Help desk
< September 6	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 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.

September 10[edit]

Why one page is considered advertising and another is not.[edit]

I am trying to figure out why a page for Heaven's Best Carpet Cleaning was considered advertising when the pages below weren't. The page just explained how the company started, the founder, and I don't even think it mentioned the services offered. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxi_Fresh_Carpet_Cleaning http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Steemer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chem-Dry

September 7[edit]

Conflict with Admin[edit]

Resolved

– Using User talk pages to discuss more..Moxy (talk) 02:21, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I realize that I had broken some copyright laws due to misunderstanding but I work on fixing the information everyday but an admin uses his powers to put the whole previous page back again by including a warning which he can also use against me later. It is to be Noted that the pages contain information about my people who are still largely living in poverty and largely kept illiterate. Therefore, it is easy for long-term existing administrators or coordinators to win the conflict. The previous pages about my people that I edited contained 90% incorrect and false information. Please help me in this issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BalochMedia (talk • contribs) 23:17, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hello there...just so you know the Admin involved is only following guidelines set forth by the community. As for helping it would be best to bring this up on the articles talk page (here). When there would be best to simply show what you believe is wrong ..then show what you think the changes should be ..with a references ....Like

"The total population of ethnic Baloch people is estimated to be around 9 million worldwide"

to..

"The total population of ethnic Baloch people is estimated to be around 17 to 19 million worldwide" Baloch people and Balochistan

pls read Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Cite_sources and Wikipedia:References for more info on referencing...Moxy (talk) 00:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please review my article again[edit]

Could you please review my article again. It´s on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Gogogic

I have added the sources requested.

Many thanks, Jon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonheidar (talk • contribs) 18:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia now incompatible with Firefox.[edit]

Dear Wikipedia people. Whet did you do to your page? In the past my Firefox and Wikipedia never had a problem. Nowadays you seem to run so much script that my Firefox browser always stalls. Please make your scrpt more simple so that my firefos doesnt always hang. I dont always want to use Internet Exploder to access your page.

Claudine ^{[details removed]} —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.12.227 (talk) 01:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest updating your browser to the newest released version of Firefox. I have not noticed any problems using the current release on a Macintosh. Mr. R00t ^Talk 01:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

Please do not include contact details in your questions. We are unable to provide answers by any off-wiki medium and this page is highly visible across the internet. The details have been removed, but if you want them to be permanently removed from the page history, please email this address.

I am using the latest version of Firefox, 3.6.8, without any problems. What version of Firefox are you using, and on what page(s) of Wikipedia does Firefox hang for you? --Mysdaao ^talk 01:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note i am also a user of FireFox (3.6.8,)..I have been using IE for a week or so because of the same problem...Have been here on wiki for 5 years first time this is a problem for me to. there is long hang times and protocol errors for the past 2 weeks. Moxy (talk) 02:24, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I use Firefox 3.6.8 on Windows Vista without problems. Maybe there is a conflict with an extension or something in your account. Does it help to log out? I know the OP was not logged in when the post was made. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hi[edit]

Please can you write the list of the members of Pro lifedemocrats in the house and senate.

37 pro-life members of the caucus.Who are they ?

The two lists will NOT be identical, but you may want to see Blue Dog Coalition. --Jayron32 05:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

merging cells in a table[edit]

I can't figure out how to make a particular table. Starting with this table:

cell 1	cell 2
cell 3	cell 4
cell 5	cell 6

Then, I want to merge cells 1 and 3, and cells 4 and 6, so you end up with cell 1 and cell 4 taking up 2 rows and cell 2 and cell 5 taking up 1 row.

I would expect this code to work:

{|class="wikitable"
|-
|rowspan="2"|cell 1 
|cell 2
|-
|rowspan="2"|cell 4
|-
|cell 5
|}

but it doesn't. Can someone help? Thanks. Strange Quirk (talk) 02:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Needs line padding[edit]

These weird tables usually don't work without an empty cell at the end of each row. Take out the empty cells and it all breaks.

cell 1/3	cell 2
cell 1/3	cell 4/6
cell 5	cell 4/6

{|class="wikitable"
|-
| rowspan="2"| cell 1/3
| cell 2
| &nbsp;
|-
| rowspan="2"| cell 4/6
| &nbsp;
|-
| cell 5 
| &nbsp;
|}

DMahalko (talk) 04:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, thats pretty weird. Is there a way to make those extra cells invisible or something along those lines? The table looks weird with that extra space. Strange Quirk (talk) 05:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The technical problem is that row/column sizes are determined automatically by the sizes of their contents. In the original approach, there was nothing in "just row 2", so "height=0" is sufficient to hold it. The key with the dummy-column is that there is a cell in row 2, so the layout knows there actually needs to be a non-null/visible row there. Another solution is to use explicit row-heights to override the automatic "no row 2 space needed":

cell 1/3	cell 2
	cell 4/6
cell 5

{|class="wikitable"
|-style="height: 2em;"
|rowspan="2" |cell 1/3
|cell 2
|-style="height: 2em;"
|rowspan="2"|cell 4/6
|-style="height: 2em;"
|cell 5
|}

Crazy, eh? DMacks (talk) 06:18, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Labeling ISP ownership of not-logged-in address pools?[edit]

Is there any sort of desire to label not-logged-in talk pages to show what ISP owns the address pool? I know shared-proxy addresses get labeled.

I am using WildBlue today and reading wikipedia while not logged in, and it says I have new messages.. odd. Oh, it appears this address has been used to make edits by other WildBlue customers. Would it be useful to identify this address as a shared block from WildBlue?

User talk:67.54.176.52

Is this a worthwhile template?

Template:Wildblue ISP

Oh hey, that's only 32,768 address pool pages to label. Um, I'm not doing that by hand, so I guess a bot would have to do them all. I am not a bot programmer so I don't know how to proceed, or if this effort would be considered useful by others. DMahalko (talk) 04:22, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not. There is Template:Whois and others of that family, however we do not generally proactively label IPs talk pages, even among active IPs. These labels are generally only used to tag problematic IP addresses for easy reference. --Jayron32 05:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Larkin 25 vandalism by DGG and Steve Quinn[edit]

I am having a problem with vandalism of the Larkin 25 article by Steve Quinn and DGG. They are acting in a high-handed and patronising fashion adding tags and disruptive edits to an article that has been through previous resolution processes and found to be fine. User Steve Quinn is adding gibberish about unreadable sentences and the pair are removing refences and making false claims about it being a 'fan site'. This is rubbish, it is neutral in tone and there is no 'fan' material. How do I report their concerted vandalism and get them blocked from this article?LarkinToad2010 (talk) 06:56, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As you have been told several times before, if you have an issue with the way other editors behave towards you, go to WP:ANI, not here. Go ahead, report respected editors like DGG and Steve Quinn as vandals to ANI and see how fast you'll find yourself blocked. But better would be to take a deep breath and sit back. Look at your talk page, look at all your interactions with other editors here. Almost all those interactions are antagonistic, with you accusing all these people of being unhelpful at best and of being vandals at worst. Perhaps you should start thinking about why this is so. --Crusio (talk) 07:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Auto numbering of figures[edit]

Are there any templates for use in auto-numbering figures/images? (I see how this can be done for equations: Template:NumBlk) Thanks! David Hollman (Talk) 07:47, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That template does not appear to be "auto-numbering" in the sense of generating automatically sequential values (instead, the explicit number-string is passed). The key feature of {{NumBlk}} is that it puts the number at the right margin, which requires some special formatting games. Putting specific text in an image-caption doesn't seem to need any special magic. See WP:PICTURE for the syntax. DMacks (talk) 07:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, since I wasn't actually looking for numbered equations I just didn't read it carefully. But in any case, auto-numbering would still be useful (probably for equations too) if possible... thanks. David Hollman (Talk) 09:23, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think such a template is possible with the current software and installed extensions. It would for example be possible with mw:Extension:VariablesExtension but bugzilla:7865 says it will not be installed. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:26, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks all for your responses. David Hollman (Talk) 10:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

change of the auther's name[edit]

I had uploaded a photo of the Shershah's rupee under the Indian rupee section. Now the authors name is seen changed to 'Saithilace'.The coin is in my collection and I have uploaded its picture. Hence my name may be substituted for that wrong name.I have uploaded other pictures also like coins of Balban,Ahasan Shah of Madura etc. Thank you. Dr.N.Sreedhar —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.64.180.192 (talk) 09:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is the name of the image and the account used to upload it? Did you add it to Indian rupee? PrimeHunter (talk) 10:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is it File:Sher_shah's_rupee.jpg? If so, User:Rodhullandemu deleted it from Wikipedia at 20:24 on 22 August 2010, with the rationale F8: Media file available on Commons, and the image now appearing in Wikipedia articles is the Commons version, Commons:File:Sher_shah's_rupee.jpg. That image's file history indicates that it was uploaded there at 05:49 on 6 June 2010 by User:Saithilace, and the history suggests that s/he was also the original uploader, on 10/11/2006. I can't see the history of the deleted Wikipedia image, so I can't confirm whether it's the same one the OP uploaded, and whether it's also the one moved to Commons in June. However, Saithilace has no edit history on Commons or Wikipedia going back further than a couple of months, so is unlikely to be the original uploader or author. It's more likely that s/he has incorrectly claimed authorship when uploading the image to Commons, and it is probably the OP's original image. I'm not sure how to go about reattributing authorship, other than to get the image deleted for copyright problems and for the OP then to re-upload a correctly attributed version. PrimeHunter, you're an admin - can you help? Ka renjc 11:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm an admin at the English Wikipedia but not at Commons and don't know their procedures. commons:File:Sher shah's rupee.jpg is the same image User:Drnsreedhar uploaded to the English Wikipedia. It was moved to Commons (so it can be used by other wikis) by User:Saithilace who copied the content of the English Wikipedia description page. The description by Drnsreedhar said "image from personal collection". Unfortunately the Commons version does not mention Drnsreedhar and makes it sound like "personal collection" refers to Saithilace. Is there a Commons editor who can help? Otherwise you can post to Commons:Help desk with a link to this section. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted there; thanks, PrimeHunter. Ka renjc 13:23, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There should be no need for any Commons admin action here, or a re-upload. Simply edit the image description page on Commons to reflect the correct authorship. An en:wikipedia admin will have to view the original file to import the information correctly. Also admonish User:Saithilace to be more careful when transferring images to Commons (perhaps using CommonsHelper would make it easier). Powers ^T 14:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This should, I hope, be fixed now. Please do let me know if it isn't. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:26, 7 September 2010 (UTC) ~~P.S. Since the next image by Dr. S that I looked at had the wrong license tag, there's still more to do here. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)~~[reply]

Vandalism[edit]

Fort William College is being vandalised by a new user - Amritapritam. This needs to be handled by an administrator. Please look into it. - Chandan Guha (talk) 09:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for admin intervention and the edits may be in good faith by a new user who doesn't know wiki formatting. Dismas has posted to User talk:Amritapritam. You can do the same if it continues but be careful about vandalism accusations. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, a cursory glance at the edits show that the user is deliberately trying to distort the page. Someone who does not know does not go about deleting categories. Thanks all the same for the note on the new users talk page. I will be happy if it works. - Chandan Guha (talk) 11:25, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is not vandalism - it's a content dispute with elements of WP:NPOV. User:Amritapritam appears to be attempting a complete rewrite; User:Chandan Guha seems to dislike the new version and regard it as biased. The first step is not to make accusations of vandalism at the Help desk, but to attempt to reach consensus over the proposed changes. Contact the other editor concerned, and take your discussions to the article's talk page. Ka renjc 12:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Contributions/Amritapritam shows the user has never edited before, and nobody had posted to User talk:Amritapritam when you came here. Many new users don't know how categories work. See Wikipedia:Assume good faith. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Signature removal[edit]

I sometimes do a bit of antivandalism fixing on talk pages. One thing I have noticed is a few IP editors seem to have some aversion to signbot adding signatures to their posts, and make efforts to revisit some talk pages and remove the signature. Should this be considered vandalism? Astronaut (talk) 11:17, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If they're removing their own IP address, I don't think so. We allow knowledgeable posters to opt out of auto-signing; they're just achieving the same result. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

search a phrase in particula portal[edit]

Dear Sir,

pls let me know how to search a prase or a word in a portal ? e.g. i want to search a word "evolution" in a portal on wikiped. named "HINDUISM" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.5.136 (talk) 11:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of searching, does the article Hindu views on evolution have the information you need? If it doesn't, the article may have links to the answers for which you are searching. TN X Man 11:44, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure you know what it means to search in a portal at Wikipedia. It means to search the pages starting with "Portal:Hinduism" like [1]. If you only want to search articles considered to belong to the portal then there is no way to do it. You can search articles containing both "evolution" and "Hinduism" by separating the words with a space in the search box like [2]. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:46, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect information continually posted about The Causeway Retreat[edit]

Dear Sirs

Despite editing the page on the Causeway Retreat ourselves, incorrect information continues to be posted about us by someone with malicious intent.

We are not under investigation by the Inland Revenue, we do not owe £4million pounds to them. This is entirely untrue.

Could you kindly tell me how we stop people putting this incorrect information about us onto your website?

Many thanks The Causeway Retreat —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.185.192 (talk) 12:00, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for posting here, rather than editing the page yourself. People with a conflict of interest are discouraged from editing on subjects with which they have a close connection, but incorrect, biased or poorly sourced information about individuals or organisations is not welcome on Wikipedia. There does seem to be a case for including the controversy about the retreat based on the two newspaper reports cited, since the material is potentially important to the subject. However, in my opinion the material in question violated WP:UNDUE, and I have rewritten the section to present a simpler summary of the two reports and their salient points. I have also removed the allegation about tax, which was not made in either report and has no other citation to substantiate it. I'm not sure the information was added maliciously - it might just have been over-zealousness - but I have added the page to my watchlist. I don't feel semi-protection is warranted at the moment, but if further uncited controversial material is added to the article, do not hesitate to ask for further assistance here. Ka renjc 12:44, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Teach Myself Smarts[edit]

<advertisement redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.21.213.40 (talk) 12:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, Wikipedia is not for advertising. Once your venture has expanded and has been written about in reliable, independent sources such as newspapers, someone will get round to writing about it here. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Providing information about new Master's in Human Behavior program[edit]

Can I provide a page that describes a new master's degree program that is not on your list? This is the Master's in Human Behavior (MHB) that is offered by USC. If so, it is not clear how it should be positioned in your list of master's degrees. Your extensive list are shown as "Master of XXXXX". and If one follows a strict alphabetical rule, it should go at the bottom of the list. However, many would look for it to be positioned on the basis of the name of the specialty area -- "Human Behavior." In your list of "masters degrees in North America" (which is not punctuated properly, because the first word should be possessive rather than pleural), I see that you have one entry -- 22 Master's Degrees in Administration (various) -- in the middle of the list, but I can't figure out the rule by which it was placed there.

Also, in your "List of master's degrees" you specify that there are "tagged degrees" in which the name of the specialty area is given. You provide a list of tagged bachelor's and doctoral degrees, but only have one master's degree listed -- Master of Science in Health Care Management. Not sure why this is the case.

I might note that the MHB® is also distinguished by having a trademark for the degree designation. As far as I know, this is the only degree program to be accorded trademarked status. I could include that information if it is appropriate to not only list the degree, but have it link to a page that describes the program. Egreeneatusc (talk) 12:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome! Before beginning this article I recommend that you read, at least, WP:N, WP:RS and (especially in this case) WP:COI and WP:SOAP. A good introduction for editors thinking about creating a first article is Wikipedia:Your first article. To save yourself some headaches, you might also want to check out Wikipedia:Username policy. Yours, P.Oxy.2354 (talk) 12:56, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that we don't permit the use of ® and similar marks in encyclopedia articles. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now I'm confused about whether one can add a page that describes the MHB program. The comment above from Orangemike suggests that this can be done, and is not unwelcome. However, he has posted another comment under my username (unsure why there are two post locations) that says that it is inappropriate to write up a description of the program. Egreeneatusc (talk) 17:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is that a page can be added, provided it meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability (one of the links that P.Oxy. pointed you at): few individual courses do meet these criteria. P.Oxy was also suspecting that you have a connection with the course: if so, then you should not be the one to write the article. --ColinFine (talk) 19:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Egreene, sorry if I answered your first question (about an individual article) and overlooked your others (the lists). (Also sorry for basically pointing you toward policy discussions, but it's a tricky issue and one better approached once the practices of the community are understood by all involved.)

First, about "tagged degrees", you caught an edit that didn't really respect the format of the list in question, nor did it take into account the content of the main list where that program could already be found. I've fixed this. Thanks! The reason that the program didn't belong there appears to be that, at some point, the editor(s) involved in maintaining the list realized that a great many master's degrees have or, at least, advertise themselves as having some aspect of specialization, and so maintaining a separate list would be both pointless and onerous.

Now, as for listing this program of study on the general and North American lists, the same concerns apply to inclusion in these lists as do to the creation of a page. I believe, based upon the policies I pointed you toward in my first answer (WP:COI, WP:SOAP, WP:N, WP:RS), that you should pass on listing for now. The reasons:

If a topic has not satisfied notability guidelines enough to warrant an article, then it probably doesn't belong on a list. This program, no matter how unique it is in your field, does not appear to meet notability. The program does not inherit notability from USC or anyone involved with the program. (A trademark doesn't contribute to notability.) Notability is somewhat related to the availability of reliable sources without which an article couldn't be written. The program's website is not a reliable source and, unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a truly reliable source.

Beyond all this, these lists are for programs of study, not programs of study at a specific university or universities. If USC is the only school to offer this degree, then this fact alone appears, in my opinion, at least, to subtract from the notability of the program of study.

What ColinFine writes about your involvement with an article also applies to your listing this program of study: if the apparent conflict of interest is real (and any editor will suspect it to be so) then you should not list this either. It should also be noted that in such a case, linking to the program's website would amount to WP:SPAM.

You'll probably see items in these lists as well as whole articles that you feel do not belong if this program of study does not. As an editor, you can discuss these issues on the talk pages of any page (the discussion tab at the top) and make appropriate edits. I'll watch the lists, at least, for your comments, because conflicts of interest are likely to show up here and such lists really are vulnerable to violations of the spirit of WP:SOAP. I hope this helps. P.Oxy.2354 (talk) 00:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A big request[edit]

Hi, I have a big request so if somebody can help me I will be very grateful. I would like to be deleted something if somebody want to help me because I am totally upset. For start, I am for a long time in Wikipedia so I don't really need to somebody telling me that we are make a mistakes, I don't want that. I only want if somebody can delete View history of this file. I was there did a lot of stupid things but would not now to mention, so I would really be grateful if that would be removed. I have also one more request, that is if you could in my Upload log page to erase two files from that list. It was a File:Clash2010Soundtrack.jpg. It was the same file but it was sent twice so I would like to erase it completely from that list. Reason for deletion is that I have already sent that files under a different name and I do not want to be on list because it was a big mistake, and there is another reason but there is no need to be described here. Thank you in advance. - Corey.7.11.1992 (talk) 12:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot delete your history/upload log. Anyway, I see no "big mistake" here, just a bit of vandalism which you seem to have grown out of quickly enough. Astronaut (talk) 15:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find my user page[edit]

User name ck07.

When I search for my page, sometimes I find it (plus the talk page--which as of yeserday had 5 messages from others--sometimes not. Today not. I do notice that the search seems to redirect "ck07" to "Ck07." Besides that I don't have an idea what is happening. No help in FAQ. Ck07 (talk) 13:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.

I don't see any activity or deletions on your user or talk pages, other than the welcome I just left. You have made four edits since August 28. All user names begin with an upper case character, so lower case will redirect to upper. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 13:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you have not edited your userpage yet. If you go to the page, add some text, and click "save page", you will have officially created your userpage. TN X Man 14:01, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something is wrong here. I created a user page on/about 9/1/2010 and added one line of text to it. I also asked my students to leave messages on my talek pages as they created their accounts and five did. Yesterday 9/6/2010 I (and they) could find the page, but today neither I nor they can find it. This link http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ck07 successfully connects to the page, but searching "ck07" does not. Ck07 (talk) 16:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, there is the problem. The page you just provided a link to is on the Wikimedia Outreach Wiki. It is not the same as Wikipedia. You'll have to create the userpage User:Ck07 on Wikipedia if you want to be able to find it through a search here. P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 17:32, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. The talk page you link to is on the Wikimedia Outreach Wiki at http://outreach.wikimedia.org, but right now you're logged into the English Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org; same parent organization, but a different website. With Universal Login, an account on the English Wikipedia is automatically created for you when you visit this site, but it is a completely different site, with different user and talk pages. Just like you would have a different user and user talk page if you visited the Spanish Wikipedia. You will always see the correct page if you make sure to go to http://outreach.wikimedia.org first. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess P.D. Cook types faster than I do. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:37, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but I think your answer is a bit more helpful. P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 17:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Policy on name changes?[edit]

What is the policy on links where the entity had a different name when a conference occured than when it does today. For example: If there was a table of the meetings of the US Olympic Committee and the 1964 meeting was at East Hawaii State Teacher's College and today that school is East Hawaii University, should the link be (presuming a redirect exists)[[East Hawaii State Teacher's College]], [[East Hawaii University|East Hawaii State Teacher's College]] or simply [[East Hawaii University]]? Naraht (talk) 13:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The middle one, with the pipelink; this creates a format which respects the historical name without linking to a redirect or (worse yet) redlinking when the subject does have a valid article. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The signature textbox is too short to make a complex custom signature.[edit]

I am trying to customize my signature in the special preferences area, but the coding area for placing wiki markup signatures contains too few characters for me to possibly make my preferred signature. As a result, I have to make a fake signature and follow it with only a time stamp. So the thing is, can you make it so the custom signature textbox can have up to 1000 or 2000 characters, or maybe even unlimited characters? I would thank you dearly. Also, please note that the superscript "The Game" leads to my talk page, for future reference. Hyperhippy92 ^{The Game} 14:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please note there is a reason for this. Per WP:CUSTOMSIG, excessive customization takes up a lot of room in the edit window. For example, your current signature takes up four lines already. Adding more to it would make it hard to follow along when editing discussions. TN X Man 15:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Four-lines! Mine only takes up, erm, less than 1 :) --Senra (Talk) 16:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And I thought mine was annoying. It is barely more than 1 line long. -- kainaw ™ 16:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of length on my low-rez screen, I think we're doing you a favor. How much longer can you possibly go?! I still cannot fathom what can possibly be gained by having a signature that's longer than some articles and more colorful than primary school artwork. Please consider using the default signature or at least one that's less complex. Thank goodness we don't allow pictures, transclusion, or substitution! Xenon54 (talk) 19:46, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And would you please write lower case font color so your signature screams less in the edit window. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know my signature takes up many, many lines, but I tend to be anal/retentive about this stuff, and I want my signature crazy and colorful because it accents my personality. I'm not homosexual, much less bisexual, but I am autistic/aspergers, and I like colorful imaging. This is why I wanted the textbox bandwidth expanded. Hyperhippy92 ^{The Game} 02:18, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions[edit]

Is there a Wikipedia suggestion box anywhere? --Cheers, Mazeau (talk) 16:11, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Almost everywhere" actually. For suggestions about an article, every article has a talk-page (the "Discussion" tab above its title). For suggestions about other aspects of this site (layout, features, etc.) there are other specific places. Let us know what topic and hopefully someone will recognize where to post ideas about it. DMacks (talk) 16:19, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is also The Village Pump. You might wish to browse around there to see if others have suggested something along the lines of what you're thinking. If not, you could start a discussion about it. P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 17:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was just thinking that maybe Wikipedia can edit the name "speedy deletion" and all its variants. Since it refers to simply a seemingly undisputed decision, and not any sense of urgency, that this use of the word "speedy" is misleading. Cheers, Mazeau (talk) 14:47, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually is speedy (in the urgency sense)...usually within minutes of being tagged and it can be disputed/averted (by removal of the tag, or posting to WP:UNDEL after-the-fact). The "speedy deletion" is a rapid deletion process as opposed to the week-long PROD or AFD ways. That's essentially the executive summary of the intro to WP:SPEEDY, the policy/process description of speedy-deletion. The talk-page for that article or the parent WP:Deletion policy one seem like good places to discuss the name of it. DMacks (talk) 16:50, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of unwanted images/mistakes[edit]

How do I remove images uploaded which are in error?

I've just spent a somewhat frustrating time trying to get to grips with uploading images and sizing them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjeans (talk • contribs) 17:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can mark them with {{db-g7}} at the top of the page, which will flag them for an admin to delete. Or, you can list them here and I can delete them for you. TN X Man 17:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

sdorting out unwanted image uploads and problems[edit]

Thank you for your response about deletion and offer to resolve.

Marking them as you indicate at the top of the page means nothing to me at this time. I am drowning in information from help files and am brain dead!

The mess I have got into relates to a logo (which I have permission from the owner to use) and which I tried to upload. This has resulted into several versions apparently and some were not uploaded using the correct form apparently.

Thus am anxious that only one version exists and this is the version with the correct authority. The file name is gwtlogo.gif

Would be grateful if you could resolve and reassure me that this is now all valid and the logo I have put on the Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust page will not disappear.

I have not been able to get the coding instructions to reduce sizing from the default to work, and just gave up after a long time struggling. Part of my problem resulted from my pre-prepartion of the file, only to find the system took it up in size again and thus it became blurry.

I am a relatively experienced html coder and deal with image sizing all the time using the traditional tags. Thus now feel like an idiot! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjeans (talk • contribs) 18:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted one of the images you've uploaded, per your request here. I've also tagged File:Gwtlogo.gif with what is (I hope) the correct information. However, while the image issue is sorted, your article Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust still needs a lot of work. As it stands, it appears to be an advertisement for the group. I would read our guide to writing your first article for more assistance. TN X Man 18:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding figure use[edit]

I am a graduate student currently writing my doctoral thesis. I wanted to include a figure from your website ("Diagram of nucleosome assembly" from the Nucleosome Assembly In Vitro Section) and was looking to get permission to use it in my written document. I would of course site the figure. Please let me know if I have permission to use this figure and if so, if you have a preference for the way it is sited. Thanks! Tamara6580 (talk) 19:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to re-use material from Wikipedia, provided it is cited correctly. The proper way to cite Wikipedia is outlined here. To re-use images, you'll need to peruse this guide at Wikimedia Commons. TN X Man 19:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can click an image to get to an image page like File:Nucleosome structure.png. If it says "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below" then click on "description page there" to get to commons:File:Nucleosome structure.png. It appears the image is originally by Zephyris so see User:Zephyris. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Zephyris/Archive 2 shows you are not the first to be interested in this image. Note that new posts to Zephyris should be made at User talk:Zephyris or by email. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

I am trying to validate References however the wiki regulation says "A reference must be accurate, i.e. it must prove the statement in the text" however what if the reference in on National Television and on the Official "STATION" website? Does this still count towards a Accurate Reference?

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.144.229.2 (talk) 21:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it would be considered acceptable, however it must be ref'd as a website and not a video. A p3rson ‽ 22:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your post by typing four tildes (~~~~) or clicking the signature button above the edit box which looks like this:

. Do NOT sign in articles.

I'm not sure what you mean by "validate References". Are you trying to add a new reference or to check an existing reference made by somebody else? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki language for deletion?[edit]

How do you nominate a Wiki language for deletion? Battleaxe9872 ^Talk 22:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean. Would you like to nominate an article for deletion? A category or template? Or some other section? TN X Man 22:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or perhaps an entire project. Winston365 (talk) 22:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DAF 600[edit]

On the daf 600 page the specification panel says the engine is an inline 2 it is actually a FLAT TWIN. I have spent the last hour trying to log/in or create an account and I am unable to do either. I am also unable to make any changes to the page. I have to stop wasting time on this and now dont care whether the page is changed or not --121.72.139.69 (talk) 22:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see you figured out how to edit the infobox without logging in.[3] If it's a Flat-twin engine then you can write [[Flat-twin engine|Flat twin]] to create a piped link to the article like this: Flat twin. What happens when you try to create an account? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flat twin redirects to Flat-twin engine so in this case it also works to simply write [[Flat twin]]. Note that Wikipedia doesn't capitalize all words when it wouldn't normally be done in running English text. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:53, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you cannot register for an account/login, one of 2 things may be happening:

Your browser may have cookies disabled. Make sure in your browser preferences under security/privacy that cookies are allowed from en.wikipedia.org.

Your IP may have been autoblocked, and account creation was turned on. In this case, you will need to contact an administrator to lift the block, or place the {{template:unblock}} template on your talk page (see Special:Mytalk)