Help desk
< April 6	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 8 >

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

April 7[edit]

Watchlist lag[edit]

It's 8.06pm local time, but the time shown with edits in my watchlist show up with a 25 or so minute difference, as taken place earlier. Why is this happening?Pacific Coast Highway ^{{talk • contribs}} 00:08, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scroll up a few questions. It appears there's a problem with watchlists and people have asked questions before in the last few hours (perhaps days). - Mgm|^(talk) 00:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. It fixed itself. Pacific Coast Highway ^{{talk • contribs}} 02:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spammy Edits[edit]

I'm not sure how to deal with thisː A (very) minor but long-time music industry person (or someone working for him) is adding himself to articles on a lot of musicians. I think that ALL of his entries need to be reverted (none of them are notable incidents in the lives of the people who the articles are actually about) but I don't know how to label the edits. It's 24.30.54.146 who is doing the edits; here is his website. I could just tear everything out and mark it "not notable" but I could see that turning into some kind of revert war. Closenplay 00:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could see how calling him "surrogate personal manager" could be a problem, but how is co-writing a song with Kurtis Blow not relevant to Blow's article; it may not have been relevant in his life, but it certainly is relevant to the song. There may be some problems, but blanket removal of all the edits doesn't seem like a good idea. They may simply be a fan who found a source and decided to add everything they found to the articles about the corresponding people. - Mgm|^(talk) 00:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point but it appears that he's greatly exaggerating his role in these people's careers. I mean, does everyone who wrote a song with Kurtis Blow (and Garfield didn't—he helped "arrange" (along with one of Dylan's backup singers) to have Bob Dylan sing on a record with him) deserve to get mentioned in the course of an article on Kurtis Blow? And Googling "kurtis blow"+"bob dylan"+"wayne garfield" only turns up a back-up vocal credit for the album; no anectdotes about Garfield and Dylan; nothing (and Dylan fans are an obsessive bunch). There's also that there are no listed sources for the claims about this person. I suppose I could request citations but that rather seems like taking the long way around. Closenplay 01:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Newbies often forget sources, if you really want to remove it, move it to the talk page. If those fans are as obsessive as you claim and it's indeed important, they'll track down the required sources. - Mgm|^(talk) 01:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, don't rely on just Google hits. I've come across several subjects where I was unable to place something in an article because information is no longer available while it used to exist. Not everyone bothers with keeping archives of online material and when they decide to cancel a website, all its contents die unless someone requested it to be in the internet archive before it happened. - Mgm|^(talk) 01:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all of your suggestions and comments! Closenplay 10:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki order[edit]

I just saw someone move an interwiki link on an article I was watching, but that means the two-letter codes are no longer alphabetized (which makes finding if a link is missing significantly easier). I've seen bots and programs move these into alpabetical order as standard cleanup procedure. All I could find was a poll on the issue. Is there a basic order for interwiki links or am I just imagining things? - Mgm|^(talk) 00:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just parroting here because I don't know the answer but I found this quote at Help:Interwiki linking#Interlanguage link:

The mutual order of interlanguage links is preserved, but otherwise the positions within the wikitext are immaterial, again the same rule as for categories. Usually they are put at the end. With section editing they appear in the preview if they are in the section being edited.

I'm not sure where this "mutual order" is set but if I'm reading this correctly, this means that changing the order makes no difference how they display on the side of the screen, so alphabetizing for organizational purposes seems like a good idea. Does that help?--Fuhghettaboutit 02:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it's my setup specifically, but changing the order certainly makes a difference on my computer. I wonder if that interwiki help page is correct and up-to-date. It's weird it talks about a mutual order without specifying what that order is, perhaps it got deleted somewhere along the way. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:06, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

making my own page[edit]

How do I make my own page?

Joey 0:~)

This question was answered earlier, see WP:HD#creating_own_page. - Mgm|^(talk) 00:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clay Faulkner Home listing[edit]

The Clay Faulkner Home in McMinnville (Faulkner Springs), Tenn., is listed in Wikipedia under sites on the National Register of Historic Places in Warren County. Faulkner named his home Falcon Rest, and it is open to the public as a historic site under that name. There is not an article about either the Clay Faulkner Home or Falcon Rest in your encyclopedia. As a part of Tennessee's heritage, it needs to be there somewhere. However, as General Manager of the property, I gather I am prohibitied from writing an article.

The approved National Register application is online at www.falconrest.com/Application.html. Could this be used?

Otherwise, how could Falcon Rest be listed without me violating your editorial policies.

Thanks for your help.

Falcon Rest 01:02, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put in a few links to make sure we notice if one of the articles is created. It looks like the subject should be covered. It's perfectly okay for you to create the article if you stay away from the pitfalls most people fall in when they write articles about subjects they're heavily involved in. Don't use an overly promotional tone and don't use any peacock terms. WP:COI list more things you should keep in mind. The best way to write a good article is to read a few existing articles about historic houses or buildings in the category National Register of Historic Placesas an example. The link would work as a source, but you should also find some sources other than yourself that wrote about it. Is it covered by newspapers? Does the National Register keep their own website? Just give it a go and let me know. If anything's wrong I'll make sure it's fixed. - Mgm|^(talk) 01:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of the day[edit]

someone replaced the picture of the day with porn.

Purged all the templates, seems to have fixed it. Can somebody please find out how this happened? The templates involved for Picture of the Day are mind-boggling... x42bn6 Talk 02:21, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to verify that I saw that too (after it was pointed out here), you guys weren't hallucinating. The History of the image doesn't seem to indicate any vandlaism, I can't imagine how it happened. --Ybbor ^Talk Survey! 02:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's slightly weird. There are actually two images of porn that seem to randomly pop up after I kept purging the image, and sometimes it went back to the original image. I've purged it several times and it seems to be back to normal. Could we have a developer in here or something to explain? x42bn6 Talk 02:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Aha, The issue is with commons: [[1]]. The history indicates that [User:HatesWM2] uploaded the problematic version (many, many times). He has since been blocked. Looked like it wasn't the purging that did it after all. --Ybbor ^Talk Survey! 02:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I've just wasted a couple of processor cycles on the servers. x42bn6 Talk 02:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How come it showed up on Main Page though? Isn't the WP image separate from the commons image? --antilived^{T | C | G} 02:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No idea - can't find anything. It could be that the names are the same so it takes Commons's image over the local image? x42bn6 Talk 02:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there's no local image here on Wikipedia, the software will look on the commons. My guess is that the image was not uploaded here before it was shown on the main page as it should. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Doesn't local override Commons? Are the Pictures of the Day from Commons? I thought they were just local. Corvus cornix 18:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Local does overide commons, but obviously only if there is local. All main page pictures which are not protected on commons are supposed to be uploaded locally temporarily before appearing on the main page but this sometimes doesn't happen for a variety of reasons. I think most and I would argue all PoTD should in fact be from the commons since if an image is good enough to be the PoTD then it should definitely be on commons as it is something that would almost definitely be usable by other projects and it's obviously licensed appropriately. Even if it was originally uploaded here, it should be moved preferably by the uploader but someone else if that isn't possibly for whatever reason. Nil Einne 18:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Actually I just checked Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates and as I suspected it similarly recommends that featured pictures be uploaded to the commons. (N.B. the actual process of choosing PoTD and featured pictures is of course local but the pictures can either be from here or from commons) Nil Einne 18:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Table help[edit]

Hi. With this table, is it possible to merge the one box that says ā with the three boxes above it, and if so, how? Tuncrypt 03:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

	Nominative		Oblique
	Singular	Plural	Singular	Plural
Masc	o	ā
Neut	uṃ	āṃ	ā	āṃ
Fem	ī

You could try using a nested table to display those four cells. --Teratornis 05:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Downloading Database[edit]

I just want to ask one question,I read that there is a way to download the full article database of Uncyclopedia.

How do you go about it?03:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure about Uncyclopedia, but you can see about downloading full Wikipedia database dumps at WP:DUMP. //PTO {speak} 03:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The answer seems to pop up in the top results of this search:

google:download uncyclopedia database

Good luck. ("Ask not what the Help desk can Google for you, but what you can Google for the Help desk.") --Teratornis 03:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In case that was too terse, Google says there is an Uncyclopedia article right here on Wikipedia that tells how to download its database. --Teratornis 04:25, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How Come My Link To Bridgette Monet Was Deleted?[edit]

Resolved

– on IRC

John Reaves (talk) 05:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a guy named Valrith who has been deleting my link to my group The Bridgette Monet Picture Show. Why is he doing this and can he do this? Please help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dya91101 (talk • contribs)

The link in question seems to be here. --Teratornis 04:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This removal of your link lists these reasons in the edit summary: removing inappropriate link per WP:EL, WP:SPAM, WP:RS, and WP:NOT. Read all of those guideline pages; you need to show how your link does not violate any of those guidelines. --Teratornis 04:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also be careful with the number of times you add the link back; see WP:3RR. If you don't understand someone else's edit, ask them (nicely) to explain further, by posting a question on the article's talk page. However, in this case the problem seems to be pretty obvious, because the link that's getting deleted is to an age-restricted (i.e., pornographic) Yahoo group. You may have better results promoting your Yahoo group on another wiki specializing in this topic area, such as maybe this one. --Teratornis 05:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sexual abuse[edit]

Can anyone tell me what the organization is that takes care of child sexual abuse? You know, the people that teachers and nurses are supposed to call if a child reports being sexually abused. I thinking along the lines of a 4-letter acronym that starts with a C???

Don't get any wrong ideas, I'm asking this question because of this thread.--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 05:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Child Protective Services? Postoak 05:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A bit late but it depends of course where the child lives. In NZ for example it's CYFS (Department of Child, Youth and Family Services). This case appears to be in the US so the recommendation was right. But there is obviously no use contacting the US Child Protective Services if the child is in another country (of course I would presume if you did contact the organisation in the wrong country they would put you on to who to contact but it's best to get it right in the first instance) Nil Einne 18:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, in most instances especially if it's an emergency you should contact the police first. Nil Einne 18:53, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I posted an article and it doesn't appear on other computers[edit]

I posted an article on the linux computer and I could log out, search for that article and find it. However, I can only find it on the window computer if i'm logged in. if i'm not, i cant find it. Any ideas on where i went wrong? Eisenhower 05:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be talking about this article: Ai XIn Jue Luo Yu Huan. How are you searching for the article on your Windows computer? --Teratornis 05:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the article is mis-named. It currently has name Ai XIn Jue Luo Yu Huan. It probably should be Ai Xin Jue Luo Yu Huan (using Xin for '新'). It may be that after logging back in you type the correct name, and couldn't find it. Should the article be 'moved' to the second name? Shenme 05:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clearing history[edit]

An anonymous IP user inappropriately vandalized my user page with hurtful edits recently. The vandalism was since reverted, but I am not satisfied with the edits existing in the page's history. I am wondering whom I might be able to ask in helping to remove the relevant edits from the history. --Brandon Dilbeck 06:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revisions in the history are almost never removed unless they contain very sensitive personal information. Many users on Wikipedia have had their user page vandalized many times (some even thousands of times (check admins' userpage history)) but they are not removed from history because they serve as a record of past contributions from that user and can be used as evidence in blocking or banning the said user. Vandals often target userpages because they know that provoking the user will attract attention which is what they want. If you still want to have the edits removed then you can request oversight at WP:RFO. You can also read up on Wikipedia:Oversight for more info. Hope this helps! -- _Hdt83 ^Chat 08:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hdt is right. It's best not to remove those edits. If they're oversighted, they'll be gone forever. If you leave them, they can be used as evidence against the vandal later. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism on talk pages[edit]

I understand that it is "frowned upon" to remove content from your talk page, or the talk page of an article, but what if it is vandalism (well, in this case it isn't vandalism so much as an IP address inserting random symbols at the bottom of the page). Can I remove that without being bitten? --The Dark Lord Trombonator (((¶))) 10:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Random symbols fall under the "grafitti"-bit of Wikipedia:Vandalism. No one will bite you for that. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:17, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Semi-Protected' chart on 'Iraq War' and 'Multinational Force in Iraq' pages[edit]

Hello,

It seems that somebody has tried to prevent others from editing a chart that I would like to update, as some information on it is now old. Could somebody please have a look at the chart listing the size of troop contingents on these pages and determine whether it is legal to prevent others from editing it, and if not, how can I go about making changes to it?

Thanks.

--Buttockhat 11:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you were referring to this chart, it isn't semi protected. --KZ^{Talk• Contribs} 11:26, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I see...when I tried to make changes to it by editing its section on those pages, it did say it was 'Semi-Protected'. I didn't know it had to be edited by opening it up on a seperate page. Thanks KZ.

--Buttockhat 11:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How to add a link[edit]

I want to add a clickable link called "I-LIE" under "See Also" in the article "Political Satire". All I have been able to do so far is to do so far is to make an entry that appears in black, "I-LIE [1]", with a linking icon. What I would like to do is to have a directly clickable link that says "I-LIE", without, of course, the inappropriate "[1]" but I haven't been able to figure out how to do it. What's the proper procedure?

Hendon Chubb

First, if you're trying to give an external link (which it looks like you are), note that those usually go under a heading called "External Links." "See Also" Is usually for other Wikipedia articles. In any case, check out Wikipedia:How to edit a page#Links and URLs for more information on how to link to other pages. --Ybbor ^Talk Survey! 13:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is also just a minor example of satire, of which countless tens or hundreds of thousands can be found on the internet. Why do you think this one is notable enough to be linked? This isn't a rhetorical question: take a look at Wikipedia:External links and see if this fits the bill. Notinasnaid 16:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't "Spam" But Got Deleted[edit]

I wrote an article about BBRBR (Bring Back R&B Radio), which is a radio program.

People keep asking what it is so I figured Wikipedia is the best place to "explain" it since I know I come here anytime I'm wondering "what is" or "who is" something.

I didn't advertise anything in it. I talked about it's inception, it's staff, it's purpose, and gave examples of the kinds of songs reviewed in the radio program.

Any ideas on what went wrong or how I can resubmit an article that won't get deleted as spam?

P.S. I edit a number of pages here and absolutely am not a spammer.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by MissKriss (talk • contribs)

See Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?. --Teratornis 14:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct that Wikipedia is an extremely popular wiki, and lots of people come here to read encyclopedic articles about things. Millions of people, like you, come here instead of to other sites because Wikipedia has high standards for article quality, rigorously enforced. (The enforcement isn't always consistent, because there are only so many experienced editors to keep up with the flood of new articles written by new users who haven't learned the rules yet, so some articles can contain beginner mistakes for some time before attracting attention.)

I'm not trying to be harsh, but you must be new to Wikipedia, because you did not sign your post here. That probably means you have barely started to read the manuals. That in turn means new articles you start are at high risk for deletion, because you aren't aware of all the things you are supposed to do and not do. But don't worry, everyone else made their share of mistakes starting out too. The right attitude is to look on these setbacks as exciting opportunities to learn more about what makes Wikipedia so great! Wikipedia really is a kind of miracle, like nothing else in history: tens of thousands of volunteers who are mostly strangers to each other, from every nation and point of view, are somehow able to collaborate to build one of the world's most popular Web sites. What's going on here really is wonderful and probably even revolutionary, and anyone with a lick of sense ought to recognize the importance and be curious to learn how it manages to work. What may not be obvious at first is just how staggeringly complicated this place is.

When the other editor called your article "spam" he or she almost certainly referred to Wikipedia's technical definition in WP:SPAM. This hardly means you are in the same class as those people who fill our e-mail inboxes with thousands of unsolicited advertisements. It's just the way Wikipedia uses the word. It just means you made a mistake which should be straightforward to fix. It does not mean you are a spammer, it means your article satisfied Wikipedia's definition of "spam." On Wikipedia, we have to separate ourselves from our contributions, and don't take other people's edits and critiques personally. They aren't criticizing you, just those words on the screen. Your challenge is to learn how to put words on the screen that satisfy the critics.

It's hard for us to advise you on what went wrong with your article, because we cannot see it just now. If we could see your article, we could tell you how to bring it up to Wikipedia's standards, if that would be possible for the subject. We would need a sysop to bring the page back so we can review it.

If you just want a place to write about the radio show, without all the strict rules for content, you should try another wiki. A search of WikiIndex finds some possibilities, including WikiSound. If you develop your article there, we can tell you what it will need to reach Wikipedia's standards. In the meantime, you will have a page on the Web that you can direct people to read for more information about your radio show. --Teratornis 15:34, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, WikiSound's copyright policy looks incompatible with Wikipedia. Anything you contribute to WikiSound becomes owned by WikiSound, and therefore you could not develop an article there and then bring it to Wikipedia. So you would need to find another wiki. --Teratornis 15:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could also try again here, but start at the drawing board first. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 17:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hobart talk page[edit]

Someone has recently moved Hobart to City of Hobart. Assuming this is correct(?) shouldn't the talk page Talk:Hobart be moved as well? Could someone who knows how to do this have a look please? --Shantavira 13:59, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was not a move in the Wikipedia sense. Both articles existed from November 24 2006 when City of Hobart was split off from Hobart (diff) until March 31 2007 where Hobart was redirected to City of Hobart (diff). The talk pages are separate and it's normal that an article keeps its own talk page when it's changed to a redirect without being moved. I have not examined whether it was appropriate to redirect. That can be discussed at Talk:City of Hobart. PrimeHunter 15:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which is empty except for a template. It does seem odd to me that that discussion of the "move" should be left behind at Talk:Hobart, which page is not obvious to a newcomer unless they know to click on the little "redirected from Hobart" flag first...--Shantavira 17:57, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to clarify here - the move was incorrect and I have reverted it. Hobart is about the city, whereas City of Hobart is about the local government area formally known as City of Hobart. They are very different - Hobart is about 5 times the area of City of Hobart. -- Chuq (talk) 04:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks For Your Reply, but how do you change it?[edit]

Thanks for Answering my Question, but i don't know how to change an article's name. Can you show me? Eisenhower 14:17, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:MOVE to find out how to move an article to the correct name. You'll have to be a registered user for at least four days before you can move an article. Or you can post a request before then at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Dismas|^(talk) 14:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation template for magazine.[edit]

What citation template do I use for referencing a magazine? I looked and I didn't see one, should I just use standard MLA format and not use a template? Thanks. —Christopher Mann McKay 16:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can use either the general {{citation}} or possibly {{citenews}}. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 17:38, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you checked the WP:CITET page? Anchoress 21:47, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Popups[edit]

Hi. I added some new features to my monobook (see my contribs), but they didn't seem to have made any noticable difference, the new options are not showing up, and the popups are acting as if the new options haven't been added. Please take a look at my monobook if you like, and note anything I typed wrong. I noticed a few strange things with the page; the white bordered box has dissapeared, the grey warning has dissapeared, and the lines themselves don't have their own line the way that the popups tool page shows. Could anyone help me? I notice that the popups summaries for reverting are now working, but the new options I add aren't. Could someone help me? Thanks. – A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)(+sign here+How's my editing?)} 17:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try Bypassing your browsers cache, this normally has to be done for scrips to work (e.g WP:TWINKLE).Telly addict 17:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I tried bypassing my cache, but a new and worse problem has occured. Right after I bypassed my cache, the whole popups stopped working! Also, near the bottom of my screen, my browser indicates that there is an error in the page. This happens whenever I log on to wikipedia now. When I'm logged off or on another site, there don't seem to be any problems, but when I'mlogged on, that notice appeares, and popups don't work. When I hover my mouse over a link, the text appeares with the name only of a page in a small, but the actual popups don't work. They were working just fine except for the new features just before I bypassed it. I've tried clicking refresh, bypassing it again, and even clearing my cache, but nothing seems to work. Please help! I want my popups back. Thanks. – A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)(+sign here+How's my editing?)} 18:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that it's a syntax error. In the place of:

popupQueriedRevertSummary=Revert to old Reversion $1 dated at $2 edited by $3 using [[Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups|popups]].;
popupsFixDabsSummary=Fix Disambiguation link %s into link %s using popups.;
popupRedlinkSummary=Remove red link %s from article using popups.;

try:

popupQueriedRevertSummary='Revert to old Reversion $1 dated at $2 edited by $3 using [[Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups|popups]].';
popupsFixDabsSummary='Fix Disambiguation link %s into link %s using popups.';
popupRedlinkSummary='Remove red link %s from article using popups.';

Hope this helps. Gracenotes ^T § 22:49, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yay!! It finally worked! Thank you so much :D:D:D !!! – A stroHur ricane 00 1^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)(+sign here+How's my editing?)} 01:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gary Catona[edit]

I worked on a project entitled Gary Catona. It has been deleted, I think. Where has it gone? What must I do to correct this?

If it's been deleted, it was probably non notable or something of that sort. It's gone. You can recreate it, but it'll probably be deleted again anyway.--$UIT 18:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[2] shows the deletion log. The cryptic part is WP:CSD#G11, but you follow the link you will see it was described as "blatant advertising" and has a more detailed explanation. Notinasnaid 18:21, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?. --Teratornis 19:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not found[edit]

In the last 15 minutes, I've gotten, maybe 5 'not found messages

Not Found The requested URL /wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Help_desk was not found on this server.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

it's not a 404, What's going on here? should I be worried?--Honeymane_{Heghlu meH QaQ jajvam} 20:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just got three "not found"s in a row trying to add this reply to say that I also have had these "not found" responses when trying to view my watchlist. Sancho 20:59, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've gotten the 'not found' and the 404 messages - just a server hiccup I imagine. BTW it looks like it's being discussed on the administrative noticeboards too, if someone wants to look and see the 'official word'. Anchoress 21:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It appears (from discussion on #wikimedia-tech WP:IRC that there is a malfunctioning Apache server. The developers are sorting it out now. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 21:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Same problems here too. Pacific Coast Highway ^{{talk • contribs}} 21:12, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Draft?[edit]

I've seen draft versions of articles on pages that begin with "User", but it really isn't a user page. How can I make one of these? FictionH 21:28, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are user subpages. You can make them like a normal page except you prefix them with User:Yourusername/. For example, you could make a sandbox page User:FictionH/Sandbox or to start a draft article User:FictionH/Article When you are ready to move it to mainspace, move it like a regular page, so the history can be moved too. Then tag the resulting redirect with {{db-author}}

- Thank you! FictionH 21:59, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See: WP:UP#What about user subpages?. Some user subpages are impressive. One I use often: User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia. --Teratornis 00:55, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help Desk mess[edit]

I don't know whether the archive bot had a bad day or what, but we've ended up with the 4-7 April duplicated apparently in their entirety. I'd dive in and fix it, but if it's throwing a wobbly, I'd be worried that any intervention might make it worse. Adrian M. H. 22:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the archives' transclusion. Hopefully this doesn't mess with the bot... I'm looking into it, I guess. Odd though, odd. Gracenotes ^T § 23:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was a problem with RefDeskBot, I believe it was jsut fixed recently, the owner must still be working the kinks out. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 00:58, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was manually archiving the desk with RDB, but it seems that someone had manually archived April 5 already, so removing that text from the RefDesk. Because the April 5 date header was now gone, and the only one remaining was at the bottom of the page, the bot mistakenly archived the whole thing, leaving us with 2 transclusions. Thanks, Mart inp23 08:37, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Until a moment ago, there were two sets of blue box areas, split by a TOC. I think I have managed to fix that correctly. Adrian M. H. 14:02, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures[edit]

How can i add pictures. Also were is th pipe used in some editing —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.215.109.19 (talk) 23:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

For uploading images, look on the toolbox on the left. See the link Upload file? Click it. Make sure you follow the image guidelines when uploading. As for the pipe, it is slightly misleading because it is a broken pipe on the keyboard. For the |, look to the left of the z or above the Enter key. It is shift-\. x42bn6 Talk 23:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Report problem[edit]

Could I email a problem to wikipedia (I'm not talking about sending a email on why I shouldn't get blocked)? Cause there's this user that keeps getting rid of everything I put on the Ben 10 pages and there. He keeps getting rid of them is because he doesn't like them and thinks they're pointless and he does this to annoy me. How can I report a problem like this? Is there a rule about people getting rid of people's edits repeatedly? --Naruto134 00:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unless someone is violating the three revert rule, you should try the recommendations at WP:DR. — coel acan — 01:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]