOU PUT AN IMAGE ONTO WIKIPEDIA? Noone in this whole place seems to have bothered to put a page saying how it is done. Can someone please direct me to the right page? --Mark J 3 July 2005 08:12 (UTC)
Mark, I have asked that very same question here before -- precisely because Wikipedia:Picture tutorial is really no help at all to anyone who just wants to get started: far too technical. Have a look at my post A beginner's guide to uploading images? (it's item no. 160) and the excellent help which User:Hermione1980 provided there. We do still need a more prominent "beginner's guide" to this area of Wikipedia. -- Picapica 3 July 2005 21:17 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering if it's possible to change your user name once you've got an account? I'm regretting using my real, full name for reasons such as not particularly wanting my user page to come up on google searches etc. I definitely want an account so that people recognise my posts but think I'd rather go under a pseudonym. Any suggestions? Thanks, KG.
Sorry, but user name changes are rather difficult, and as such, don't happen. You can create a new account with a new name, if you want. But it appears that it is too late to keep your user page from showing up in Google. -- Cyrius|✎ 30 June 2005 00:43 (UTC)
Google has ways to remove cached pages on their site, if you contact them. Elfguy 30 June 2005 00:48 (UTC)
More information regarding changing usernames (which is no longer done) can be found at Wikipedia:Changing usernames. The page gives many helpful hints, though. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 30 June 2005 01:01 (UTC)
I've been wondering about this for quite some time. I regularily create pages of bands, for example Anti-Cimex. Is it appropriate for me to put redirects on all the pages reasonably similar to them such as anti-cimex, Anti-cimex or Anti Cimex? I don't think they have any other uses. thanks machinebuster
Just searching without the proper capital letters should bring the user to the right article anyways. If there are similar names for the same article then sure you should redirect them. Elfguy 30 June 2005 12:34 (UTC)
Nope, if you search for anti-cimex, it will say that page doesn't exist and Anti-Cimex doesn't come up under relevant articles. Should I put a redirect on it? machinebuster
Guidelines for redirects are at Wikipedia:Redirect. Searches for article titles, although generally case insensitive, are not if the software decides the article title is mixed case (I don't exactly understand why, but Anti-Cimex apparently counts as a mixed case title - I'm fairly certain Anti Cimex would not). If you add one redirect from, for example, Anti-cimex, any capitalization (including the dash) will match this redirect. -- Rick Block (talk) July 1, 2005 22:01 (UTC)
How to fix a page that was copy/pasted instead of properly moved?
I noticed that User:Chad1m had moved the page for Kerri Kenney to Kerri Kenney-Silver. I don't mind that he did this, I just know that copy/pasting is looked down on in Wikiland. So how do I go about fixing this or alternatively, how do I go about having someone else do it who is responsible for such things? Thanks, Dismas 30 June 2005 07:36 (UTC)
Looks like it's already been taken care of; Kerri Kenney-Silver is the main page, and Kerri Kenney is a redirect....And I'm stupid! Quite obviously, it hasn't been fixed, as the page history reveals. Could we get an admin to go temp-delete Kerri Kenney-Silver and move Kerri Kenney so we won't have GFDL issues? I put a note on Talk:Kerri Kenney-Silver in the meantime. I'd do all the deleting/moving myself, but I haven't earned my mop yet. -- Essjay · Talk June 30, 2005 08:00 (UTC)
I am trying to register/sign-in/create an account. I filled out the login page as it instructs for new users, but when I click Create Account I received a red text error message that says "You have not specified a valid username." On the off chance that my regular alias is deemed too ambiguous by the site, I tried my name in a standard "jdoe" format, but I got the same response. Please let me know if this is an error or if I need to try something else. Thanks.
Try capitalizing the first letter. Normally it's supposed to do this for you (usernames must be capitalized due to the title-forming rules in the wiki) but it looks like there's a bit of a bug and it's just rejecting lowercase. --Brion June 30, 2005 08:01 (UTC)
I found an article in English & want to translate it to another language. How am I going to save it? Is there an easy way such as "Save in language..." or so? It would be a useful feature, but there may be a useful workaround also I do not know...
Thanks for the help!
Ekrem.Saban@utanet.at
I'm not sure of the purpose why you do it, if it is to post on wikipedia, then simply go to http://www.wikipedia.org and select the wikipedia version in your language, and post the article there. Elfguy 30 June 2005 12:34 (UTC)
I'm a UK student. I need to reference an article in Wikipedia. I cannot see an obvious guideline about how to do this.
Formal referencing for web pages ideally takes this format:
Author (Usually difficult and often not given online. What would you like? Wikipedia?)
Title - easy enough
Place, publisher, date. Hmmm. I can find a state if I hunt and there is an update date on the page in question. Is that what you would recommend, or is the article date somewhere?
URL & date accessed. That is simplicity itself.
It would be awfully helpful to have a link to note saying how you like to be cited.
Hmm. Special:Statistics tells me there's well over 300,000 registered users. The general stats here, whilst a year behind, give a figure of about 25-26,000 for May; call it maybe 28,000 now. These, on examination, are "Wikipedians who edited at least 10 times since they arrived", which accounts for some of the discrepancy.
But that much discrepancy? I find it quite surprising that 90% of Wikipedia registered accounts haven't edited even ten times... am I reading this correctly? Shimgray 30 June 2005 16:57 (UTC)
Do the maths. The page says:
we have 1,849,465 pages.
Users have made 18,095,957 edits since July 2002; an average of 9.78 edits per page.
We have 313,551 registered users
I don't really find it surprising that regular contributors are not very numerous. Elfguy 30 June 2005 17:01 (UTC)
10% of accounts actually being used seems a bit high for a web site, actually. Remember that the cost of creating an account is virtually zero. -- Cyrius|✎ 30 June 2005 17:06 (UTC)
[head, meet desk]. I really should have noticed that line just above. Sorry :-)
Okay, I was reading it right. Hmm, interesting. Wonder if there's a power-law here... Shimgray 30 June 2005 17:08 (UTC)
If I read further (damn, I'm being sloppy today) there's a table of the distribution of number of edits/user, which is interesting - only 75,000 users or so have made at least one main-space edit. So less than a quarter... Shimgray 30 June 2005 17:26 (UTC)
Actually, that's not that bad. Most large forums (and even medium-sized ones) have trouble getting a 1% participation/posting rate. The fact remains: there are plenty of users who do not contribute, but there are also plenty of users who contribute a lot. Possibly too much. ;) -210.19.249.221 4 July 2005 06:15 (UTC)
I've searched for this, and I'm sure it's mindnumbingly simple, but I can't find the info.
In my list of contributions, some of them have a lower case m preceding the name of the article, and some are followed by this: (top)
I strongly suspect one or both of these indicates someone has, or is about to, take a look at my changes. Which I understand - but can someone clarify what it means for me? Much obliged.
The m indicates you've tagged your edit as minor (which should generally happen with spelling corrections and the like). (Top) indicates, your version is still the most recent version of the page. - Mgm|(talk) June 30, 2005 19:14 (UTC)
Note that there is no general mechanism to ensure that someone looks at all of your changes, or that every change is inspected. Many people put articles of interest on their watchlists and inspect changes to them. Others scan the Recent Changes and New Pages pages. There is no rota. Many things slip through. Somehow we manage. Bovlb 2005-06-30 21:07:14 (UTC)
From the HCI perspective, it would be a lot better if pages like this had keys, or links to specific help pages. It may be obvious to old-timers, but think of the newbie. Bovlb 2005-07-06 00:46:24 (UTC)
How can I find out which articles I created? Ncik 30 Jun 2005
You can see them in 'My contributions' which is on the top right corner of your screen. I don't think there is any way to view just the list of articles that you started. Elfguy 30 June 2005 20:00 (UTC)
But even the contributions list doesn't seem to tag edits that were article creations as far as I can see. Do I really have to check each article I have edited so far to see which ones I created? There must be an easier way!? 01 Jul 2005
Unfortunately, not really. It will mark new articles that have not been edited by anyone else, but once an article has been edited by someone else, it will no longer mark articles you created in any special way. —Lowellian (talk) July 1, 2005 22:34 (UTC)
Is there a wish list where Wikipedians can suggest changes to developers? Ncik 02 Jul 2005
It used to be that when I went to my watchlist, all the items were bolded; this is no longer the case. Is there a way to change it back? Meelar(talk) June 30, 2005 21:04 (UTC)
It's a bug in the new MediaWiki software. There was a page where you could list bugs that you found but I see that page has been removed... I don't know why though since these bugs are still around... Dismas 30 June 2005 21:16 (UTC)
The bug in question is that a new feature is supposed to bold watchlist items that have changed since you last visited them. And it didn't. -- Cyrius|✎ 30 June 2005 21:27 (UTC)
Does anybody know of a way to find out how many edits a user has made? I've been on a page once that told me my exact number of edits, but I completely forgot where it was. Can anybody help? Dragonfly888 30 June 2005 21:28 (UTC)
There's a link to "my contributions" on the top right corner of your screen. Elfguy 30 June 2005 21:55 (UTC)
What is the purpose of the as yet empty article named "Flippancy"? Is it supposed to be one's biography? I know there's a rule that self-plugging pages are a no-no, so I'm keen on finding out what it's for before I do anything with it. Flippancy June 30, 2005 21:43 (UTC)
It's intended as a way to get to know one another. It's your user page. Put stuff there about you or the edits you've made or hobbies you have, etc. It's not exactly an article. Click on other people's user names to see what they've put on theirs if you want an example. Dismas 30 June 2005 21:53 (UTC)
I read a recent Wikipedia article on Out of this World, a card trick that was invented by Paul Curry. The secret for this (and many other magic tricks) is NOT and should NOT be in the public domain.
The Internet has fostered a culture in which people behave as though they have the right to have any and all information for free. In the real world, this is not the case. Not all information should be provided to anyone free of charge.
I recently quit a job with a Fortune 500 company. If I were to post that company's trade secrets on Wikipedia, I would expect to be sued, with the company demanding damages. Why is it OK to post magician's trade secrets on Wikipedia? I can't come up with a compelling reason to do so. If Wikipedia decides to infringe on people's copyrights and trade secrets, I would imagine it will eventually cease to exist. I don't want to see that happen.
So how about it? Can we agree that there is some information that ought not to be included in Wikipedia? Could we start by removing the Out of this World article?
-Barry R. Fernelius
You seem to be referring to Out of This World (card trick). I note that an anonymous editor removed the section "The Secret" from this article earlier today with no edit summary. I suspect that it might reappear soon.
Legal protection: There are traditionally two ways that the law allows someone to control the distribution and use of ideas: copyright and patent (and trademark, which is not relevant here). You use the term "public domain", which usually means something whose copyright or patent has expired, or for which the owner has explicitly revoked all his rights.
Copyright: This controls distribution of the specific expression of ideas, and derivative works thereof. No-one seems to be claiming that the text of this article (as opposed to the invention described) is not the original work of the Wikipedia contributor. If this is a copyright violation, however, then the text should be removed.
Patents: These restrict the exploitation of an invention, but do not restrict the publication of the method. On the contrary, patent application requires publication. I am not aware that magicians commonly patent their tricks, but note that Paul Curry is cited in U.S. Patent 5,580,056 (Block puzzle illusion of matter created and destroyed)[1]. The existence of a patent does not affect the Wikipedia article, but might make an interesting external link.
Trade Secret: Generally, legal protection for trade secrets is weak. You can sue people who contracted to keep it secret, but most jurisdictions will not help you put the genie back into the bottle.
Moral/Ethical obligation: You could argue that we have a moral obligation not to injure magicians' livelihoods unnecessarily. There was a recent discussion on Wikipedia about privacy issues, and whether we should list the phone numbers and social security numbers of celebrities, or the real names of pseudonymous authors, but I can't seem to find it right now.
It's not clear from your post above which, if any, of these arguments you are trying to make. The last one is probably the strongest. I can't find any web-sites that publish the same information, but it does appear than many people (including Paul Curry) have written books that purport to reveal this secret. Bovlb 2005-07-01 00:58:25 (UTC)
I agree that the last reason, Moral/Ethical obligation is the strongest argument. Also, I think that it is at least bad form to post Paul Curry's trick on the Wikipedia without obtaining Paul Curry's permission.
Also, there are a number of folks selling this trick (or variants thereof). There are a lot of 'how-to' books in many fields. If someone does a minor re-write of one these works, is it OK to post the content on Wikipedia?
I think that a description of the effect would be fine. Posting the secret is tacky, and not in the spirit of an encylopedia.
First I think it's ridiculous to think some information has to stay "secret". This is not an original creation, patented and kept in close secret. It's some general information about a card game. Second, from a legal stand point, if someone writes information on Wikipedia, it is totally legal to do so. If, however, that person broke an agreement with some company that forced him to keep the information secret, then that's between the person and the company, and Wikipedia has nothing to do with it. So in conclusion feel free to revert it all you want, but once information has been put into Wikipedia, it's always available in the history, and it will remain in the public domain forever. Elfguy 1 July 2005 05:39 (UTC)
I've had such a discussion before regarding the King Rising Levitation, see my talk page. - Mgm|(talk) July 1, 2005 08:27 (UTC)
And another instant edit war begins. Bovlb 2005-07-01 08:52:58 (UTC)
Elfguy is mistaken; Out of this World IS an original creation. It was created by Paul Curry. It's not a card game; it's a card trick. And no, entering information into Wikipedia does NOT automatically make that information 'in the public domain.'
Try this experiment. Enter the entire text of the next Harry Potter book into the Wikipedia. I'll guarantee that this will not enter this information into the public domain!
Barry, information cannot be copyrighted. Only expression can be copyrighted. If you're alleging that the article in particular copies the words used in some magic textbook or publication, then that's a copyright violation. But if you're alleging (as it seems you are) that the text doesn't come from a copyrighted work, but describes a process that its inventor would like to remain secret, that's not a copyright violation. That's just not how copyright works, plain and simple. If we did reproduce the text of Harry Potter then that would be a copyright violation. But if (as we do) describe, in our own words, the contents of Harry Potter, that's not a copyright violation, and we're perfectly within our rights to do so. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 1, 2005 21:45 (UTC)
With the Harry Potter example, there's derivative work issues, but that's irrelevant to an uncopyrightable card trick. -- Cyrius|✎ 2 July 2005 16:37 (UTC)
So screw what is right/wrong and just do what you can get away with under the law? There is NO REASON for the explanation to the effects being put up in wikipedia. The purpose is to inform laymen about the subject, not expose the theory. An article for this effect should include what the effect does(in the eyes of a laymen), its history, where you can purchase it, and perhaps different variations on the effect. The secret SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN OUT due to a legal loophole. It is still ethically wrong and you shouldn't use law to justify your unethical behavior.--MacGyver07 2 July 2005 22:06 (UTC)
Copyright a magic trick? I think what you meant to say was "Patent right". Copyright protects published works - literary, scientific, and anything tangible, from being uncontrollably reproduced. When you wish to protect a technique for your own personal use, so you can feed your family and pay the rent, you must file a _patent_ with the US. patent office. A patent restricts the usage of an invention (i.e. a unique, unprecedented idea) to one person.
There is a problem inherent with patenting magic tricks since you must publicize the information and make it freely accessible (35 U.S.C. Sect 10) Unless it's a national security issue (sect 181)-- and the patent must eventually expire in 14 or 20 years (sects 173, 156 - I think...). Second: since secrecy is essential to magic, the origins of any Magic tricks are hard to discover - making claims of inventor-ship difficult. Magic tricks often fall under the _novelty_ clause (35 U.S.C. Sect 102) of patent law which denies patents to inventions which were "known or used by others in this country." Trade secrets that are shared and used among an entire industry make it ineligible for protection under the law. Ultimately, the only protection you have against blabbermouths is via unofficial means (oaths of secrecy, appeals to ethics and morality, mafia retaliations etc.). You cannot claim any legal protection.
Refer to U.S.C. consolidated laws here CONSOLIDATED PATENT LAWS - United States Code Title 35 - Patents. It's a very readable explanation of patent law. Also Wikipedia patent article is pretty clean explanation. P.S. I'm not a lawyer. And, I can't speak about a magic trick has been patented out side of the US. If anybody knows - I'd be interested in how that works. And - there just might be magic tricks that ARE patented (note the article's incorrect use of the word "copyright"). If anyone knows any please also let me know. Finally for the guy who claims this is patented: this trick may very well be patented: please cite the pat. number for me - I'm interested. Seriously, not being facetious
Let me say this again. With force and clarity for those who missed it. A patent protects others from using your invention. It does not keep it secret. Indeed, when you patent a magic trick, you must publicize the mechanics of how it works. The word "patent" comes from the Latin "patens," past participle of "patere" which means "to be open". That is, you must "lay open" your invention. A visit to the U.S. Patent office shows how this works The patent for the Ipod user interface--Muchosucko 3 July 2005 10:28 (UTC)
Sorry, I have two questions, and I don't dare try to post twice, because if the help desk has become anything like the VfD office...
Question 1: why does it take forever now to get one's vote or comment onto VfD? I've tried multiple saves, various magical-thinking formulas of "see change", "see preview", "refresh", go away and come back - there seems to be no rhyme or reason as to how you get your words to stick in place. Yes, if you go away for hours, it will usually be there when you come back. Or it may just head up a whole list of votes/comments that haven't shown up on the page yet. Why is this happening? And is there a magical-thinking formula I haven't tried that works?
There was a bug introduced in the latest software upgrade that made the save button go to the preview option frequently. It seems to have been fixed so this may have been what happened. Elfguy 1 July 2005 05:39 (UTC)
Question 2: I have just sort of finished a list project that seemed very interesting at first, then got quite boring in the middle, but finally ended up forcing me to think about some really fascinating things I'd never considered. But pulling together the list was what whacked me on the head to understand that. Many people looking at it will probably be left with my middle impression, if they haven't skipped on to something more sparkly. Is it appropriate to put some comments on the article talk page about what one might find in the list if one were to look at it as something beyond a list? Or should I just keep my keyboard quiet? --Mothperson 1 July 2005 02:57 (UTC)
Uhm you can write whatever you think best on the talk page. It is however no guaranty that people will read it, before pressing the revert button. Elfguy 1 July 2005 05:39 (UTC)
Is there a hard and fast rule on the proper use of "The" in titles and page names? I am looking at [New_York_City_newspapers] and noticed some titles have "The" at the beginning - and most don't. - tdempsey 1 July 2005 09:49 (UTC)
The rule is to never do it, unless you need to do it. That is, don't do it unless there is a very very good reason to, e.g. The Ashes, where the definite article is part of the name. smoddy 1 July 2005 09:57 (UTC)
I agree. Just verifying the rule. tdempsey 1 July 2005 10:17 (UTC)
If the name of the article is not the title of a work, an official name, or another proper name, avoid the definite ("the") and indefinite ("a"/"an") articles at the beginning of a page name.
The name of The Wall Street Journal is The Wall Street Journal, with the definite article. The name of the New York Post is just New York Post. Thus one article name has a "The" in front and the other does not. -- Cyrius|✎ 2 July 2005 16:32 (UTC)
Dear Sir or Madam,
Are Wikipedia members allowed to write video game walkthroughs and reviews or not? I'm wondering about this because I want to write one, but the thought of Wikipedia not allowing that left me wondering if
they would allow it or not. Please take your time to answer this question.
--Shocko7 July 1, 2005 12:59 (UTC)
There is also an issue of copyright you must carefully consider, wherever you put the review. Copyright not only restricts how we may use text and images found in a game, but how and where we play it. For example, you may not hold a MonopolyTournament without the permission of the publisher of that game. Some game publishers prohibit the addition of game variants, where you add your own rules for the entertainment of yourself and some friends.
Suppose your review says something not nice about the game. The publisher could take offense. In fact, whatever contract you signed, when you first purchased the game, could contain denial of permission for you to do certain activities. AlMac 8 July 2005 14:00 (UTC)
hey, there is a problem with headers cutting into templates because of some recent change someone made to wikipedia. I tried to report the bug but don't know how to do it correctly.
This problem only shows up in internet explorer 6.
Can somebody fix this? Most people use internet explorer. ScifiterX 1 July 2005 03:18 (UTC)
I recieved the above on my talk page. I don't use explorer, and have no idea's regarding the technical aspects, but would appreciate it if someone who knows more than I takes a look at it.
Looks OK on both IE(5.2) and Safari(1.3). hydnjotalk 1 July 2005 19:15 (UTC)
Someone else made a change to the MediaWiki monobook.css that caused the problem. I have removed the relevant line, fixing the problem, which is why the problem is not showing up anymore. —Lowellian (talk) July 1, 2005 22:31 (UTC)
There's not any need to file a bug report, by the way. —Lowellian (talk) July 1, 2005 22:32 (UTC)
i am unable to upload a google earth file (kml). any plans to allow it soon?
I'm not sure what would be the point of having a .kml file here. Who would be able to see it? The articles are supposed to have text and images only, so anyone with a browser can see them. Plus doesn't the program EULA prohibit that? May want to just take a screenshot. Elfguy 1 July 2005 19:44 (UTC)
Nope. If we'd allow these images, we'd be breaking copyrights left and right. - 131.211.210.10 4 July 2005 12:30 (UTC)
Sometime during the last 10 hours or so, my watch list has stopped watching. I checked my list, and everything is still on it, but no news comes through. Is this a general problem, or just mine? Getting a wee bit paranoid. --Mothperson 1 July 2005 15:25 (UTC)
No, it's a general problem. There is a bug report filed. smoddy 1 July 2005 15:36 (UTC)
This wouldn't have anything to do with my own watchlist suddenly going blank for no reason, would it? -- Extraordinary Machine 1 July 2005 21:42 (UTC)
Usually it's instantanious, but since wikipedia uses cache servers sometime it may take a few minutes. Elfguy 1 July 2005 19:44 (UTC)
Minor clarification - new articles can be found by article title nearly instantaneously. Searches via Special:Search use an index that is only periodically updated. I'm not sure, but I'd imagine the index was rebuilt during the recent software change. Last I heard, index rebuilds are only initiated manually so it may take considerable time (days, perhaps even weeks) for new content to show up in these searches. -- Rick Block (talk) July 1, 2005 21:48 (UTC)
I mostly try to help out wikipedia by adding images to existing article under a creative commons attribution licence. However, since the software upgrade a week or so ago, I noticed this text is now on the upload page:
If you upload a file here to which you hold the copyright, you must license it under the GNU Free Documentation License or release it into the public domain.
Am I to understand that wikipedia is no longer accepting images under creative commons free licences?
Thanks for the help --CGP July 1, 2005 17:38 (UTC)
I don't think the licenses have changed recently. I think there is a distinction between uploading images here in en.wikipedia and in commons. Plenty of images are being uploaded under a variety of free licenses, and even fair use. Elfguy 1 July 2005 19:42 (UTC)
I happen to be watching "The Practice" as I type this, and we decided to look up an actress called Carolyn McCormick on Wikipedia.
For some reason, the photo on your article is the wrong one. It shows Kelli Williams, who plays another longstanding character. This can be checked on IMDB.com:
"Kelli Williams .... Lindsay Dole Donnell (1997-2003)"
I can see how the mistake happenned, because the picture seems to be a screenshot from an episode that both actresses are in. Details below (again from IMDB)
"The Practice" playing "Dr. Catherine Nesbit" in episode: "Food Chains" (episode # 2.25) 6 April 1998
I'm really sorry, I have no photo to put on the site....but the one there is definitely wrong. I tried to correct it myself but can't.
I removed it. hopefully someone will be able to confirm and get the right pic there. Elfguy 1 July 2005 19:39 (UTC)
I recently discovered your great project and even made a correction to an article I was reading. However, I can't seem to find any way to determine the authorship of anything -- even my own correction, while accepted, is not "credited". I'm not concerned about credit for every minor correction, but if users don't know who wrote the major sections of a given article, how do they have any way of veryfiying whether or not it's accurate or even biased? Admittedly, anyone can create an account and use a false name and create all sorts of articles, but I'd think most folks, especially experts in their field who contribute, would want to be known as the source of an artcile.
Is Wikipedia deliberatly anonymous to encourage free discussion? Or is there a way to determine authorship but I'm just not seeing it?
Thanks in advance.
Welcome to Wikipedia! Wikipedia is a free-content encyclopedia, which means that anyone can read and edit it. We encourage you to log-in and create an account, though. See Wikipedia:Why create an account?. If you are interested in the page history and the authors, all you have to do is click the "history" tab, which will show you a list of revisions and their respective authors. However, most of us don't use our real names. Despite this, the vast majority of our articles are factually correct, being constantly revised and edited and fact-checked by multiple people. If you wish to be identified as an expert in a field, you can put it on your user page once you create an account.
Thanks once again to Wikipedia! I hope you create an account and join us! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 1 July 2005 21:31 (UTC)
Look at very top lines of each page.
Top line has connections to stuff YOU done, such as your TALK page, your contributions, your watch list.
Second line at top has connections to stuff that is important to THIS page.
Check HISTORY ... this shows links to history of changes and additions to this page, including links to the people who did stuff, and ability to compare two versions to see net changes.
Today all of my watchlist for the past up to today does not show. I have approximately 26 pages on my watchlist and up until today it has been an excellent source for watching articles of interest.
Is there some reason why they would not show past history? When I press the buttons to show activity for the past hours and days, nothing shows. Any assistance to allow me to recover this data would be appreciated. Thank you. Storm Rider 1 July 2005 21:52 (UTC)
A couple questions above, it talks about a bug. Fixing that bug caused the watchlists of all users to be wiped clean. You can go to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Watchlist bug for a little more information. --NymphadoraTonks 1 July 2005 22:00 (UTC)
I'm certain this isn't a new question but I couldn't find an answer in the FAQ's. I suspect one has to "know" where the answer might be and click down the correct branch of the tree. Couldn't find an obvious "Search FAQs for keywords" mechanism.
I uploaded a graphics file Loco162.jpg and then realized that it should have been named Loco620.jpg. While I could have simply changed my Wiki-code from 620 to 162 the Locomotive actually has #620 on it and anyone who looked at the filename would have been confused, likely assuming I had posted the wrong Locomotive picture.
I have uploaded Loco620.jpg but now I need someone with the correct permissions to PLEASE blow away Loco162.jpg for me.
Thanks folks- Verne
Deleted. The information you were looking for is at Wikipedia:Deletion policy; in your case, adding a {{deletebecause}} on the image description page with the justification would have been enough. --cesarb 2 July 2005 00:53 (UTC)
Can anyone explain this please. The page on the G8 group of industrialised nations contains a paragraph which reads as follows:-
"On February 18th, 6098, United States Senators bobs ur uncle and [seymore butts]] called for Russia to be suspended from the G8 until democratic and political freedoms are ensured by Russian President Vladimir Putin."
Clearly this text has been defaced. So I tried to fix it by editing the page, but in the editing window, there's nothing wrong. Here's what it says :-
Another user probably fixed it while you were looking at the page. Howabout1Talk to me! July 2, 2005 02:09 (UTC)
When you click "edit", it loads up a copy of the most recent version of the page for you to edit; in this case, someone had fixed the vandalism between the time you read it and the time you tried to edit, so the version you were editing was the "newest" - you'd also have seen it corrected had you reloaded the page. Pages which tend to attract a lot of vandalism also attract a lot of users watching them, so vandalism tends to be removed quickly. Shimgray 2 July 2005 02:14 (UTC)
I have made some changes to the page for the Kainai first nation. "Kainai" is the preferred usage, with "Kainaiwa" being an alternate usage. My edits have reflected this, but the heading of the page still says "Kainah".
I am a member of the tribe, and have worked for the tribe for over 10 years, and no one that I know uses "Kainah" to refer to our tribe - no one uses this spelling on our reserve.
Is there any way to get this heading changed to "Kainai" instead of "Kainah"? As well, it might be useful to have "Blood", or "Blood Tribe" included in brackets after the name "Kainai" in the head.
I will be doing further work on this entry, but I think it is important that this change be made, if possible.
Thanks.
Email is lscout@shaw.ca if you have any questions.
Sorry, you made only 0 edits before 00:00, 30 May 2005. You need at least 400 to be able to vote.
The above message may be because the Elections for the Board of Trustees link in the notice has brought you to Meta-Wiki, thus the vote link is now within Meta. Go back to your preferred Wiki and try to vote there. (SEWilco 20:07, 30 Jun 2005 (UTC))
And also ask your local administrator(s) to fix the sitenotice. Thanks. --Aphaia | Translate Election | ++ 20:17, 30 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Say, en:Administrator: "fix the sitenotice". Whatever that means. Maybe there should be a copy of "Elections for the Board of Trustees" in en:? (SEWilco 2 July 2005 04:35 (UTC))
DefaultSettings.php on my website has been accidentally edited (language change) and I now get the following messages errors when I try to access my Wikipedia, what can I do? Thanks.
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/DefaultSettings.php:1092) in /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/OutputPage.php on line 391
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/DefaultSettings.php:1092) in /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/OutputPage.php on line 324
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/DefaultSettings.php:1092) in /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/OutputPage.php on line 352
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/DefaultSettings.php:1092) in /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/OutputPage.php on line 353
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/DefaultSettings.php:1092) in /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/OutputPage.php on line 355
Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/DefaultSettings.php:1092) in /home/fr-novar/public_html/RomanWiki/includes/OutputPage.php on line 404
You could try downloading a new one from CVS. Angela. July 2, 2005 06:52 (UTC)
I did some copy-editing on an article and saved my changes before realizing that I had forgotten to log in. The revision history of course shows my IP address rather than my user name for this change. Is there any easy or recommended way to "take responsibility" or credit for the changes that ought to have been tagged with my username rather than my IP address? --Brandon 2 July 2005 07:58 (UTC)
The simple answer is "no", I'm afraid. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 2 July 2005 11:11 (UTC)
It is no longer possible to reassign anonymous edits to an account (see Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit), but if you want other users to know that the edits are yours, maybe you can accomplish that by writing a note about it on the article's talkpage. Good luck. Sietse 2 July 2005 13:41 (UTC)
Please actually ask a question (and sign it) — don't just leave a heading like this.
If you're absolutely sure that you've done the required work, then delete the template. If you don't know what the template is, then it's unlikely that you've done the required work.
As a corollary, I've noticed a number of cases in which editors have removed "wikify" or "copyedit" templates, having done very little (or even nothing) to wikify or copy-edit the articles in question. Please don't do this. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 2 July 2005 11:14 (UTC)
If you don't know how to remove the copyedit notice, then you probably shouldn't be removing it. -- Cyrius|✎ 2 July 2005 16:25 (UTC)
I do not appreciate you people allowing the cretins at Bullshido.com to post this sort of lies about me. Please have this removed.
Ashida Kim
ashidakim.com
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Ashida Kim is the pseudonym of self-proclaimed ninja Radford William Davis, best known for his books on ninjitsu and martial arts published during the 1970s and 1980s. Other pseudonyms include Christopher Hunter.
Leader of the Black Dragon Society form of Koga Ryu Ninjitsu. Teaches forms such as Iron body, stealth, and Taijitsu.Due to claims of practicing and teaching supernatural and magical abilities such as invisibility, telepathic mind control and death touches, as well as offering mail-order black belt programs in a belt factory fashion [1], Ashida Kim is regarded as a fraud by many in the field of martial arts.
First of all, Wikipedia is an open encyclopedia, which means anyone can come and write anything. If you disagree with what is written, you can edit it, and rewrite it. However, please remember the guidelines such as making sure the article is NPOV and also remember this is an encyclopedic site, not a site to publish auto-biographies. Elfguy 2 July 2005 17:14 (UTC)
Wanting to provide a link via allergy related website
Dear Madam/Sir
My husband and I are opening up an allergy based website in Australia, serving (hopefully) worldwide to allergy sufferers over 600 products for example, wheat free,gluten free, dairy free foods etc and natural organic products, nutritional advice, books and chat rooms for allergy sufferers.
As personally, I do use your WIkipedia resources for certain ingredients for foods as my little 3 year old boy has multiple food allergies and can die if he eats particular foods, I find Wikepedia vital to my every day living. In saying this, I believe that everyone should be aware of this website, it is very informative and highly interesting in general.
Please I look to you for permission to provide a link and write up about your website, in particular the food/ingredient area of your site. We anticipate opening mid July 2005 and therefore look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience.
Our website will be named Allergyblock.com (and .au) and we hope you can also provide a support to us, which fortunately most of our manufacturers, product companies and the like have also been upmost helpful and assisted in any way possible.
Look forward to hearing from you.
Tania
You don't need to ask for permission to link to us. Feel free to do so. You can also directly copy our material and put it on your website as long as you also state that you got it from here and provide a link to the page you got it from. As for support, if you need any technical advice I'm sure there would be many here able and willing to help you. But if you are talking about financial support, then you need to know that we are not a company and rely on charitable donations ourselves, so we cannot help you out with money. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 2 July 2005 12:54 (UTC)
...and sorry but but we don't maintain commercial links if that is what you meant. alteripse 2 July 2005 16:46 (UTC)
hello!i'am an engineering student doing my second year here in india.i have an assignment regarding electric field intensity due to volume charges.i don't know much about volume charges.
i have to submit my assignment within two days.i need a full derivation about my topic.
can anybody help me soon?
I'm trying to add a table to the top of the Angers page. Currently, there is an image at the top right. When I add my table it sandwiches between the text and the image. I want it to appear below the image, aligned on the right. Thank you for your help.
One way to do this is to surround the image and table with a HTML "div", as explained at Wikipedia:Picture_tutorial#Co-aligning like images. Note that if you do this, the pixel width must be specified to ensure all browsers are able to properly render it (at least IE and Mozilla have problems figuring out how wide the div should be). -- Rick Block (talk) July 2, 2005 22:17 (UTC)
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws"
Is there something going on with Image:Example.jpg? On the WP:MIND (Mind Benders) page that I am maintaining, I see a picture of Lego men and the words "Owned" on the picture. Yet when I click on it, it takes me to the right Example.jpg. THe code in the page is still for example.jpg. Seems weird. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 2 July 2005 22:00 (UTC)
P.S. I can't miss this promo opportunity! All Wikipedians are encouraged to submit entries for our logo competition. Afterwards, there will be an open vote open to everyone starting on July 16. The vote will determine the winner of the pre-round artistic competition. Also on July 16, Round One will open. The round consists of approximately ten mind-boggling, logic/intellectual questions that promises to be WikiFun for all! So why not come join us- submit an entry, vote, and then participate!
All the pages that link to Example.jpg seem to be fine (there's only five or six) except for Mind Benders and User:Harajuku. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 2 July 2005 22:03 (UTC)
It would be a clear case of clear your cache — except that you needed to do it on Image:Example.jpg itself. The image was vandalized, disguised as a revert, and since it's common on newbie tests you had it cached. The thumb version is uncommon, so you didn't have it cached. --cesarb 2 July 2005 22:09 (UTC)
I searched thourgh wikipedia but I couldn't find any information about the "Contents box" appearing on the top of each article and showing all the sections. First, how many sections is needed, or how does the page size have to be, for the Contents box to appear.
And is there a way to make it vanish from the page (It's bothering my User page]]. Thank you. 500LL July 2, 2005 22:04 (UTC)
You shouldn't add it to regular articles, as that would impact others as well, I think there's a preference if you want it on articles as well. TOCs appear when there's at least 3 sections. - Mgm|(talk) July 3, 2005 09:08 (UTC)
I will only add it to my User page, it's bothering it.500LL July 6, 2005 13:16 (UTC)
I was wondering if there was a way to add a link to a long piece of writing to an already existing wikipedia entry. For example, I have written a 12-page paper on Elmore James and his influence. I would like to make it accessible from the existing entry on Elmore James, but just copy and pasting it would make the entry way too long. It would be good if people could go there for quick reference, and if they have a lot of interest, they could then click a link to read my paper. Is there a way to do this with the editing functions?
If the material is good and not copyrighted, go ahead and put it into the article. Expect it to be edited. Feel free to contribute. alteripse 3 July 2005 00:03 (UTC)
Even if it is really long? Is there a way I can make a new sub-catagory for the table of contents within the entry, so I can put it there? Corporal Klegg 3 July 2005 04:23 (UTC)
Actually, I just read the Five Pillars of Wikipedia, and discovered the no original research rule. Does this mean there is no place on wikipedia for my paper (which includes original reasearch), or can I still put it somewhere in the article. (I don't know if I can put it into "external links" because it isn't posted anywhere else on the internet.) Corporal Klegg 3 July 2005 04:55 (UTC)
This is not a place for original research. If you have text you have written that describes a subject in a NPOV view that's fine, but not if it's an article that describes unproven and unsupported theories. Elfguy 3 July 2005 05:13 (UTC)
We'd rather you just use the knowledge you gained while writing your paper to expand the existing article. Add a few facts! Isomorphic 3 July 2005 05:53 (UTC)
Well, you can get a feel for this place by the range of our recommendations. I would still recommend putting in what you are sure of and we don't already have. Offer some of your more original assertions on the talk page and see what responses you get from the people who watch the article. Go for it. alteripse 3 July 2005 18:25 (UTC)
I keep seeing the message: "WARNING: Your browser is not unicode compliant, please change it before editing an article." What does this mean? Is it life-threatening? How do I fix it? MulgaBill 3 July 2005 00:54 (UTC)
It means that using it to edit articles can cause funny question marks to appear in place of some characters when the page is saved. The quickest way to fix it is to download a modern browser, for instance Mozilla Firefox. Just for curiosity, which browser are you using currently? --cesarb 3 July 2005 01:33 (UTC)
I'm using Internet Explorer 5.2 for Mac. I haven't noticed any "funny questions marks". MulgaBill 3 July 2005 01:50 (UTC)
And if you want to stick with IE, you might want to upgrade to 5.5 or 6. - Mgm|(talk) July 3, 2005 09:12 (UTC)
Does IE 5.5 or 6 for Mac exist? --cesarb 3 July 2005 13:53 (UTC)
The last version of Internet Explorer for Mac is 5.2.3, which hasn't been updated in two years. IE Mac is effectively a dead product. -- Cyrius|✎ 3 July 2005 17:18 (UTC)
HI MY NAME IS LYNETTE LUCAS I AM LOOKING FOR AN ARTICLE BACK IN THE 1970 ABOUT THE NOISE FROM THE PLANES GOING OVER HOUSE IN LENNOX CALIFORNIA THE PLANES WERE GOING TO LAX THE SPECIFIC ARTICLE THAT I AM LOOKING FOR IS A BOY BY THE NAME OF JOEY LUCAS HE WAS HOLDING HIS CAT IN THE PICTURE THAT WAS PUBLISHED I HAVE TRIED LOOKING FOR THIS ARTICLE FOR SO LONG CAN YOU PLEASE HELP ME THANK YOU LYNETTE
"Number A, you don't have to shout. Do you know how many Internet etiquette laws you're breaking by typing in all caps like that? Well, you're breaking one: Don't type in all caps."
Let me get this straight. You're looking for an article about LAX noise pollution from the 1970s that has a picture of a boy named Joey Lucas holding a cat? You're going to have to give us some sort of hint here. It's not exactly a trivial thing to look through a decade's worth of newspapers and magazines, largely unindexed by modern search engines. A title would be useful. -- Cyrius|✎ 3 July 2005 17:30 (UTC)
Most newspapers get copied to microfilm, stored in the basement of both the local public library of major cities, and in some dusty closet of the newspaper itself & I believe this microfilm office is called a Morgue (not the kind that has dead bodies to be autopsied.
At time of microfilming, some info went to some kind of index, so that people could search the index for some story, learn date title of story, what microfilm code location it is at, and go look up the original story. At least that is how it was done before the age of computers that look like Personal Computers, networked or not.
Some of these old storage places are open to the general public. So I suggest you head on over to your public library to find out if they have this kind of deal that would let you look up what you interested in. Ditto the various newspaper offices. Plan on spending several days at each newspaper microfilm place, unless you got more info than you stated.
AlMac
The notion of airplanes flying over people homes and making a horrible racket has long been a controversial topic, in which various political groups seek to change how the airline industry operates.
Similarly, the airport industry needs to have runways and flight space towards them to avoid risk of crashing into those people houses. Getting the real estate to do so, is also a big political football.
I suggest you go looking for the special interest groups that are interested in doing something about airplane noise flying over homes, and improving right of way for airplanes approaching and leaving airports. They may have resources that you can use. AlMac 3 July 2005 18:39 (UTC)
I think that people whould be careful before they make comments about a famous person on Wikipedia as children use that information as though it is the absolute truth.
Where does it confirm that Monica Dickens was expelled from St Pauls School, and also which of her books was published posthumously?
While I'd applaud people trying to confirm our sources, it would also help to educate people not to take any source as the absolute truth in the first place. Which of her books was published posthumously should be easy enough to find out. Look up the day she died and go to a bookstore to find what her last book was and when it was published. - Mgm|(talk) July 3, 2005 09:15 (UTC)
Where can I view my contributions with only one media type? For example, I used to be able to view only my image contributions, template contributions etc. Is that feature still available? • Thorpe • 3 July 2005 10:12 (UTC)
I had a look at the help pages regarding translations. I speak 3 languages and I thougth I could edit some content from the English to the Italian and vice versa, and from German to English.
I notice that often the articles from one "version" of Wikipedia (english for example) to the other "versions" (italian for example) are different.
Is it considered plagiarism to just entirely translate an article from one language to the other? And should I cite the content or just edit and give it a go?
Thanks for your answer.
Account name
Aralerm
It's not considered plagarism, and you are positively encouraged to translate info between articles. There's no requirement for articles in different languages to mesh, but it's nice when information can cross the language barrier. One article I largely wrote has been translated wholesale into German, and I couldn't have been happier about that. As to credit, I'd just put "translated from the german wikipedia" (or whatever) as the edit summary. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 3, 2005 10:59 (UTC)
When I'm at a user page, is there anywhere I can click on the page to see that user's contributions?
Not unless they make a link to it themselves. Some users do. You can look by going to special:contributions/username. Howabout1Talk to me! July 3, 2005 20:23 (UTC)
The link labeled "User contributions" (on the left, in the toolbox section) does this. -- Rick Block (talk) July 3, 2005 20:34 (UTC)
Is there a way to figure out what pictures are available on Wikipedia? --HappyCamper 3 July 2005 20:31 (UTC)
Special:Search searches images (and can be restricted to search only for images). If you want to browse existing images, all images should be in one of the categories rooted at category:Wikipedia images. -- Rick Block (talk) July 3, 2005 20:41 (UTC)
The Protoscience catagory was missing for a while.
When someone erases a link or page can you put it back automatically. Wikipedia should control which erased pages should stay erased. I'am not able to respond to the messages that were send to me in Wikipedia.
Hello! About an hour ago, I have edited an article about a Slovenian musical performer, Robert Pesut aka Magnifico. Before I have done that, if I wanted to search for an article in the search box, I would find only a page with list of famous Slovenians (or something like that), a list of people named Mag- and another similar page + a couple of pages with no relation to the person I was writing about. I would like to emphasize, that ABSOLUTELY nothing had been written before my editing, so I thought that that was the reason, why I couldn't get to the article directly from search box. But even after I fully edited the page, there was the same thing - no direct access (I thought that the name of the article, Robert Pesut Magnifico would pop up after putting those words in search box). Altough, the article itself seemed fine, with all the edits properly in place.
Please help!
(I am quite knew here, so I would prefer a simple answer)
Thanks to anyone who responds!
Lifer 21
Hi - looking at the contributions from the IP address you're using, Special:Contributions/82.192.54.209, I don't think I'm seeing the article you're talking about. Can you provide a wikilink to the article? For example I see edits you've made to Oksana Akinshina. BTW - these sorts of problems are usually easier to chase down if you create and use a login. -- Rick Block (talk) July 3, 2005 22:38 (UTC)
By the way, if I login and than wait like 15 minutes and open ANOTHER browser window, before uploading images I have to login again! Why is that?
Lifer 21
Try linking this way: Robert Pesut Magnifico. It's simpler. Our search engine isn't worth much sometimes. In the picture is he really doing what it looks like he's doing? alteripse 3 July 2005 23:10 (UTC)
The index of pages the search engine uses needs to be updated periodically. That's why you can't find the new page immediately. The best thing you can do is make it visible in related lists, articles and categories to make sure it's picked up quickly by outside search engines. - Mgm|(talk) July 4, 2005 08:31 (UTC)
How do I start a new page with a name that has been 'taken'?
There is a page describing 'bulb' - but this is plant-related.
If I were to start at page on the photography meaning of the word 'bulb', how would I do that?
Add the information to the bulbpage allready there? Or start at new page named 'Bulb (photography)' or somthing like that? /Rob
You'd call the article bulb (photography) or flashbulb. Note that the second article already exists, so you probably (in this case) want to add to it. I'll add a link to bulb so that folks can find flash version. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 3, 2005 23:57 (UTC)
Thanks a lot :o) What I was thiking was this:
"'Bulb' is a shutter-speed setting on an adjustable camera that allows for time exposures. When set on B, the shutter will stay open as long as the shutter release button remains depressed."
/Rob
Oh, I see what you mean (not a flashbulb at all, but one of those squeezy rubber things). Yep, that sounds like a start. One word of advice - wikipedia frowns upon "dictionary definitions" of words (that is, articles which just define a word the way a dictionary would). I think the bulb you mean isn't just that (and so would be okay) but it's wise to start a new article with a full paragraph or two, just so folks who don't know the field won't brand your new article a "dic-def". So, in addition to what you've got above, I'd add why it's called bulb (that'll be the squeezy rubber thing) and describe the circumstances in which someone would use the bulb setting. You could also describe the results someone would expect, the equipment they'd use, and maybe say whether the setting is still used in fully-automatic cameras. Stuff like that. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 4, 2005 00:22 (UTC)
If you do only want to add a dictionary definition, you can do that at our sister project, Wiktionary. Angela. July 4, 2005 05:43 (UTC)
Well now I've done it: Created a page on bulb (photography) - my first article. Please let me know if I've done something wrong.
I was looking at the Greater Roadrunner and Coyote references (for reasons which will be obvious to fans of Chuck Jones cartoons), and noticed a strange entry in the taxonomy. The 'Class' heading is replaced by an ad for sphagnum moss art (bizarrely enough). Looking at the wiki source, though, it doesn't seem to be there and it's not in the page history, so I assume it's in the definition of the Taxobox_classis_entry style. You can see a cropped screen capture of what I see at http://biojanus.anu.edu.au/~paulway/Wikipedia-roadrunner-ad.png - between Phylum and Order on the left hand side of the Scientific Classification section.
Please email me at paul.wayper@anu.edu.au if you want to correspond directly.
I was conducting research on the BTK Serial Killing and came across this page. It has very good information, except for the 2 pictures of a penis located at the top of the page, one flacid and the other is erect... Someone should fix that.
I uploaded this Image:IntersymbolInterferenceEyeDiagram2arySignaling.JPG, and I am having a difficult time figuring out how to tag it properly. Could someone point me to the right direction? Also, I want to understand what "uploading to commons" means. Thanks! --HappyCamper 4 July 2005 05:17 (UTC)
Do you know what license the image is under? You should be able to find the right tag at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. "Uploading to commons" means uploading the file at http://commons.wikimedia.org/ instead of here. This should only be done for free images. The advantage of doing that is that all Wikimedia projects in all languages will be able to use the image, rather than it being available only to the English Wikipedia. The disadvantage is that you will need to create a new account on the Commons since we don't yet have single login. Angela. July 4, 2005 05:40 (UTC)
At List of UN peacekeeping missions, the flags recently stopped showing up. I can't figure out what the problem is for the life of me, and so I'm starting to think it may be with me not WP. But, I noticed it happened right after a recent edit I made, so I could have screwed up the table somehow. Could someone take a look at it and see if either you can see the flags (and it's me) or if there's something wrong with the formatting I did. Any help is appreciated. --Dmcdevit 4 July 2005 07:31 (UTC)
When I look at the article the flags are fine. Are they still missing for you? If so, you might try clearing your browser's cache (see Wikipedia:Bypass your cache). -- Rick Block (talk) July 4, 2005 16:20 (UTC)
And I can see them now, too. I had cleared my cache and eveerything else I could think of. But, oh well, it's working now. Thanks for your time anyway, :) --Dmcdevit 4 July 2005 19:31 (UTC)
I would like to know this: if I download a picture from internet (like copy - paste) in order to upload at Wikipedia, Wikipedia states that I should provide link to the picture and copyright stuff as well. Well, I don't know how to check a picture whether it's copyrighted or not. Where does a file hide those information?
Thank you for your help!
Lifer 21
They are all copyrighted unless they say they are not. Yes, really. -- Cyrius|✎ 4 July 2005 08:29 (UTC)
Copyright info is generally given on the site where the pic came from and not stored in the file itself. - Mgm|(talk) July 4, 2005 08:35 (UTC)
I think as a general rule: if you don't understand copyright, on no account upload any images to Wikipedia, unless they are photographs you took of people or places. Wikipedia can get in serious legal trouble if you guess wrong, or just decide you really want the image anyway. Since almost everything on the internet is copyright (even if it does not say so), think of finding suitable images as a rare (and pleasant) surprise. There are a lot of articles which can just never have (legal) illustrations, and others which will need some generous person to take new photographs and release them for use. Notinasnaid 4 July 2005 08:51 (UTC)
Linking to material with uncertain copyright status
Hello. I'm working on the Karl Rove article, and I'm curious to know what the Wikipedia policy is on linking to a 3rd party that has a copy of a copyrighted article with no apparent permission of the copyright holder. In this case, in that article is a link to a copy of a New Yorker article that is hosted on a non-New Yorker web site, with no mention of re-publishing or re-printing permission from the publishers of the New Yorker or the original authors. I searched the WP FAQ and elsewhere, but nothing seems to directly address this question. What is the Wikipedia policy on linking to external sites that have dubious copyright status? I've also highlighted this link in the Talk:Karl Rove page. Thank you. --NightMonkey July 4, 2005 09:53 (UTC)
Personally, I would avoid linking to info with dubious copyright status. If, however, the original New Yorker article isn't available online or in a book somewhere for readers to track down, I wouldn't object to this particular link. - Mgm|(talk) July 4, 2005 10:37 (UTC)
OK, that's your personal policy. But what is Wikipedia's policy? In this case, The New Yorker does offer back issues for sale, so, the site being linked to is defrauding the New Yorker out of direct income. Really, there should be a policy on this - one way or another. --NightMonkey July 4, 2005 21:55 (UTC)
Is it possible with wiki-software to position an image on a specific place in the article, apart from left, center and right ? Look at the article Apple. To avoid a large blank space at the right side of the TOC, I've put an image in this space. It only works when I put the image on the left side. But I'd rather have the TOC on the left side, the image in the middle and the taxobox on the right side. I know this lay-out could easily be done in Dreamweaver by using a layer, but can it be done with a wiki-table or is there such a thing as a wiki-layer ? JoJan 4 July 2005 12:34 (UTC)
I've tried to using a < div >, but on screens with a large resolution the edit link of the section below that has jumped to a spot between the image and the taxobox...:( - Mgm|(talk) July 4, 2005 13:09 (UTC)
I wanted to ask whether the removal of certain parameters within an infobox is possible. For example, Relic Entertainment is owned by THQ, so listing a revenue figure is not applicable/possible. Druidika 4 July 2005 15:26 (UTC)
I assume that there is an FAQ that answers my questions, but I would like a pointer to it.
Here are my questions at this time:
1. Some articles, such as Racism in the United States, have headings with no text. Is it reasonable to assume that this means that there is agreement that text is needed, and that volunteers are requested to add the text, which can then be reviewed and discussed, etc.?
2. If I think that I can make a useful addition to an existing article, should I just click on Edit this page, or is there anything else that I should do instead?
3. Are there any limitations on adding articles about places in the United States that do not have articles about them?
I think that I can contribute to Wikipedia, but I don't want to do anything offensive. Thank you.
- - Robert McClenon
Your answers are yes, yes, and no. But there is a chance there will be debate about certain places. There is a FAQ page at wikipedia:FAQ. Howabout1Talk to me! July 4, 2005 18:34 (UTC)
Regarding 2, you may want to create an account, although you don't have to. See Wikipedia:Why create an account? Also use the Help link at the left side of each page. Bovlb 2005-07-04 18:47:34 (UTC)
The opera is still in copyright, and will expire in europe in 2007, and in the USA c.2020. These excerpts form less than 1% of the work and should be OK, but what copyright notice should I use? (I'm currently using "Fairold")
Thanks
--Alexs letterbox 4 July 2005 23:52 (UTC)
As this has been up for a while, I am reducing the largest images to prevent sideways scrolling of this page. Sorry! Bovlb 2005-07-07 04:23:53 (UTC)
My Jack was attacked by a large dog, I cant afford a vet. A dog bit him(Edger) at the top of one of his front legs and he has a swollen area between his sholder and ribs the size of 2 golf balls. I think it may be a colapsed lung or broken ribs. Any sugestions would be very thankful.
Andy
I'm late seeing this, but one wouldn't send a person with a collapsed lung or broken ribs over to the reference desk with no other suggestions. At least I hope not. Most vets do not wish to have animals suffer over a question of money. Very often, you can arrange a payment plan, and possibly a reduction in fees. Your dog needs to see a vet immediately, if he hasn't already. He will need antibiotics as well as treatment for whatever has happened internally. Call around to your local vets and explain the problem. Someone sympathetic is bound to turn up. --Mothperson 8 July 2005 12:53 (UTC)
Are lyrics a copy vio? I was involved in avotes for deletion that deleted lyrics and i was wondering if all lyrics were copy vios. Jobe6 July 5, 2005 00:32 (UTC)
Ya. I think they are. At least someone told me not to post them a while ago. Howabout1Talk to me! July 5, 2005 01:27 (UTC)
If the lyrics are still under copyright and unless permisson is granted for them to be reproduced here, then they are violations of copyright. This would apply to the vast majority of modern popular music, to which I presume you are referring. --Gabriel Beecham/Kwekubo 5 July 2005 02:47 (UTC)
I have read an article that is (in my opinion) mostly very good, but one section of it is very biased. I know that I could simply rewrite it. However, that could start an edit war, something that I want to avoid. I have seen sections that have an annotation "The objectivity of this section has been disputed". That is what I would like to do. How do I flag the section as having disputed objectivity? I know that comments should then be taken to the Talk Page.
- - Robert McClenon
I think you're looking for the NPOV-section tag. Insert {{NPOV-section}} just before the biased section. It will look like this:
The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please view the article's talk page.
Thank you. I did that. I think that I don't yet understand what the procedures are for dealing with neutrality disputes. I posted my own comments as to what was wrong with the section on the talk page. Should I just wait a few days for more comments?
I see that I can add a link to the talk page from the Requests for Comments page, but I don't understand exactly what the markup is for the link.
How can I do to make parameters that are undefined (but not assigned empty strings) not be displayed?
Example: {{t|a}} (using Template:t containing "{{{1}}}{{{2}}}") gives a{{{2}}}. Now I want the "{{{2}}}" to disappear. Upssdr 5 July 2005 04:22 (UTC)
How do I un-edit an edit I made and delete my account? Thank you.
For reverting a page to an earlier version, see the explanation on Wikipedia:How to revert a page to an earlier version. If someone else has edited the page after the edit you want to remove, you'll have to remove the edit manually by editing the page.
You can't delete your account, see Wikipedia:Changing username, but you can ask an admin to delete your user and user talk page by adding {{db|user request}} tags to the pages in your user space that you want to delete.
I hope this answers your questions. Sietse 5 July 2005 07:19 (UTC)
Thanks for reporting the problem (it's been fixed). Wikipedia can be edited by anyone. Some users find this hard to believe and make minor changes to articles "just to see" if it's true. Other users actively vandalize. Nearly all such changes are quickly reverted. For more on this topic, please see Wikipedia:Dealing with vandalism. -- Rick Block (talk) July 5, 2005 06:43 (UTC)
Can an article be both a stub and marked for attention?
Of course you can do that. Just avoid multiple stub templates and if possible keep the number of templates at the top to a bare minimum as well. Two tags are quite reasonable and not wrong at all. - Mgm|(talk) July 5, 2005 10:40 (UTC)
I'm am a first time visitor and very impressed! I have had a look through the FAQ's and have not seen a similar question:
"How is the integrity of information protected and what kind of weight does the information carry, as I can edit information?"
Thank you.
Cobus J. van Wyk
It's not. Anyone can come and put in vandalism or false information in articles. However, there are so many willing contributors, that vandalism is reverted on average within 5mins, and false information can be corrected by anyone. Elfguy 5 July 2005 12:12 (UTC)
I am disgusted that on the page that should be carrying Information about India there is a line proclaiming 'Hi India is stupid'.
What is the meaning of this ?
You just happened to go on the page just after someone vandalised it. Most vandalism is corrected within 5mins, but as you should know Wikipedia is a free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, so people do engage in vandalism. Elfguy 5 July 2005 12:10 (UTC)
Watch out for certain photos that show who did it. For example, if it was an Anonymex, you would see this: Colin MochrieColin Mochrie
How does one become a Wikipedia adminastrator? Do you have to go to an interview officially or are they chosen via Wikimunnity? --Anti-Anonymex2 5 July 2005 12:37 (UTC)
You can contribute fully as a normal user, by editing articles, monitoring the recent changes page, or reverting vandalism. Administrators simply have the ability to ban repeating vandals and protect pages in extreme situations. Admins are trusted users who have done thousands of edits and have been nominated by other users. Elfguy 5 July 2005 13:54 (UTC)
Response: How do you nominate users?--Anti-Anonymex2 5 July 2005 13:59 (UTC)
Administrators are chosen on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. If you want to become an administrator, you can either nominate yourself there, or you can be nominated by another user. The Wikipedia community determines whether you become an admin by means of a voting procedure. Many people who vote on RFA have various requirements for promotion to administrator. For example, many users think that someone with less than, say, 1000 edits does not have enough experience for being a good administrator. You can get a rough idea of the standards of people who regularly vote on RFA on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Standards . Good luck, Sietse 5 July 2005 14:00 (UTC)
Hi, I have an old (9 years or more) Sony handycam Hi 8 but I'm seriously considering to by a DCR-HC90 MiniDV. Can anyone tell me if I'm doing the right thing or whether or not I should look at different types of camcorder and model.
Also can I record my Hi8 to MiniDV?
Your replies are very welcomed.
Lee
I was just surfing the web, and I reviewed an area by hatfield, and I am interested in camping out by arbutus lake.
I did see a county recreation area on the lake. How do I contact you via telephone to ask about camping there?
Thank You
Steve Parker
You can ask questions about factual topics (eg. Who is the pope?) at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. Good luck, Sietse 5 July 2005 14:12 (UTC)
Acctually, you cannot contact anyone here via telephone. This is an encyclopedia, not a campground book. Howabout1Talk to me! July 5, 2005 16:59 (UTC)
I cannot view certain templates, such as Chicago Television stations (i.e., what is located at the bottom of an article such as WGN-TV when I'm logged in. I think this problem started when the upgrade was made. I asked this in the Village Pump, but I didn't receive a responce. Is there anything I can do, or is this a bug with the upgrade? ErikNY 5 July 2005 17:32 (UTC)
What exactly do you see, and what skin preference and browser do you use? -- Rick Block (talk) July 5, 2005 17:48 (UTC)
I don't see anything when I'm logged in, and I'm using Internet Explorer version 6 and MonoBook skin. ErikNY 5 July 2005 17:50 (UTC)
I had similar problems using MonoSkin and Mozilla 5 earlier this evening, but now everything works fine again. Can you check if the problem has gone away for you too? Sietse 5 July 2005 18:18 (UTC)
I've had the problem for a while, and I don't know what to do. It doesn't simply go away. ErikNY 5 July 2005 18:51 (UTC)
Can you give us a screenshot? - Mgm|(talk) July 5, 2005 19:10 (UTC)
I have received an e-mail saying I may use the material on a page that has been marked for copy-vio. Do I just remove the message and explain why on the talk page? Or is there something more? Howabout1Talk to me! July 5, 2005 21:24 (UTC)
You should be aware that simple permission to use may not be enough. For example, if the permission is specific to Wikipedia, then the material may not be used by anyone who (legally) copies Wikipedia content. If the permission is specific to a specific article, then it leave a hidden boobytrap for later editors who may copy the text. If the permission adds constraints such as verbatim reproduction or reproduction with a specific notice, then you're leaving similar boobytraps for editors who might modify the article. Basically, unless the permission in question is effectively an explicit licence of the material under the GFDL (or a more free licence, such as a release into the public domain) then you still can't use it. In general, by adding text to Wikipedia, you're warranting that it is released under the GFDL (but the issue is slightly more complex for images). See Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ#I have, or can get, special permission to copy an image or article to Wikipedia. Is it OK to do that?.
Well actually, the problem is copyrighted text. If I simply re-wrote it or got rid of it, would that be enough to disscuss, then remove the notice? Howabout1Talk to me! July 6, 2005 02:11 (UTC)
If you remove the copyrighted text and put your own then sure you can just remove the notice. Elfguy 6 July 2005 02:33 (UTC)
But be sure to leave a note so administrators can delete the copyvio from the history. - Mgm|(talk) July 6, 2005 05:11 (UTC)
Hi there !
I know I might be posting this at the wrong place, but I really couldn't find any other posting area, so thought I might make a post at the help desk.
The section named, '100 Greatest Artists of Hard Rock' has been severely vandalised. I tried all I could to restore it. But since I joined just this evening, maybe I dont have enough permission to edit, and restore, or I haven't figured out how to do that yet.
Kindly look into it.
Regards,
Grooveguru
I found a good version in the article's history and reverted it back to that version. In the future, you can just look at the article's history and go back through versions until you find one that looks right. Then hit "edit this page", put a note in the edit summary about "reverting vandalism", and save it. You can ignore the warning about "editing an out-of-date version" in this case. Hope that helps! —HorsePunchKid→龜 July 5, 2005 22:55 (UTC)
Are there any animation formats that I can use in Wikipedia articles?
Nope, I don't think so. Sorry. Hermione1980 6 July 2005 00:14 (UTC)
Only animated GIF, for now. One day we'll allow animated SVGs or one of the moving PNG formats, but browser (and indeed edit) support for these is so far much too poor. We don't support flash (and, unless the licence changes radically, we never will). Animation isn't necessary for most articles (although I'm jealous of http://www.howstuffworks.com/ which has some very nice animations for internal combusion engine motion). Before you undertake making the animation (as it can be a lot of work) I'd recommend floating the idea on the article in question's talk page - that way you can be (fairly) confident that your animation will meet with an appreciative audience, and your effort won't be wasted. A very nice example of a good, encyclopedic animation can be found at roundabout. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 6, 2005 00:18 (UTC)
Wha ... my visited links just changed from purple to hot pink. If I backtrack through my cache, the prior are still purple so I don't think my browser went "pink" on me. Unvisited links are still the same blue as usual. Anybody else? hydnjotalk 6 July 2005 01:10 (UTC)
This seems to be happening only with Classic skin, MonoBook is as it was, purple. hydnjotalk 6 July 2005 01:43 (UTC)
Anything more muted would do. The hot pink is, well, is too hot. Very distracting. I don't know how to enter color codes but if I did, it wouldn't be the current choice as it hurts my eyes. Thanks for your concern, hydnjotalk 6 July 2005 02:37 (UTC)
How about going back to where it was about 2 hours ago which was the same as is currently being used for the MonoBook skin. hydnjotalk 6 July 2005 02:53 (UTC)
In RGB it used to be about: 144 81 191. hydnjotalk 6 July 2005 03:31 (UTC)
I'm still trying to find the root cause of this change. It didn't happen on it's own. Somebody changed something. I'm asking for help to identify the source of this change. I'm sure that someone was trying to make things beter but it didn't do so. I'm asking the more savy members of this community to direct me to the person who made this change (in good faith, I'm sure) so that I can comment to him/her as to my perceived results. And, I'm not having much success. Does anyone know who did this? hydnjotalk 6 July 2005 04:48 (UTC)
Is there any way to change "23:00" into "11:00p"? The 24 hour clock is killing me. I wish there was a setting in Preferences to do this, like I can with the dates. i.e. From "April 23" to "23 April".--Muchosucko 6 July 2005 03:19 (UTC)
Not that I know of. Why do it anyway. The 24 hour clock is international while a.m. and p.m. designations may change per country. - Mgm|(talk) July 6, 2005 05:09 (UTC)
That's no reason not to allow localization, though. As long as MediaWiki is capable of parsing the format you enter so that it can present it to other users in their preferred locale... —HorsePunchKid→龜 July 6, 2005 05:13 (UTC)
By all means, if it can be done like the dates, that's fine. I'm just wondering what's wrong with a 24 hour clock. - Mgm|(talk) July 6, 2005 08:08 (UTC)
Yes please, someone do that if it's technologically possible. I'd do it myself, but I'm dumb. The 24 Hr clock is very unatural (see 1984). It's hard to read. For example: what is 20:00 hours? I have to subtract 12 to get to 8pm. Why bother when you can just say 8pm? Why? I think a VAST majority of people will say to thier loved ones, "Honey, let's go to dinner at 8pm." Rather than, "Honey, let's go to dinner at 20:00." At least, I wouldn't. Maybe you guys do.--Muchosucko 6 July 2005 12:36 (UTC)
I've noticed parts of articles in the English wikipedia written in Cyrillic looks something like В и к when you go in to edit them. As you might imagine it is not too easy to edit these entries for typos and so on. When I edit articles in the Russian wikipedia, I have no such problem. Is this a problem on my end or is this simply a feature of the English wikipedia? --Pravit 6 July 2005 05:35 (UTC)
It's the result of a limitation of the English Wikipedia that did not allow for Unicode characters to be stored except in an encoded manner. This limitation has been removed during the Mediawiki upgrade, and such encoded characters can be replaced with their unencoded equivalents. -- Cyrius|✎ 6 July 2005 09:02 (UTC)
I am looking for an FAQ on what the details of the markup language are to add links.
For instance, and in particular: How do I add a link from the Requests for Comments page to a Talk Page?
- - Robert McClenon
Use double brackets [[User talk:MacGyverMagic]] or [[Talk:Wikipedia]]. When you save the page it will render as: User talk:MacGyverMagic or Talk:Wikipedia. - Mgm|(talk) July 6, 2005 12:04 (UTC)
I love the Random page feature for a spot of casual browsing. But sometimes (not always) it just returns the same page every time.
Why? Could it be something to do with IE temporary file settings?
WRT disambiguity, there is perhaps a third "Scott Parker", namely a Harley Davison racer. (I know that Scott Parker the NHL player likes motorcyles and owns at least one HD, so I can't rule out the possibility they are one and the same.)
it is a list of words with hotly debated pronunciations.
is there any reasonable way to get a recording of these pronunciations on the page? or must one rely on deciphering the IPA?
just curious.
ok, thanks to anyone who responds.
--
dreme
Yes, you can add audio to page of wiki if you'd like. Confer this. You can record your pronunciations of the words, save it to a .ogg file, and up load it to wikiepdia.--Muchosucko 6 July 2005 16:36 (UTC)
Once in a while one of my edits has this (top) label next to it. Why? What information am I supposed to get from this label? Thanks in advance for any answers. -- Rune Welshταλκ July 6, 2005 19:42 (UTC)
I think it means that your edit was the most recent one for that page MyNameIsClaretalk 6 July 2005 19:47 (UTC)
Can one write an article if the subject seems unfamiliar to the administrators?--Anti-Anonymex2 6 July 2005 21:50 (UTC)
Regardless of whether the subject is familiar or not to anyone, you need to cite your sources for everything in the article. That way we can prevent anyone from adding made-up crap. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 6, 2005 22:01 (UTC)
I wrote an article with information only within the confines of Wikipedia. My article is the only information. The article is Anonymex and it is up for deletion. Check it out and tellme if it fits this criteria..--Anti-Anonymex2
You didn't cite your sources. So how can anyone tell it's not made-up crap? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 6, 2005 23:52 (UTC)
Hi, I have recently moved to Puerto Rico from New York and I have been a electrician helper for quite a while, But I notice that the main electrical box is attached to the cement walls, with no wood board behind it like in new york, and that the master electricians here attach the green and the neutral in the same line for grounding. I am very confused, I believe that is double grounding, and quite dangerous, I spoke to the electrician and he said it doesnt matter that it will work just the same, I say green goes to ground (earth)and neutral is neutral a return for the hot wire. there has been a few electrical fires around here and I have been trying to explain to the electricians that the green should go to the right side of the panel where a small screw is with a gromet and the green to the left side. I am very confused. am i right or are they right.? they also attach the green wire to the metal box in the ceiling or the wall receptacle. I also told them that cement is a conductor of electricity and that the main breaker box should be on a wood panel and not straight into the cement.well I need to help, so I can help. thank you very much
While on RC Patrol today, I noticed on some pages that after I tagged it with {{delete}} , the page history only shows my edit. Why doesn't the original IP edit (who created the page) show up? I've noticed this in the past as well- I tagged a page, and decided to leave {{test}} on the IP page, and there was no history (except for my edit)! Hmm... interesting. Anyways, thanks! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 6 July 2005 23:32 (UTC)
What happened is that while you were editing the page to add the {{delete}} tag, someone else deleted the page. Your edit recreated the page. Innocent mistake, and will be cleared up quickly. Yours, Meelar(talk) July 6, 2005 23:42 (UTC)
When I revised the older "Lillooet" item, which was simply a redirect to the "St'at'imc" page (St'at'imc is the proper name of the Lillooet native people) I did not realize that there was already extant a page on the town of Lillooet, which is "Lillooet, British Columbia", and from the "British Columbia communities list" linked from that page I gather that town names are supposed to have their state/province name attached to them in that manner (or not?).
As you'll see my entry is a bit more thorough in its description of this town's rich history but I am wondering how to merge the two entries, as it seems clear I cannot simply delete one; what I could do, if I understand your system right, is to restore the redirect to "St'at'imc" as well as have a second redirect to the "Lillooet, British Columbia" page, and integrate my information into that page where it should have gone at first. The reason I revamped the original "Lillooet" (stand-alone name) entry was because that, typed into your search, should not just bring up a list of communities of the St'at'imc Nation without any reference to the town.
Yep, that sounds right. You're not the first person to write a whole article and then discover it already existed under another name :) Our search engine isn't perfect, we admit. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 7, 2005 00:19 (UTC)
I think in this case it would be proper to change Lillooet into a disambiguation page -- a list of possible uses of the title -- rather than a redirect. See Wikipedia:Disambiguation for details. — Catherine\talk 7 July 2005 00:36 (UTC)
If I understand the original poster correctly then St'at'imc, Lillooet, and Lillooet, British Columbia are all the same place (so there's nothing to disambiguate). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 7, 2005 14:24 (UTC)
I thought I was understanding him correctly that "Lillooet" is another name for the native people who prefer to be called St'at'imc, and that there is also a town by this name....? — Catherine\talk 7 July 2005 17:40 (UTC)
First, what should I do if I think that a group of articles needs cleaning up? There are several good articles that have incomplete and odd cross-references. Can I nominate them for clean-up?
Second, the articles are "International Olympic Committee", "Olympic Games", "Summer Olympic Games", and "Winter Olympic Games". There is no reference from the IOC article to the Olympic Games article, which is where the discussion is of the amateurism issue. I think that the articles are good, but need tightening.
Third, is this where I should ask these questions, or are they too technical, and should I go to another desk?
- - Robert McClenon
Yes, I'm not sure what you are asking, and yes, here is fine. Howabout1Talk to me! July 7, 2005 03:02 (UTC)
Just to clarify - articles that need it can be nominated for clean up (see Wikipedia:Cleanup), although in this case it sounds like you have specific changes in mind, which I suggest you just make (see Wikipedia:Be bold in updating pages). This is a fine place to ask questions that you don't know where else to ask. BTW - you can sign comments on talk pages by adding four tildes (~~~~) which the software replaces with your user name and the date and time. -- Rick Block (talk) July 7, 2005 03:09 (UTC)
I'm guessing that you want to download Wikipedia as a CD-ROM image. Wikipedia is primarily available as an online website. You can download the Wikipedia databasehere, but I strongly suspect that will not be helpful to you. There is a CD-ROM version of the German Wikipedia available (and the ISO image is available online), but I'm not aware that the project to produce one from the English Wikipedia has been completed. Bovlb 2005-07-07 04:02:20 (UTC)
I'm trying to set up an external text editor to edit the articles (when I click on "edit this page"), and I can't get it to work. I have the latest IE and Firefox Mozilla 1.0.4. Firefox is supposed to do it. I downloaded MozEx, and it is there (right click on the page). But I can't get any farther than that. If I go to preferences and check "always use external editor", it wants to edit index.php (which isn't the article). I'm stuck, how can I get an external editor to work? Bubba73 July 7, 2005 03:51 (UTC)
Is there any way to show how many times an articla page has been viewed? I'd like to know if anyone is reading the stuff I spend hours putting up. Bubba73 July 7, 2005 04:11 (UTC)
No. And it would be wildly inaccurate given the existence of caches, and mirrors. Bovlb 2005-07-07 04:19:41 (UTC)
Actually, I understand this is an available feature of the MediaWiki software that runs Wikipedia, but it is disabled at this site for performance reasons. -- Rick Block (talk) July 7, 2005 18:48 (UTC)
This is correct. By default the counter is shown in the footer of the page. -- Rune Welshταλκ July 7, 2005 22:12 (UTC)
It wouldn't have to be exactly accurate. Sometimes I spend 30 to 60 minutes writing two paragraphs. I wonder how many people are reading it - on the order of 1, 10, 100, or 1000. Bubba73 July 7, 2005 20:06 (UTC)
It's turned off at this site because, as implemented, it would preclude caching any pages and would force every page view to update the database. Wikipedia is a very high volume site and makes use of front-end caching to reduce the sheer amount of hardware needed to run the site. For more details of the hardware arrangement you might want to see Wikipedia:Technical_FAQ. The bottom line is that this feature is turned off at this site for good reason and there's basically no chance it will be enabled in the future (sorry). -- Rick Block (talk) July 8, 2005 02:32 (UTC)
I can certainly understand the need for good performance. Bubba73 July 8, 2005 15:16 (UTC)
I want to write about a specific design of a pair of loudspeakers. Can I write an article about it?
Hello, welcome to Wikipedia! If you think that this subject is notable enough to write an encyclopedia article about it, then you can just be bold and start a page about it. Remember to cite sources. Good luck, Sietse 7 July 2005 13:02 (UTC)
What stops people from screwing everything up on this site? I.e. editing everything to say something that has nothing to do with the topic? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.48.214 (talk • contribs) 2005-07-07 00:13:45 CDT
... and not noted on the FAQ page - there are a fair number of editors who watch all changes, effectively in real time, for people "screwing everything up". As mentioned at Wikipedia:Vandalism, most outright vandalism is reverted within 5 minutes. -- Rick Block (talk) July 7, 2005 18:40 (UTC)
For performance reasons, Wikipedia's content is served not directly by standard web servers but usually by a set of caching servers which save copies of entire pages. When a page is updated the cached copies are marked as invalid and the next time the page is accessed the page is regenerated by one of the actual back-end web servers (see Wikipedia:Technical_FAQ). The link you're asking about is on some pages that display the content of other pages. Sometimes if the other page is updated the change isn't visible. Clicking this link forces the page to be regenerated by one of the actual back-end web servers, making the change visible. -- Rick Block (talk) July 8, 2005 02:51 (UTC)
You watch an article that lies on one of many cache servers. This link will update the cache you are viewing with the latest version of the article from the master database. Elfguy 7 July 2005 17:04 (UTC)
Exporting articles in XML format with revision history
I am trying to export various articles in XML format using the Special:Export feature. What I am trying to get is the XML version of the page including its revision history. Although I DID unckeck the "Include only the current revision, not the full history" I consistenly get only the last version/revision of the page. What is going on? Is there something wrong with this feature or am I missing something? Can you please answer via email at smatei at yahoo dt com? thank you
I reported it as a bug. -- Cyrius|✎ 7 July 2005 17:49 (UTC)
I created the category "Category:Nazi architecture" may I enquire why someone has posted a message at the top that it requires a "Clean Up" ?
The majority of the links are to Nazi buildings, Nazi Architects, Nazi misc and other relevant architectural pages.
So my question is why have you slated it for clean up ?
Seems like someone is trigger happy with their clean up post button !!
This notice was added by Endurance with the addition of the {{Category}} template. It's probably a bad idea in general to post cleanup tags on templates. Bovlb 2005-07-07 15:09:48 (UTC)
The cleanup-tag you are seeing was not added to Category:Nazi architecture itself, but to Template:Category which you included in the category page, so it does not refer to your category. Sietse 7 July 2005 15:14 (UTC)
All I can tell you is there is a Clean-Up tag at the top of the Category:Nazi architecture and I would be obliged if you would remove it, I don't think the Category requires a clean-up or a clean-up tag. Please remove it. Endurance 7 July 2005 15:21 (UTC)
Template has now been removed by Endurance himself. Sietse 7 July 2005 15:37 (UTC)
I have removed {{cleanup}} from Template:Category, and fixed a couple of typos. This template is not much used (and never usefully), but it does seem like it might be useful when an article and a category represent the same concept. Bovlb 2005-07-07 15:41:41 (UTC)
How do you see the votes and the argument for the deletion of an article?--Anti-Anonymex2 7 July 2005 16:48 (UTC)
An article that is up for vfd will have the following notice on it
This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy.
Please vote on and discuss the matter. See this article's entry on the Votes for Deletion page.
You are welcome to edit this article, but please do not blank, merge, or move this article, or remove this notice, while the discussion is in progress. For more information, read the Guide to Votes for Deletion.
. Click on the link that says this articles entry. By the way, this is my 1000th edit! This isn't the right place to celebrate, but I had to say it. Howabout1Talk to me! July 7, 2005 16:57 (UTC)
Howabout1, you do realise you just categorised this page as up for deletion…? Hermione1980 7 July 2005 19:48 (UTC)
How about that for a 1000th edit! :) --Dmcdevit July 7, 2005 19:52 (UTC)
That's okay, my 500th edit was filing an RfC. Oh well. Hermione1980 7 July 2005 19:55 (UTC)
Ya. I did know I put this was up for deletion. I figured noone would take it seriously since it was in context with an answer. Howabout1Talk to me! July 7, 2005 23:23 (UTC)
I meant after it was deleted.--Anti-Anonymex2 7 July 2005 22:20 (UTC)
Just go to Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/ArticleName (fill in the article). Unless it's really old. In either case I think doing a search (making sure to check you're searching the Wikipedia namespace) would bring it up. --Dmcdevit July 7, 2005 22:33 (UTC)
How old is too old?--Anti-Anonymex2 7 July 2005 23:27 (UTC)
Well, there's not really a too old. Here, lemme give you some better advice I just thought of. If you know when the debate/deletion was that you're looking for, go to Wikipedia:Archived delete debates and find it in the dated archives. If you only know what you're searching for, go to the Special:Log, choose "Deletion log" from the drop box and type the article name (careful of caps) in "title" to find the log of the deletion which will tell you the date. Once you know the date, go to the Wikipedia:Archived delete debates I just mentioned. --Dmcdevit July 8, 2005 07:40 (UTC)
Can I re-write the same deleted article and not have it deleted for this reason? Can admins' articles be deleted?--Anti-Anonymex2 7 July 2005 23:37 (UTC)
If you rewrite the same article again, it will be speedy deleted as a recreation of deleted content. And yes, admins' articles can be deleted, if the community decides they're not worthy of keeping. Hermione1980 7 July 2005 23:42 (UTC)
You can rewrite an article that was previously deleted provided the deletion discussion found it a topic worthy of an article and that the reason for deletion was the content rather than the subject. But please make sure a previously deleted article is given a serious overhaul before posting again. They are only a recreation of deleted content if they contain the same content. - Mgm|(talk) July 8, 2005 05:02 (UTC)
Issue of trust and copyright paranoia: complicated process to upload pictures which were already permitted
I placed several photos in the Opus Dei article, my first ever attempt. I was given permission by the organization to publish them under GFDL. However, an official of Wikipedia who was editing the article (just to state the facts: he made anti-Opus Dei edits) did not allow the photos to appear in the article due to copyright issues.
He said: If the photos were commissioned, we need clear evidence of that. Stating that they were published on the Opus Dei website and you have permission from them to republish them is not sufficient. What was the nature of the contract, and who entered it? You need permission from the specific person who entered the contract with the photographer, and that contract needs to clearly state that all rights are transferred to the contracting party. Finally, the party holding the copyrights must explicitly agree to release the photos under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License or a similar free license (see Wikipedia:Image use policy). In the interest of transparency, it would be best for you to fully document your correspondence in this regard.
I replied: Once I have obtained the correspondence, how will I show it here to prove that it is authentic?
The answer: I would say that putting the text of the correspondence online is sufficient - we try to assume good faith - but that's just my opinion. To get more general feedback on the matter, I suggest visiting the Wikipedia:Village pump.
Please help to clarify what I need to do. I find it strange that this is a very complicated process. I looked at that the other image description pages and the word of the one uploading is trusted. But I am ready to do what is needed. You can check how the exchange went at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Opus_Dei Thank you. Walter Ching 7 July 2005 23:45 (UTC)
If the image is free then you can upload it and use it. Just make sure you use the right template in the image description to indicate it is free. Elfguy 8 July 2005 02:55 (UTC)
It's not complicated, just laborious. Anyone can say they have permission to republish something and possibly get us in legal trouble. Requiring you to put the correspondence with the copyright holder online makes it possible for others to go check and verify you've indeed got permission. It's all about Wikipedia:Verifiability. - Mgm|(talk) July 8, 2005 05:06 (UTC)
I own some strong names, theukrainians.com, the-ukrainians.co.uk, ukrainians.co.uk, and was wondering if we could cross link. I would host your page leading to Wikipedia-Ukraine on my links page which holds many other links to Ukrainin related sites.
Please let me know what your policy is on this.
Thank you.
Stepan.
Feel free to link to us, but I'm not sure we could link back to you--you would have to discuss that on Talk:Ukraine. Best wishes, Meelar(talk) July 8, 2005 00:44 (UTC)
You should get to know what Wikipedia is and how it works. Then you'll know why what you ask is impossible. Elfguy 8 July 2005 02:52 (UTC)
i want to know the sofware applications in sofware component that runs and gets the work done. for example internet explorer, ms word, notepad and etc. i wnat to know more applications like this...'
I notice nobody has replied. I can think of two reasons. (1) I don't understand your question at all. It may not be a bad question, but although I know a bit about software I cannot begin to answer. (2) Does the question belong here? Remember
I can't say for sure if it belongs here until I understand the question. Notinasnaid 8 July 2005 13:37 (UTC)
I suggest you first review what the role is of different pieces of computer architecture, such as operating systems and Middleware because some of your examples are not software applications per se. All your examples are from Microsoft products, in which there are standards that developers are supposed to follow when adding new features that work with their Suites or Packages. AlMac 8 July 2005 13:44 (UTC)
how do you label a page as "biased" or "in need of further review"?
You can add {{bias}} to the top of the page or use some of the other templates available, se Wikipedia:Template messages/Disputes for a list. But, please, don't just put the biased-note there without any explanation. First post on the article's discussion page explaining what you see as biased about the article. Then wait for people to respond and maybe correct the bias (or you can go ahead and try fixing it yourself, if you're up to it). We'd rather have the bias fixed instead of just living with it. Shanes 8 July 2005 03:39 (UTC)
i would like to aid in the translation of articles from english to spanish and vice versa, but it's so complicated trying to find an article that needs translation. could you please guide me step by step? thank you.
me gustaria ayudar con la traduccion de articulos del español al ingles y vice versa, pero me resulta complicado encontrar articulos que necesitan traduccion.¿podrian guiarme paso a paso porfavor? gracias.
I just created Lost and Found (disambiguation), since the article titles within are close enough to cause problems to anyone wanting to search for them. However, I'm not sure what the next step in setting it up as the primary link would be. My guess would be that I move all of the linked articles to new names and put a redirect in - but I wanted to check before doing something that drastic. Any help would be appreciated :) GeeJo 8 July 2005 08:14 (UTC)
You can add {{otheruses}} to the top of relevant articles, or write a more detailed line and explain what other options exist (as one of the articles already does. - Mgm|(talk) July 8, 2005 11:49 (UTC)
I wanted to tweak the first item on the "In the news" col of the Main Page today. But there was no "Edit this Page" facility. Have I missed an obvious link somewhere? Moriori July 8, 2005 08:52 (UTC)
No you haven't. Unfortunately, the main page and it's attached templates had to be protected to stop repeat vandalism that occured. Go to Talk:Main Page or WP:AN to inform an admin of the needed change. - Mgm|(talk) July 8, 2005 09:06 (UTC)
I am just trying to get someones attention. I do have quite an abundance of documented material on DR. Alexander MacGregor - Dean and Principal of Toronto Institute of Pharmaceutical Technology. There is no question he is an academic wife-battering fraud. He has neither a Masters nor a Ph.D. according to correspondence from the University of London (England). His claim to a D.Sc. is questionable. He initially claimed it was awarded from Pacific Western University but has changed it to Pacific University in recent times. His clinical trials were audited and a host of non-confromances were revealed by the auditors (Materials obtained under Canadian Freedom of Information Act). If you need more information feel free to contact me at dufinch@yahoo.ca
Debates about a particular article should be done on the article's talk page. The article itself should remain NPOV and present both sides. Elfguy 8 July 2005 12:36 (UTC)
There is an unpleasant VfD going on right now (as of July 7) regarding an editor who pretty much rejects the whole concept of Wikipedia. The article in question is going to be deleted, but the editor has a long list of other articles either written wholly or substantially by her. Most of them are about astrology, which I don't understand, and can't begin to evaluate. The ones I can understand a little – Parricide, Abandoned child syndrome, et al. – all seem in need of major editing, but I know about as much about these subjects as I do astrology. How do you deal with the discovery of a large group of articles needing work? I've heard the term "flag" before, but if it involves adding templates, I don't know how to do that, either. Flag for what, exactly? Which templates? Etc. --Mothperson 8 July 2005 12:36 (UTC)
I checked some of her articles out and they aren't bad in the sense that they were NPOV. If you think an article is not factual you can use the disputed template on it and discuss it on its talk page. But I agree that touchy subjects like this should be watched. Elfguy 8 July 2005 13:07 (UTC)
Sorry, I used the wrong word. Er, the right word, wrong article – Parenticide and up from there. --Mothperson 8 July 2005 13:24 (UTC)
And to tag an article (i.e. add a template to it), just add the following: {{name of template here}}. You're probably looking for {{NPOV}} or {{disputed}}. Meelar(talk) July 8, 2005 13:57 (UTC)
i read the very rounded beatiful article about that bird. my question is: a large flock of that species has placed itself in a city dense neighbourhood on top of high trees, causing commotion, dirt and unbeareable causing health-hazard to asthmatic people. how can we transfer the flock in a humane way to a rural area with lots of cattle and sheep??? please help. Arik. my email:arrina-s@zahav.net.il.
I have moved your question to Wikipedia:Reference desk. Please check there, although this is a rather unusual question. Best, Meelar(talk) July 8, 2005 13:57 (UTC)
now i'm sure that you don't have people watching the website 24 hours a day right? so how do you know if someone is writing false information on one of the articles? who police's the site? is it a program or a person? lyle smith
Every second of every day, people who happen to be interested might be watching the site. People in all time zones visit Wikipedia. Don't forget: it isn't anyone's job, it's all about people who happen to be interested. Most people just watch a few, or a few hundred, articles. These are often on the subjects they are interested in, so they can spot people messing around. Some people watch articles in general, or track new articles, and so forth. Bad changes might be found in seconds, or might take days. In some cases, they might never be found. Notinasnaid 8 July 2005 15:31 (UTC)
There are people 24 hours a day actually. They can't monitor every new change all the time, but during a typical evening vandalism is corrected inside a minute, and obviously false information is changed very fast. We could use more people in the early AM EST to monitor RC and new pages, feel free to volunter. Elfguy 8 July 2005 19:17 (UTC)
Is there a way to find articles written by the same author? I like reading a certain person's work and would like to type in her name to find what she is writing about now. ND
Most wikipedia articles are written by lots of people, but some are largely the work of one or two people. Check the history link on the article you like, and it'll list the names of the people who wrote it. For each one, you can hit their name to reach their user page. People often list articles they're proud of on that page. Failing that, from there you can hit the "user contributions" link and it'll show everything they've edited. I'm afraid that last method doesn't distinguish between major things they've done and places where they've only done something trivial like fix a typo. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 8, 2005 17:37 (UTC)
I want to re-write articles that were called hoaxes, patent nonsense, and vanity pages. But the other Wikipedians don't understand. I put the article Hamster Language in strange articles to show that it wasn't nonsense. It was just called a hoax. But I have seen these writings and have read information. What should I do?--Anti-Anonymex2 8 July 2005 18:20 (UTC)
If you feel an article has been deleted wrongly, you can take it to Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion. However, this article appears very...strange and improbable, perhaps? The only way to get this undeleted would be to cite sources proving that this actually exists. Best of luck, Meelar(talk) July 8, 2005 18:23 (UTC)
But the other article,Anonymex, only exists within Wikipedia and my source of knowledge is being part of that group. How do I get that --Anti-Anonymex2 8 July 2005 18:45 (UTC)undeleted?
You need to cite a different source, not just yourself. Wikipedia just won't take your word for it that something exists, you know. You need to find proof from a reputable source. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 8, 2005 18:49 (UTC)
No original research on Wikipedia. If it's not a documented, recognized subject then it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Elfguy 8 July 2005 19:10 (UTC)
The Deep Blue Good-by -- how to move article with wrong name to correct name?
Someone has written an article called The Deep Blue Good-bye about a Travis McGee novel called The Deep Blue Good-by (without the final e). The original March, 1964, American publication is clearly called the latter and all other encyl. references to it that I can find also omit the e. I tried to start a new article with the correct name, to which I would have moved the other article. But this has already been done, with a redirect to the article with the incorrect name. How can this be fixed? --Hayford Peirce 8 July 2005 18:39 (UTC)
In general, articles are moved using the "move this page" link (rather than by copying and pasting the content). That can't be done in this case, so a request must be made at Wikipedia:Requested moves following the procedures described there. -- Rick Block (talk) July 8, 2005 18:47 (UTC)
I made a personal attack and was penatalized, and the victim insulted me and got no penalty. What gives?--Anti-Anonymex2 8 July 2005 18:50 (UTC)
How did you get penatalized ? Elfguy 8 July 2005 19:07 (UTC)
Don't mock other users.--Anti-Anonymex2 8 July 2005 20:07 (UTC)
I was banned for a week, jerk.--Anti-Anonymex2 8 July 2005 20:07 (UTC)
Please visit Wikipedia:Banning policy for information about banning policy. This isn't the place for user disputes, or policy information. Alternatively you can discuss the situation at the Wikipedia:Village_pump. Elfguy 8 July 2005 20:14 (UTC)
Admins simply may not have been aware of the insult they returned. And if you don't know about it you can't punish someone for it. - Mgm|(talk) July 9, 2005 07:40 (UTC)
Can you advertise an article without breaking Wikipedia policy?--Anti-Anonymex2 8 July 2005 20:26 (UTC)
Can you advertise in an article, no. Can you advertise for a Wikipedia article on your own userpage or another website, yes. Hermione1980 8 July 2005 20:29 (UTC)
Usually I get impatient after test1, and follow it up with a threat to chain them to boulder in the Caucusus where an eagle will pick eternally at their liver. That's a new feature for Mediawiki 1.5. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk July 8, 2005 23:37 (UTC)
lol…where can I find the template for that? I need it. :-) Hermione1980 8 July 2005 23:43 (UTC)
I don' know... When I was chaining that last guy up I noticed the boulder was getting really crowded. I like the template that sends them to Wiki-Hell. --Dmcdevit July 8, 2005 23:52 (UTC)
Wiki-Hell isn't so much a place as it is being separated from the Beatific vision of the Jimbo. Sometimes, though, it's important to absolve the sinners of their wiki-sins. -- Essjay · Talk July 9, 2005 00:07 (UTC)
You guys crack me up. Isomorphic 9 July 2005 00:55 (UTC)
Thanks, guys. I really needed this. My wikistress level today has been through the roof due to a revert war on an article and a heated argument on its talk page. Humor is always a good thing! Hermione1980 9 July 2005 01:00 (UTC)
Revert war? Just remember, when in such situations, always ask yourself WWJD?Isomorphic 9 July 2005 01:29 (UTC)
We heard you the first time, too. --Dmcdevit July 9, 2005 02:10 (UTC)
I guess in this case we should add "and questions about fictional characters too". The sort of question you're asking isn't what people are expecting here... Notinasnaid22:10, 9 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
hello-i am working on a school project for college. i wanted to know please if mr.jimmy wales have valid credentials to present the information given?
do you have affiliations that might create a built-in bias toward the information?
can i provide feedback and/or exchange with the author/web-site manager?
Jimbo writes very little of what is here. Everyone does. There is no single author of website manager. There are no affiliations at large, but there are lots of smaller ones. Remember, this is a wiki. Howabout1Talk to me! July 9, 2005 02:40 (UTC)
You might want to read Wikipedia's article on Wikipedia. There are a variety of mechanisms for providing feedback, please see Wikipedia:Contact_us. -- Rick Block (talk) July 9, 2005 02:46 (UTC)
HI, THIS IS RUSHABH HERE AND I AM A FAN OF MACDONALD'S AND LOVING TO GO EVERY WEEKEND ALL OVER MUMBAI AND COLLECTED MANY MANY TOYS WITH HAPPY MEALS.
I JUST WANT TO SHARE ONE BAD EXPERIENCE WITH YOU AND I WILL NEVER FORGET THAT MOVEMENT AS I WAS VERY VERY SAD BECAUSE OF THAT. I WITH MY FAMILY IN 3 RD WEEK OF JUNE AND TOOK HAPPY MEALS AND GOT " BABBLED " FRANKLY I HAD VISITED FOR THAT TOY ONLY. AFTER REACHING HOME I FOUND THAT THE TOY IS NOT WORKING PROPERLY SO I THOUGHT THAT NEXT WEEK I WILL CHANGE IT, BUT WHEN I VISITED THE SAME PLACE THEY SAID VERY RUDELY SAID THAT THEY WILL NOT EXCHANGE IT BECAUSE IT'S OPEN AND I SAID I COME TO KNOW THE PROBLEM ONLY AFTER I OPEN IT. I WAS VERY SAD AND COME BACK TO HOME, BUT STILL NOT IN MOOD SO MY DAD AGING TOOK TO ME AT THE SAME PLACE TO TAKE NEW HAPPY MEALS SO I CAN GET THAT TOY. BUT UNFORTUNATELY THEY HAVE CHANGE THE TOY AND NOW THEY ARE GIVING SOME TALKING PARROT .
SO THIS IS MY STORY AND AFTER THAT TILL DATE I HAVE NOT VISITED ANY PLACES AS I WAS A REGULAR VISITORS. JUST FOR THE INFORMATION I AM WRITING THIS MAIL AS I FEEL VERY BAD ABOUT THIS.
hope ypu do not have duel policy for india and rest of the countries .........?
still not get reply from any one yet
How in the name of Jimbo do these people end up here, and why do they think we're the corporate complaint office? -- Essjay · Talk July 9, 2005 08:51 (UTC) I was in a crabby mood, now wasn't I; that's not like me at all. -- Essjay · Talk July 9, 2005 14:40 (UTC)
Just to make it clear to the writer. We are not in any way related to MacDonalds. - Mgm|(talk) July 9, 2005 11:57 (UTC)
I'm going to respond because I suddenly had this horrifying vision of some near-future world where Wikipedia has taken over and is in charge of everything, everywhere. If that comes to pass, I want to believe we will be kind to animals and kids.
Rushabh: Here are some contact options for you. I collect stuff, too, and I know the disappointment of opening a box of Red Rose Tea and getting another sheep, when what I really want is the elephant. Send an e-mail explaining your problem to:
and that will give you another e-mail address that may connect you to corporate headquarters elsewhere.
Good luck. I may go nag them myself on my own. The grinches. --Mothperson 9 July 2005 13:41 (UTC)
P.S. Next time you have a question like this, go to Wikipedia:Reference desk.
May her future disappointments in life be no worse than that! alteripse 9 July 2005 13:24 (UTC)
Please could you add a spell checker to the search facility, because some of us are hopeless!!
Pretty sure previous requests/attempts at spellcheck have been made, and abandoned. Most of what I've seen on the subject has suggested using an external editor. If it's just problems with searching, use Dictionary.com before filling in the search box. -- Essjay · Talk July 9, 2005 09:30 (UTC)
Hi, i'm intending to merge two articles, Guan Yu and Guan Gong, the second of which is redundant. What should be the appropriate procedure for this? Is a voting necessary? Thanks. --Plastictv 9 July 2005 09:52 (UTC)
No, voting is not necessary. But asking for comments a few days in advance on the article talk pages might be polite if there a potential for controversy. To be absolutely sure, you could also check the article histories and contact significant contributors. You should leave a redirect on the old page. Bovlb 2005-07-09 13:47:03 (UTC)
Is there any way to make marquees (scrolling texts) on Wikipedia? I've tried <marquee> Using Marquees </marquee> (see my text) and it doesn't seem to work. Also, is there a way to make marquees of images? Thanks! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 9 July 2005 15:11 (UTC)
Nope, that's one of the HTML tags that's shut off on the wiki, as it's hardly useful in writing encyclopedia articles. Why do you want to use it? - Mgm|(talk) 20:48, July 9, 2005 (UTC)
I have fibromialgia and my dr. wants to try the fight or flight responce. i am not sure what this is.... my dr is comming out with a dvd of this if you could help me with this so i know what to do.--67.1.56.157 9 July 2005 15:11 (UTC)--67.1.56.157 9 July 2005 15:11 (UTC)
tracikreusch914@yahoo.com
If an entertainer changes his name, must the article about them always reflect that change? Specifically, should the David Sutch article be called david sutch or Screaming Lord Sutch (that was his stage name / persona when he was with Screaming Lord Sutch And The Savages.
By the way, it was really hard to find this "question asking place". This is my third post in a quarter hour. It's like solving a maze around here, and I'm not no newbie neither (!). Uncle Ed July 9, 2005 15:11 (UTC)
Sorry to hear that. What do you recommend changing to make it easier? Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 9 July 2005 15:17 (UTC)
I got this for an answer. Does this mean my post didn't go through?
Sorry- we have a problem...
The wikimedia web server didn't return any response to your request.
I'm really lost here. Should I go to the mailing list? Uncle Ed July 9, 2005 15:11 (UTC)
That message means that the site was not working properly at the time; usually a "reload", "refresh" or the "back" button fixes the error. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 9 July 2005 15:17 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response but (1) I only have observed the problem of finding where to ask questions; I have no solution yet - and (2) What about my actual question: policy on naming articles. Where do I go for that? Uncle Ed July 9, 2005 15:29 (UTC)
I suggest you create a redirect, and as long as there is no official policy on this you can put the article under any of the two or more names, with all the others being redirects. --Fenice 9 July 2005 16:29 (UTC)
Here is the link to the naming conventions: Wikipedia:Naming conventions. It was easy to find from the Manual of Style.--Fenice 9 July 2005 16:45 (UTC)
I still don't get what you mean. Do you want to put Go to Anti-Anonymex2's User Page!!!! on the top of an article? Do you just want people to go to your user page? Howabout1Talk to me! 23:10, July 9, 2005 (UTC)
Okay, you definitely can't to the first one. As for the second, try a flashy signature. Do you like this? Anti-Anonymex2. If so, I'll give you more detailed instructions on your talk page. Howabout1Talk to me! 23:23, July 9, 2005 (UTC)
The neutrality of this section is disputed. 
