Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2008 January 2

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.

January 2

An article with serious issues I can't address

Nedley_Mandingo: I came across this article while browsing the category Obscenity Controversies. I'm fairly certain this article has been vandalized, from bits such as this:

"Manson's Father in law is the oldest of the show's crew with an estimated age of over 60. (He plays Ned at Live appearance, when Ned and Manson have to appear together, to continue to steal money from you, weird how this "Ned" never has anything to say)"

and the first sentence under "Neds Interest" (sic), which I won't dignify by pasting it here.

Unfortunately (well, unfortunately for the ARTICLE, anyway) I have absolutely ZERO knowledge of the mechanics and characters of the "Bubba the Love Sponge" show, and I'm thus unable to do anything with this article other than report it here. (I did consider putting it up for AfD, but I couldn't find a valid criterion...)Gladys J Cortez 00:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I've removed most of the content per WP:BLP. In the case of biographies of living persons, all content should be reliably sourced. Thank you for reporting this here. Mr.Z-man 00:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Ooh! WP:BLP...of course!!! Why didn't I think of that??? (foreheadslap) Thanks!!!Gladys J Cortez 00:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

need to reverse a page move

I am looking for some assistance on reversing a page move I did. The page is Hamilton Centre (provincial electoral district). I was looking at the undo feature on the history listing, but when i tried it said it was unable to do, so I did not want to mess it up any further. I came across what I thought was a missed move in the listing of Ontario provicial electoral districts, but it seems someone stopped converting them at Hamilton Centre's page. Thanks in advance for the help. --Jordan 1972 (talk) 00:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I believe I've fixed it. Take a look. ~ Bella Swan 00:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

No, you did a copy and paste move, which breaks the page history. You should always use the "Move" tab to rename a page and if that doesn't work, ask on WP:Requested moves for an admin to do it. I've fixed this one. Mr.Z-man 00:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Just as an additional note, on those rare occasions when a copy & paste is appropriate, as when one article is being merged into another, you must note the source of the material in order to comply with GFDL. This is done with a wikilink to the original article in the edit summary. Then the redirect includes the template {{R from merge}}. This makes sure that the redirected article is not deleted. All things considered, it's much better when we can simply move the article as Mr. Z-man did. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

FACTS ABOUT "GUIt AM" ON WIKIPEDIA

To Whom it may Concern:

Your current opening paragraph about Guam reads as follows:

'Guam (Chamorro: Guåhan), officially the Territory of Guam, is an island in the Western Pacific Ocean and is an organized unincorporated territory of the United States. It is one of five U.S. territories with established civilian government.[1] The island's capital is Hagåtña (formerly Agana). Guam is the largest and southernmost of the Mariana Islands.

The Chamorros, Guam's indigenous inhabitants, first populated the island approximately 6,000 years ago.[citation needed] The island has a long history of European colonialism beginning in 1668 with the arrival of Padre San Vitores, a Spanish missionary. The island was captured from Spain by the United States during the Spanish American War in 1898. As the largest island in Micronesia and the only American-held island in the region before World War II, Guam was occupied by the Japanese between December 1941 and July 1944. Today, Guam's economy is mainly supported by tourism (primarily from Japan) and U.S. military bases.[2]

It should read as follows:

'Guam (Chamorro: Guåhan), officially the Territory of Guam, is an island in the Western Pacific Ocean and is an organized unincorporated territory of the United States. It is one of five U.S. territories with an established civilian government.[1] The island's capital is Hagåtña (formerly Agana). Guam is the largest and southernmost of the [Mariana Islands Archipelago].

The Chamorros, Guam's indigenous inhabitants, first populated the island approximately 6,000 years ago.[citation needed] The island has a long history of European colonialism beginning in 1668 with the arrival of Padre Diego Luis de San Vitores, a Spanish Jesuit missionary who founded the first Catholic church on Guam. The island was ceded from Spain to the United States following the Spanish American War in 1898. As the largest island in Micronesia and the only U.S. Navy administered island in the region before World War II, Guam was occupied by the Japanese Imperial Army between December 8, 1941 and July 21, 1944. Today, Guam's economy is mainly supported by tourism (primarily from Japan and other Asian countries), U.S. Department of Defense installations and locally owned businesses.[2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.98.163.2 (talk) 01:13, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Mr.Z-man 07:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Edit help: How to put paragraphs within a single bulleted item?

This is an editing-style question. Some editors like bulleted lists for long lists with short descriptions. However, when the material for a bullet gets to be lengthy the bullet text becomes a huge tedious run-on, and the text can be hard to follow without paragraph breaks:

• Item 1
• Item 2
• Item 3 with a really long boring block of text that really should be broken into two or more paragraphs but there's no apparant way to do it. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
• Item 4

I want it to break that into two or more paragraphs, except with the second paragraph indented to be part of the paragraph above it:

• Item 1
• Item 2
• Item 3 with a really long boring block of text that really should be broken into two or more paragraphs but there's no apparant way to do it. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.

Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

• Item 4

Embedding text within single-cell tables can be a workaround to formatting problems. But a wikitable is incompatible with a wiki-bullet list. This attempt fails miserably:

• Item 1
• Item 2
• {|width="100%"

|- |Item 3 with a really long boring block of text that really should be broken into two or more paragraphs but there's no apparant way to do it. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.

Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. |}

• Item 4

I can FORCE this into working by using raw HTML markup like this: <ul> <li> <table width="100%"> <tr> <td> . . </td> </tr> </table> </li> </ul> and it does work correctly, but now I've contravened wiki conventions by not using the wiki's markup language and is not likely to sit well with other editors..

• Item 1
• Item 2

• Item 3 with a really long boring block of text that really should be broken into two or more paragraphs but there's no apparant way to do it. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Raw HTML works! This is all part of one giant cell within a table. But alas the bullet doesn't align with the first paragraph. Oh well.

• Item 4

What can be done to do this "properly" using wiki markup? Or is it not possible to do what I want here with pure wiki markup? DMahalko (talk) 02:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

You could probably put a colon : to indent the text.   jj137 ^♠ 02:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

• Testing 1

Testing 2

• Testing 3

Testing 4

Alas this does not work under FireFox 2.0.0.11 and Internet Explorer 7 -- the indent for a colon is different from the bullet-item ident. :-/ DMahalko (talk) 02:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd say the best option to use is partial HTML. Have a standard bulleted list, but use <p> tags on the long item. Example:

• Item 1
• Item 2

• Item 3 with a really long boring block of text that really should be broken into two or more paragraphs but there's no apparant way to do it. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur.

  Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

• Item 4

This method keeps the bulleted list while allowing for paragraph breaks. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 02:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Another method: You can just add a <br> in the text, and just keep writing on the same line. The paragraph will still be long in wikimarkup, but will look fine on the screen (at least it does in IE6):

• Lorum ipsum whatever whatever (I can't remember how it goes). Here comes the break.
  Next line, aligned with the first.
  
  If you add two breaks, it aligns correctly, but adds a blank line.

See? --barneca (talk) 12:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

If you can't remember "how it goes," we actually have (incredibly) a Lorem ipsum article. --Teratornis (talk) 16:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

A article with muttiple page design?

I have an article with large contents and I prefer to have it in multiple pages where a user can move from one page to another and back rather than one very long page.

It is possible to create such mutliple pages in Wikipedia? If it possible, does anyone has guiding instructions or sample example as to how this can be done?

--Jamesccs (talk) 02:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

See these entries under WP:EIW#Article:

• Wikipedia:Article size (Manual of Style)
• Wikipedia:Summary style (guideline) - when articles get too long
• Special:Longpages - top 1000 articles, sizewise

--Teratornis (talk) 03:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Spacing

Is there a way how i can make get these tables to be even and for the references to be right in this article? Thanks Hatmatbbat10 (talk) 04:51, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, but you might find something useful in Wikipedia:How to fix bunched-up edit links. Another possibility might be to put those three "loose" tables into cells within a larger containing table. --Teratornis (talk) 07:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

CANT ACCESS

UNABLE TO LOG IN WITH MY PASSWORD. HAVE CONFIRMED MY ACCOUNT. PLEASE ADVISE. THANK YOU.

---

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.67.59 (talk) 05:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I hope that some of the suggestions at Help: Logging in will be able to give you assistance. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the answer is simple, you have CAPS LOCK on, and passwords are case sensitive. Turn it off and try again. --69.118.143.107 (talk) 12:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I botched myf irst attempt at editing.

I tried to edit the article about Ernie Vandeweghe. I noticed that some of my attempted edits seemed to be "bracketed" by the name "Nowicki" (What does that mean?) Those edits never went through, but others did. Therefore, some of the article seems a bit garbled, and while some of the punctuation has been improved, much has not. What did I do wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pepecoco (talk • contribs) 05:09, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I reverted your edit; try it again. What were you trying to do when you got the nowiki tags? If you wanted to delete text, just delete it; don't click on the that tool bar button. --teb728 t c 07:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

See Help:Magic words#Default for explanation of <nowiki>...</nowiki>. --Teratornis (talk) 07:06, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Using Wikipedia

Can I use Wikipedia as a reference source for my school projects without violating its copyrights? Cyberina 11 07:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes you can, see Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. --Silver Edge (talk) 07:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

But it's not really a good idea, most teachers won't accept their students using Wikipedia as a source, like my old English teacher. Jake the Editor Man _(talk) 22:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

how do i post a picture

how do i post a picture?

See Help:Images and other uploaded files. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

group discussion related

should there be job resrvation in private sector? please answer pointwise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.91.178.247 (talk) 09:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 11:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

group discussion

is america a rogue superpower? please answer pointwise . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.91.178.247 (talk) 09:30, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 11:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The Reference Desk is not an appropriate place for this question, as this is a polemical question and not one properly addressed at the Reference Desk, which is for factual information, not opinion. Corvus cornix_talk 18:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

What would be appropriate? The Helpful One ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 19:32, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Ummm...

Can you block an account's account creation and/or e-mail without blocking the account itself? 58.168.147.119 (talk) 11:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

There's no easy way to do so, that I'm aware of. – Luna Santin (talk) 11:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

No, if an account is blocked, the creation and/or email are extra things to be blocked. The first and main part of blocking is not being able to edit. Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^{(Talk) (Contributions)} 12:00, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

How to help in preventing vandalism

I am a new wikipedian and wish to help in arresting vandalism. but how do I do that?? Maanush (talk) 12:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

You cannot prevent vandalism, but you can revert it. Check out How to respond to vandalism for a complete guide. --Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 12:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for asking to help tackle vandalism (: the recent changes on the left shows 'recent changes' surprisingly enough, that's a bit slow though, clicking on every link to see whether its vandalism or not, a better way is to use a tool I find this is the best just follow the instructions on that page and you can try this, hope that helps. Harland1 (^t/_c) 13:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

If you are really ambitious, perhaps bordering on being gripped by hubris, you could try to persuade Jimbo Wales to require users to log in before editing. Some 97% of vandalism comes from non-logged-in users, and while requiring all users to log in would possibly motivate some vandals to create accounts, it does appear that semi-protecting pages (i.e., requiring users to log in before editing those pages) reduces vandalism to those pages. In other words, semi-protection is like a limited experiment to test the effect of requiring users to log in before editing, but I am not aware of any systematic attempt to analyze the results of this experiment, to see if requiring users to log in before editing the whole encyclopedia might yield a net improvement (that is, to see whether the reduced vandalism might outweigh the loss of constructive non-logged-in contributors who for some reason might strongly resist creating accounts). Having actual data on the impact of requiring users to log in before editing could elevate the currently faith-based debate to a debate about facts. --Teratornis (talk) 16:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

And for everything you could want to know about vandalism and more (other than vandals' real names and addresses), see: WP:EIW#Vandal. --Teratornis (talk) 16:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Mistake

Recently in attempt to adding a photo of terry brooks I by mistake uploaded a different image the file is saved in wikipedia commons under the name "Terry Brooks" I dont know how to delete it please delete it.Thank you Maanush (talk) 12:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

If you still want to upload an image under that name go here, if not, the image will eventually be deleted because it doesn't show a link to a valid picture in Flickr. --Yamanbaiia^{(free hugs!)} 13:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

How to handle conflicting birth date information

A Wiki user claiming to be the step-daughter of Florian ZaBach reported that the birthdate shown in the Florian ZaBach article (1931) was incorrect, it should be 1918, and cites the Social Security death index as confirmation. I checked all of the referenced sources and found that most of them report 1931 and a few report 1921. See Talk:Florian ZaBach. How should we handle this type of discrepancy? Truthanado (talk) 14:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, with an approximate date, according to MOS, one would add "c." before the date. I'd probably be inclined to suggest at the talk page going with the most reliably referenced with a footnote reporting on the discrepancy and directing to references that provide other dates. Or you might go with the most likely in the date range, possibly with a "but see" footnote" and report the discrepancy, with proper notes, in the biography section, with a lead along the lines of "ZaBach's year of birth have been variously reported as...." In your position, I'd probably propose one of those at the talk page. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Style guidelines: lists

Wikipedia:Lists#Title_of_list

It says As a matter of style, list items should start with a capital letter. They should not have a punctuation mark such as a period, a comma or a semi-colon at the end, except if a list item is one or more full sentences, in which case there is a period at the end.

What about if I want to say, for example:

Simple things that people can do to reduce their environmental impact include:

• using energy-efficient light bulbs and switching off lights when they are not required
• using lids on cooking pans to reduce the heat-input required for cooking and not ferociously boil when simmering will achieve the same effect

According to the rule state above, it should read.

Simple things that people can do to reduce their environmental impact include:

• Using energy-efficient light bulbs and switching off lights when they are not required
• Using lids on cooking pans to reduce the heat-input required for cooking and not ferociously boil when simmering will achieve the same effect

but this a problem because each bullet point starts mid-sentence.

Also, where it says that a period at the end is only permitted at the end of a bullet pointed sentence if there is more than one sentence to that bullet point, wont this look inconsistent in contrast to bullet points with only one sentence?

• Blah blah blah blah
• Blah blah blah blah
• Blah blah blah blah. Blah blah blah blah.
• Blah blah blah blah

--Seans Potato Business 16:07, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. (Almost) everything is contextual. If you feel certain that the article on which you're working would benefit from deviations from standard style, you may wish to implement those deviations, so long as you are prepared to explain your deviation (and perhaps even do so proactively, on the talk page of the article). If the article is actively edited, you might wish to discuss it before implementation on the talk page. If the article is not actively edited, but you aren't particularly bold in deviating from norm (I'm not), you might wish to seek consensus for your idea at a relevant wikiproject or the talk page of a relevant guideline. (On the latter page, you may even wish to raise the question of whether consensus exists to alter the styleguide to account for such deviations.) Good luck, and happy editing. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

citing sources

where can i find the copyright date —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.190.233.236 (talk) 16:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Is it a websource? If so, they don't usually have one. Rt. 16:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

If it's Wikipedia you want to cite in another work then see Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Details of currencies

I want details of denominations of currencies of all the countries in the world. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.71.87 (talk) 16:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

There's a page at Currencies. But to see what country uses what, see List of currencies. Please remember though that this desk is for using Wikipedia. Rt. 17:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Go to the the reference desk or do what Rudget said. Just out of interest, why do you want details of every denomination of every currency in the world? Jake the Editor Man _(talk) 22:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Why was my article deleted?

I find using Wikipedia bewildering. I simply want to post an article. I know absolutely noting about codes. I signed up and logged in then I created the following page: Nouveau nous (Nous from the Greek meaning mind, thought or soul) or new mind refers to persons who recently acquired a taste for intellectual or philosophical thought and discussion. The nouveau nous often engage in intellectual one-upsmenship, pedantic discussion, misuse of concepts, and philosophical “name dropping.” Like the Nouveau riche (see Wikipedia entry), the nouveau nous lack the intellectual experience to properly utilize ideas, philosophical concepts and texts which have been newly acquired. Often they are the first in their family to go to college, or at least the first in their family to focus on abstract ideas. They often appear to be intellectually insecure; hence, they make special efforts to make up for this by excessive or incorrect philosophical dialectic. Without a long familial history of experience with philosophical or intellectual abstractions, they often conspicuously utilize abstract ideas, and avail themselves of abstruse quotes, taken out of context.

It was deleted with the explaination that it did not show itself to be important. I think the term is very useful and clever. Anyway, I was unable to contact the person who deleted it. How can I simply add this page? Perhaps Wikipedia is too complicated for a non-geek like me. please advise. -Bullwinkle19 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bullwinkle19 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Is this a term already in use? If so, did you provide references to uses of this term in reputable sources? Wikipedia is not a venue for original research, nor for neologisms. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

edit conflict Hi. With regards to the article, there are two significant obstacles to overcome. First, you will have to create an article that is more than just a dictionary definition in order for Wikipedia to host it; Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Wiktionary, on the other hand, is, and it may be very interested in an article on the term. The second obstacle is that Wikipedia has a policy against articles on neologisms. Can you demonstrate through reliable secondary sourcing that this term is in widespread usage? If you can demonstrate widespread usage of the term and can write an article that is more than simply a definition of the term, then it may be appropriate for Wikipedia. Otherwise, even if the page is not speedily deleted, it is likely to be brought up for deletion through another process.

Onto your other note: when you check the log of a deleted article, which you can find when you enter the title of the article (for example, here's one that I deleted: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Suresh_vaithianathan&action=edit), you see the name of the deleting administrator, followed immediately by a "talk" link. If you press that link, it will take you to the administrator's personal talk page, where you can ask your questions. (Please remember to sign all notes on talk pages or boards--but not articles--by typing four tildes (~~~~). This will input your name & a time stamp, which is helpful to other editors communicating with you.)

As a final point, if after reading the speedy deletion policies, you feel that the deletion of an article was done outside of policy, you may choose to ask the administrator to review his or her decision. If he or she disagrees with you, you can invite wider community review of the choice at the deletion review board. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Also see: Wikipedia:Why was my article deleted? Wikipedia is complicated, but not more complicated than the real world we must all deal with every day. The difference is that in the real world, we have our social upbringing to help us navigate the intricate system of do's and don'ts we must follow to stay out of trouble. In contrast, Wikipedia is unlike everything which existed before, so our past experience causes almost everyone who is new to Wikipedia to form some misconceptions about it. It's remarkable that many humans seem to vastly overestimate their expertise when forging into new fields they initially know nothing about. In the early days of Arctic exploration, for example, this led to many fatalities among explorers, as they assumed they knew how to survive in the hostile environment. Fortunately on Wikipedia, we don't have to pay for our mistakes with our lives, but the key to survival is the same as it was for the Arctic: learn from the people already there. After enough Arctic explorers died to demonstrate the value of intellectual humility, the later ones began asking the Inuit how they had managed to live in the Arctic for thousands of years, instead of dismissing them as primitive savages. It turns out the Inuit had a whole array of clever technological innovations to keep themselves alive and relatively comfortable in the harshest environment humans had yet inhabited. Similarly, Wikipedians have come up with an array of innovations to facilitate collaborative editing on the largest scale ever done, i.e. to keep ourselves "alive" in the harsh online environment, and the way to learn about these innovations is to Read The Friendly Manuals. Wikipedia is designed for people who can self-educate by reading manuals and following instructions. Everyone else is likely to have a difficult time participating here. --Teratornis (talk) 18:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Alerting when article contents is changed

How can I track a particular page so that I get an alert when it is updated - i.e. each time the page is saved? Does Wiki either have such a feature or is there some recommended external page content tracking software/webservice?134.24.147.144 (talk) 18:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. I'm not sure if there are external trackers to let you know each time a page is saved, but one of the benefits of registering an account is that you will have access to a "watchlist" which allows you to see the most recent change to an article. This does require you to log in and view your watchlist on occasion, but perhaps this will help? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 18:45, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The basic idea of a watchlist is that when you're logged in, an extra watch tab appears at the top of each page. If you click that tab, it'll add the page to your watchlist, which lists all changes to pages on your watchlist. When you're logged in, there's a link to your watchlist in the corner of each page as well. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 18:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Question about uploading photos

I own & operate a website devoted to autographs, primarily political. I have many, thousands, of signed photos of various politicians and use your website for information for the various listings. I have noticed that you do not have photos of many of the older politicians and would like to contribute the photos I have. Almost all of these photos have come diretly from the various politicians offices themselves as promos over various years. I do not want to violate any copywright laws but believe I can make a signifigant contribution with these images. Can someone advise me if it's ok to upload these to Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vidalhoward (talk • contribs) 19:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

See WP:FUC (perhaps not the best shortcut abbreviation, but oh well). You can also search the Help desk archive for "fair use" to read previous answers to questions like this. --Teratornis (talk) 20:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia editing software

Does there exist, akin to an HTML editor, software to make editing easier through the use of colour-coded tags and hiding/showing of inline citations etc? ----Seans Potato Business 19:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

See WP:EIW#Tools for what's available. --Teratornis (talk) 20:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia API

Is there an API for Wikipedia? If not, is there a project to create one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.225.91.110 (talk) 20:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

See the entries under WP:EIW#Query. --Teratornis (talk) 20:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Accounts across language sites

Does my account in English transfer to the Wikipedia sites for other languages? Insert name here (talk) 20:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately no it doesn't. I am part of the Simple English Wiki and I have accounts on German Wiki and Meta-Wiki, but the same account isn't on all of them. You can register on to each wiki if you want and then add something like [en:User:Tinkleheimer] to that page. That will link to my Userpage on the English Wiki. I hope you understand :). Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 20:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

For background on this issue, and on the work being done to make it so that you can use a single login on all Wikimedia sites, see m:SUL. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 21:20, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Editors falsely claiming to be "experts." What's the policy?

I've come across this twice now. First, there was a sockpuppet whose main account had been saying things like, "I have a Ph. D in X. You have no idea how many academic awards I have for X." On the other hand, I've come across another user who has some pretty big credentials on his userbox. While he hasn't invoked his credentials in our discussion, I am skeptical based on some pretty silly edits of his.

What's the Wikipedia policy on user credentials? Should they be ignored or not? And should users be blocked for falsifying them? Wikipedia has no way to verify credentials. Therefore, even though WP:Ignore all credentials was rejected as a policy, it seems to be implied by WP:Verifiability. I plan to write an essay on this issue. Zenwhat (talk) 23:01, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The policy on Wikipedia is that just about anyone can edit it. Therefore it's hard to understand what difference credentials could make. Mentioning one's credentials will probably not, for example, stop many vandals from being bold. A handful of users might be having a discussion on a talk page, thinking they are settling some issue, but anyone else could come along later and clobber everything. --Teratornis (talk) 23:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I've been doing some reading. Mentioning one's credentials can make a difference on Wikipedia, as shown by the Essjay controversy. It doesn't seem clear to me, then, how the Wikipedia community could reject both Credentifial verification and WP:Ignore all credentials. It's such a contentious issue (not to mention it's used by vandals) that it certainly deserves to have some kind of guideline, don't you think? Most people that opposed both of those proposals before seemed to believe Wikipedia needed some kind of guideline. Zenwhat (talk) 23:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The editor doesn't matter. The references matter. If you have a degree in X that may qualify you for having more books and references available to you on that subject, but other than that it's null. - Carbon ^[Nyan?] 23:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia has many contradictions, as one would expect from any group of 47,333,393 people. --Teratornis (talk) 18:43, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Carbon, if what you said were true, then WP:IAC should've been accepted. Also, Teratornis, it's true there may be contradictions. That's the reason for Template:Contradict. But good editors should remove such contradictions, and contradictions in Wikipedia policy seem particularly problematic. If WP:IAC and Credentifial verification were both rejected, that seems to imply that the Wikipedia policy is: "Editors are free to choose whether to consider credentials in their judgments." Right? If so, why isn't there a policy page on this? I started a discussion on this at the Village Pump. [1] Zenwhat (talk) 20:41, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Category question

In Category: Medical equipment, you will find an interesting item: User:Owain.davies/Defibrillation. This appears to be a userfied version of Defibrillation, which is also listed. I haven't the foggiest notion as to whether WP:BOLD includes messing with whether the list-item lives in article space or user space, esp since the history of the non-user-space article seems to imply some sort of edit conflict involving that user...not wanting to step on toes, I'm bringing it here. (Also, since I couldn't get the link to work, how does one link to a category? I tried putting "Category:Medical_equipment" into double square-brackets, like any other wikilink, but it just gave me a blank, thusly: "In, you will find..."--obviously not what I was trying to convey.) Gladys J Cortez 23:18, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

What you want to do here is link to the category. You probably should consult User:Owain.davies first (to be bold! but courteous as they may not appreciate edits to their userspace). To link to a category, insert a colon before the category name, so it looks like [[:Category:Medical equipment]]. This returns Category:Medical equipment. (The same works with images {Image:Example.svg} and templates {Template:Db} as well.) NF24^{(radio me!)} 23:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

1. Thanks for the category tutorial. I'll get all this straight eventually! :) 2. Re: contacting the user--since it's the CATEGORY I want to change, and not the article in his userspace (except to delist it from the category), should I still contact him? He's more than welcome to his article; I just think it's confusing to have 2 versions of Defibrillator in the list. Gladys J Cortez 00:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC) (Oh, and NF24? GREAT username. Go JG!)

I have often boldly commented out categories for mainspace articles in userspace, with an edit summary explaining it. Nobody has complained about this. Usually I also leave a note in the comment explaining it. See for example [2] where I also commented out a template which added a category. Wikipedia:User page#What may I not have on my user page? says to not add categories intended for articles to userspace. By the way, [[Template:Db]] without an initial : only gives a link to Template:Db. A common way to display the template syntax while only linking is {{tl|Db}} which produces {{Db}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:18, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Table column widths

I have just created the article Combination puzzles. It contains a number of tables where the second column is labelled 'Data'. In every case I have used;
! width="250px"|Data
to specify 250 pixel column width. However, the column is not the same width in every table. I have a particular problem with this one, where the second column text has been crushed. Deleting, or partially deleting the third column text on the first line seems to fix that particular table. I am completely baffled - help!

Using IE6. Spinningspark (talk) 23:25, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

It looks fine in Firefox 2.0.0.11. That would indicate a problem with IE6. Upgrade to IE7 or Firefox if possible and everything should render correctly. NF24^{(radio me!)} 23:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Looks good in IE7 also. Malinaccier (talk) 23:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I was afraid that was going to be the answer. Spinningspark (talk) 00:34, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

It should be either width="250" (without "px") or style="width:250px;". Both should work in all modern browsers, though the former may work better in very old ones. I've fixed the article to use it. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 13:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)