Help desk
< August 1	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 3 >

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.

August 2

Question about viewing deleted article

Hi,

I'm planning on creating a requested company article for 7digital, and see that previously there was one but it was deleted (no sources and no notability or something, won't be a problem this time around). Anyways, I was curious to take a look at the previous version of the article to see if there is anything useful I could incorporate. Is that possible and if so, how do I do it? Cheers! Richc80 01:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has to be retrieved by an administrator. Lucky for you, I am an administrator and I will email you a copy of the last version. Make sure it meets the notability guideline before recreating it though. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 01:37, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mr.Z-man for the quick response on this. Shame the previous article turned out to be only one sentence! No wonder it was deleted. Cheers again! Richc80 01:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikivietlit

Hi,

I am writing to request review of the deletion of two articles, "Wikivietlit" and "Linh Dinh".

I have already brought the matter up with the administrator involved and not received a reply. My letter to him is copied below my signature. I am requesting your objective review in a case that I see as compromised by subjectivity.

The administrator <Blnguyen> deleted "Wikivietlit" as a speedy deletion, saying that that it was "not notable, with about 100 articles."

I contest the fact of this - Wikivietlit had 165 articles when the Wikipedia article about it was deleted. Moreover, Wikipedia itself attests to the notability of Wikivietlit, habitually referencing us in its own articles on Vietnamese authors.

I contest the procedure of this speedy deletion. Since we have already successfully contested a speedy deletion - by showing a notice of Wikivietlit in a Vietnamese-language literary site from Australia - Wikipedia's rules require that another deletion recommendation receive a hearing.

I also contest the objectivity of the Wikipedia administrator who made both speedy deletions, <Blnguyen>. He is the author of articles on Vietnamese topics, and a member of the Wikipedia Vietnamese topics group.

His irregular speedy deletion of the "Wikivietlit" article shows a personal interest that he confirmed after Linh Dinh, editor of Wikivietlit, complained about the speedy deletion. <Blnguyen> swiftly deleted Linh Dinh's article, with the appearance of retaliation, saying that the "Linh Dinh" article was "autobio" and "fails the professor test."

Linh Dinh is as worthy of a Wikipedia article as any author in the reference source. He is author of numerous books from respectable New York and scruffy avant-garde presses.

If the objection is that that Linh made some edits his own article, I will arrange for someone else to re-write it from the public sources Wikipedia relies on. If it is relevant that Linh teaches college, we will assemble his listings as an instructor in published university course catalogues.

I am requesting that the deletion of "Wikivietlit" and "Linh Dinh" articles in Wikipedia be reversed. If not, I request professional review of <Blnguyen> deletion proposals in these two cases, so that I may argue the cases on the objective facts according to Wikipedia rules.

In any case, I request that Wikipedia review <Blnguyen>'s decisions and consider barring him from administrative review of articles on Vietnamese literature.

Dan [Wikipedia username: vietnamlit]

Dan Duffy Editor, Viet Nam Literature Project Chair, Books & Authors: Viet Nam, Inc. 5600 Buck Quarter Road Hillsborough, NC 27278 USA tel (919) 383-7274 email <email address removed> URL www.vietnamlit.org

Hi BlNguyen,

I'm writing to ask your reasons for deleting Wikivietlit and Linh Dinh from Wikipedia.

The code I see in your comment for deleting Wikivietlit:

<02:01, 27 June 2007 Blnguyen (Talk | contribs) deleted "Wikivietlit" (a7, this site has about 100 articles, nn)>

refers to this policy:

a real person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. If controversial, or if there has been a previous deletion discussion that resulted in the article being kept, the article should be listed at Articles for deletion instead.>

Since we have previously contested a speedy deletion, and the article on Wikivietlit was kept, according to that rule you should have listed the article at Articles for Deletion, instead of using speedy deletion, right? You seem to have broken the rules in order to avoid public debate on a matter in which you have professional interest as an author on Vietnamese topics.

I can't reliably call up your reasons for deleting Linh Dinh. I found them once, and remember that the shorthand was "autobio; fails professor test". If the objection is that Linh writes about himself, that is easily remedied. I'll write one using references found in any public library.

If your objection is that that Linh doesn't teach at tertiary institutions, that's mistaken and irrelevant. He is a regular visiting lecturer at university writing programs, because of his achievements as a critic and author, easily found at Amazon or in any library catalogue.

Will you reverse your deletion decisions? If we continue to disagree, will you refer the matter to an administrator without an interest in Viet Nam?

Dan Duffy Editor, Viet Nam Literature Project —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vietnamlit (talk • contribs).

See WP:WEB for notability concerning why your page was deleted. After that, you can try WP:DRV, but considering a wiki with 4000+ pages is usually not notable, I doubt you will succeed --Longing.... 02:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)q[reply]

The "professor test" refers to Wikipedia:Notability (academics). Wikipedia:Notability (people) may also be of interest. PrimeHunter 02:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2 problems in re: a new artcle I've written -- 'disambiguation' and an 'unreferenced' flag.

I've just written an article on the American poet, Steve Benson -- it's at "Steve Benson (poet)". I have a couple of problems I'd like to resolve.

1. There is a disambiguation issue: the cartoonist Steve Benson is covered in an article and searching the name "Steve Benson" takes one to the article about him rather than to a page that might help the visitor decide *which* Steve Benson she is interested in - more simply, a person wanting to find information about the poet Steve Benson will have difficulty finding the article on him. What can be done to resolve this issue.

2. The article is flagged as "unreferenced." Benson is rather a well-known poet in the avant garde "Language poets" movement (which is well-covered by wikipedia -- a good thing!). The article I wrote on Benson does link to external sites which have detailed information about his books, digital audio of various of his performances, etc. His name is also mentioned in a number of other articles on wikipedia (i.e. about the Language poets as a group and where relevant in articles about colleagues and collaborators of Benson's). What can be done to resolve the "unreferenced" issue?

Many thanks for your attention to this problem.

Tom Mandel

1- I'll take care of this for you, in the future, see WP:DISAMBIG. 2- See WP:RS, WP:CITE, WP:CITET, and WP:OR --L--- 02:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your attention to and resolution of the ambiguity problem.

I see that the article is still flagged 'unreferenced.' As author, I would be happy to provide any information that would allow this flag to be removed. I'm sorry, but despite the help links you so kindly provided I do not exactly understand what action I can take to resolve this problem. There are references to the many books by the subject of the article; would e.g. an academic reference be any kind of improvement? And if so, why?

References do not refer to what the subject has written but to published sources that are cited in the article, thus showing where each piece of information in the article comes from. This is required because an encyclopedia does not publish new material but synthesizes (not copies) already published sources. Thus, ideally, each fact in an article is verified by a corresponding reference. The preferred method for doing this is with inline citations. Here's an example of a citation. Please see this in edit mode to see how it was placed:

Bertrand Russell was born on 18 May 1872 at Trellech, Monmouthshire, into an aristocratic family.^[1]

==Separate article section named "References"==

^ The Nobel Foundation (1950). Bertrand Russell: The Nobel Prize in Literature 1950. Retrieved on August 2, 2007.

If you look at the article we consider our best work, called featured articles, you'll see they all cite to numerous sources in this fashion. See, for example, Crab Nebula.--Fuhghettaboutit 05:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Understood -- so that in this sense, your article on the novel "The Holy" by Daniel Quinn should be tagged as 'unreferenced?' Is that correct? (I'm not suggesting that it *be* so tagged -- only seeking to comprehend the practice and how/when to use it)

Not quite but you're in the right ballpark. Articles can have a general references section, such as that article does. By simply listing references in a references section one is at least saying, "all the information in this article comes from these sources." But it is a much less transparent method of citation, and as we've developed out standards have changed such that articles cannot achieve, for example, good or featured status any longer using that method of citation.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Table of Contents help

For some reason, the ToC on Iowa Hawkeyes men's basketball will not collapse for me. Right now I am using the __NOTOC__ command so it will not show up but it's still puzzling me because the ToC works just fine on all the other pages that I have visited. Any help would be much appreciated. DanThaMan17 02:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you refer to this version. ToC doesn't collapse when I click "hide". It stays the same except the link changes to "show", and I get an error message from my browser, IE 7.0, saying there was an error on the page. I don't know the cause, but it works fine when I preview the page with the infobox removed. PrimeHunter 03:04, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

need to place a sockpuppet template for a sock confirmed by Checkuser--how do I do this?

Hi--I need to place a sockpuppet template for a sockpuppet I had confirmed by Checkuser--how do I do this?

thanks, PinkDahlia

See Wikipedia:Sock puppetry#Templates. PrimeHunter 03:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

moving an article from my sandbox to an article page.

I have just finished writing an article on my Sandbox, now I want to add it to an article on Wikipedia that does not yet have a page. How do I do this? Can I just copy and paste?Sanlaw33 02:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. --L--- 03:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or if your account is old enough to move pages, you can get some practice in by moving your sandbox to the article space, then editing the Sandbox to remove the redirect. Confusing Manifestation 05:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Buddhism

218.103.114.124 03:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)I want to know if a buddhist is too much on the subject of suffering.[reply]

Well, if you are asking about about Buddhism, you should check out the page about it. Otherwise, this page is for questions about using Wikipedia. You might try asking your question over at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities.--Max Talk (add) 05:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eric Fromm

I want to know the works by Eric Fromm on human value.

I believe you want our article on Erich Fromm. Next time, please ask at our Reference desk, this help desk is designed for questions about using Wikipedia. Thanks. Raven4x4x 04:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glitch?

While I'm still logged in, when I visit the main page, it says I have to log in even if I did. How should the problem be solved?--Hundred-Man 05:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you were not logged in, you shouldn't be getting a message telling you to log in to visit the main page. Are you sure you're not trying to edit the main page? The main page is fully protected, so only administrators can edit it. If you try to edit it, it might suggest that you try logging in even if you're already logged in as a way to bypass semi-protection, even though the article is fully protected (it's the same "error" message). --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 05:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The main page doesn't have an edit tab for non-admins. Lara ♥Love 06:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help with template

I'm working on a another Wiki unrelated to Wikipedia, and attempting to make a template for articles to be deleted. The majority of the template is going fine, but when I use the <includeonly> tags to put articles tagged with this template in a deletions category, I run into trouble. Articles tagged with the template do claim to be part of the category, but when checking the category's page no articles register as being in it. I have done an identical operation for a stub template and corresponding category, and this does work. As far as I can tell, the only difference is that the deletions category has two words in the title as opposed to one. Could someone give me some advice as to why this is happening and how to fix it please? --Niroht | Smoke signals 06:15, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you underscore the category title? Lara ♥Love 06:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, should I have? I did also try using a one-word category and the same thing appears to happen.--Niroht | Smoke signals 06:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, when directly placing the category link in the page to be deleted the page is included in the category. And now that it is included it works even with just the template. Strange. Oh well. It would appear that the problem is solved.--Niroht | Smoke signals 06:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How can I browse on the map

How can I browse on the world map --Niran 08:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~2 things, 1 sign you comments not the title, and two, what world map?Blacksmith2^talkEditor Review 09:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)~~[reply]

See World map and click the main image. Lara ♥Love 14:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

can u help me to find a job in hawaii?????

Hello wikipedia,MY NAME IS ELISABETH AND IM FROM GERMANY i try to find a job in hawaii,but i find nothing in the internet. do u have an idea how can i find some adresses or stuff to send my letter of motivation?

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a job search site.Blacksmith2^talkEditor Review 09:25, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

krishan patel

Krishan Patel is a very lucky boy who is born on the 16th of febuary 1996 he is about to start his acting debut in 2008 as a disney channel actor he will be in all sorts of shows such as cory in the house, the suite life of zack and cody and also many others like hannah montana he is even taking part in the x games which is the new name for the disney channel games he is going to be in the red team he is going to be the second youngest to be a star for disney channel after mosais arias who is rico in hannah montana.

Director of disney channel Mr samuels

Ok. ALTON .ıl 11:48, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My first impression was "So what?". Then I thought, perhaps you are proposing an article be written about this young actor. However, since he will not make his debut until next year, is he notable enough at this early stage in his career? Astronaut 12:39, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS. Please sign your posts with "~~~~" so we know who you are, and some punctuation would improve readability (eg. capitalization of the first letter of names, show titles etc.)

Somehow I seriously doubt that this was really written by the "Director of disney channel Mr samuels", whoever he might be. Corvus cornix 19:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Green and Red number

If I click on "Recent changes", some articles have a coloured (Red or Green) number next to them (with a negative and postive symbol next to them, respectively). What does this mean? I didn't know where to look in the faq. Thanks in advance. Troubleshooter 11:24, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It means the number of characters that have been added or removed from the previous total. Green for added, red for removed. AndrewJDTALK -- 11:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, friend :) Troubleshooter 13:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable inclusion

First off, I have no interest in the sport, so there's no conflict there, but when I go through AFC and come across (American) football players' proposals, I don't know what to do anymore. It seems that just being on an NFL team warrants an article, since all of these guys (you get the point) have articles, and all that's in the article is that they're on the team and they went to high school. I understand that there are major players that do deserve articles (Brett Favre), but it seems that since there are so many, the rationale of notability is thrown out the window when considering these articles for creation. What to do. I don't even really have a question, it's just frustrating for me that the license to create an article is so freely thrown around. My personal course of action would be to AFD them all, but I tried that on 50 consecutive articles only to have people laugh in scorn. So.. to include or not, that's my question. ALTON .ıl 11:46, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect they're included under the guideline that: "A person is generally notable if they meet any of the following standards ... Competitors who have played in a fully professional league", listed at Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Criteria_for_notability_of_people. DH85868993 12:13, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PS. Is there a place I can list images with questionable copyright status? I'm pretty sure this one image is not photographed by a user, but he licensed it as PD. ALTON .ıl 11:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images can be used for this purpose. --Cherry blossom tree 12:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A great deal of the culture here, unfortunately, is not really about existence of sources and forcing use of those sources if they exist, when that should be everyone's number one consideration for writing and inclusion. I think it does and will keep Wikipedia from realizing its potential of being a truly respectable resource. Many of those who at least give lipservice to requirements of verifiability and notability still give much too much leeway where hypothetical but unrealized sourcing is thought to be a possibility and where the subject appears to be likely to have more sources in the future that don't yet exist (source crystallballery) if you will).

With these types of articles it would seem even harder because there are numerous reliable sources that exist which give the bare details details you speak of right?—a player's addition to a team roster? So it's easy to say, "but there are reliable sources so it's a useful stub", notwithstanding that nothing but a sub-stub can ever be written from those sources. You're bucking human nature I think with such a popular subject. Look at this afd I started last week. I put a lot of effort into being quite thorough because I knew, even though there doesn't appear to be any even hypothetical sources to back inclusion, it would be an uphill and controversial battle to get deletion, and predictably while people commented on all the afds posting on that day's page nearby, it seems no one wants to comment there as it's too controversial. We have a terrible problem right now with quality, and the heart of it is the inability to delete unsourceable articles and to enforce deletion where sourcing isn't done, even where possible.--Fuhghettaboutit 12:55, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About Wikipedia's "terrible problem with quality": Wikipedia certainly has lots of articles that could be better, and some of them can be improved without any controversy. To me it would seem more productive to start by making all the uncontroversial improvements, and when we finish all of those, go to work on the controversial improvements (which require more labor for each improvement, due to the labor-squandering overhead of controversy). After all, if you can make many uncontroversial improvements in the time it takes to make just one controversial improvement, Wikipedia will improve faster if everybody focuses first on the uncontroversial improvements. And maybe, by making all the uncontroversial improvements, we can illuminate the deficiencies of the remaining low-quality articles by comparison, and possibly thereby reduce the controversy attending them. For example, if a million or so articles on Wikipedia attain featured status, the deficiencies in the remaining low-quality articles will become all the more glaring. Articles which lack even the possibility of reliable sources that could bring them up to featured quality may then be harder for their partisans to defend. In any case, if you want to fight AfD battles productively, I suggest that rather than just campaigning to delete articles, you first placate the partisans by finding suitable wikis for those articles, and transwiki the articles there yourself. For example, WikiIndex lists several wikis that specialize in games. Too often in deletion debates, the editors campaigning for deletion show little or no respect for the hard work and strongly-held interests of the contributors, while the contributors show little or no respect for Wikipedia's policies, and neither side shows any awareness that thousands of other wikis exist, catering to a vast range of special interests. It would be nice if every deletionist became fluent in locating suitable wikis for articles unsuitable for Wikipedia. Then instead of arguing about whether to destroy someone else's work, you would merely argue about whether to relocate it. --Teratornis 20:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, CBT.

I suppose then, what happens to those articles is out of my hands. I think that, sure, we should improve what we've got before deleting so many, but the number of contentious deletions that go through compared to the number of incontestable deletions that should happen isn't something I agree with.

Also, I sympathize with you, Fughetta, the problem with this, is the never-ending problem of so-called subjective objectivity. On an absolute basis, I believe the aforementioned players have no place in the encyclopedia, but because I have already stated my 'disapproval' of the sport in general, my AfD would be doomed by people like the first dude who replied to yours. ALTON .ıl 04:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you that being placatory has its place but finding a wiki and relocating content there (even when possible) is an elaborate use of our time and isn't our job. It is a shame that much time is wasted writing improper content, but that doesn't change the improper status of the content, nor turn equities on their head or effect a burden shift. Content that manifestly does not belong, i.e. unsourceable and therefore, by definition, unencyclopedic content, need to be cut. If the contributors of such material want to copy the content to a wiki that is not an encyclopedia, by all means, let them do so. The deletionist/inclusionist labels present a false dichotomy. All people fall somewhere along a spectrum between the two. At one end would be those who would keep every last edit anyone ever made and the other would result in no content at all. I am not a "deletionist" and I don't think anyone is. Cutting material is not "deletionist". Rather, it is a vital and beneficial task that all editors must engage to a greater or lesser extent. The encyclopedia as whole, not just individual articles, needs it badly. If you must pigeonhole me into an ideology, I am an encyclopedist, because that's what we are building here, an encyclopedia. The most fundamental aspect of an encyclopedia is that it is a tertiary source; subjects don't "merit" articles—they can or cannot have articles based on the ability to write that tertiary source entry. If a subject can't be sourced, it has no place here, not even as part of a list, which was my placatory (or at least pragmatic) concession in the linked deletion debate.

Our policies are not ambiguous on these matters, despite that many contributors treat the site like a Myspace free for all. They come here and somehow, failing to understand where they are, write essays about love and hate; epitaphs to fallen pets; post their resumes, and in great numbers, write about the most trivial minutia from fictional universe that has no chance of every being sourced because the sources don't exist. Deleting such material should be easy, but a simplistic misinterpretation of what was intended by "the sum of all human knowledge" has tainted the ability to easily clean house. Also problematic is that such content looks like an article in the making, but only on the surface. There are thousands and thousands of articles that are unsourced but sourceable and in that state look identical to the unsourceable. The two are completely different species, the latter being just as improper as those things we remove without problem. Putting it all off to some time when you postulate it will become more easy to see by contrast with more good content misses the boat I think. That allows the clutter in the attic to build to monumental proportions and its much harder to clean at the end. If the culture was steeped in "sources or no article", we would have scads more good content already. Every edit that contributes improper material represents time that could have been spent contributing proper material. The larger the mass, the harder to fix. "Starting by making all the uncontroversial improvements" is a recipe for Myspaceapedia.--Fuhghettaboutit 03:25, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

heeeelp!

hi! i was just wondering were will i view the answer to the question i ask awhile ago regarding social studies subject? i forgot where i post it. i dunno if its in help desk or where. i just remember i was in wikipedia:questions.... fyi, i already signed an account here awhile ago... thanks!

Macky24 (talk · contribs) click on the contribs it lists every edit you have made. Gnan garra 13:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

alternatively click here Gnan garra 13:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here is your post. Wikipedia isn't here to do your homework, by the way. Lara ♥Love 13:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hey Wikipedia, i was wondering if i could create a wiki page on City Of Heroes and City Of Villains Supergroups, to explain what supergroups are and what they do, whilst putting some of my personal comments in what i actually think of them —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Daley Boy (talk • contribs).

If the topics are notable, have verifiable information from reliable, citable sources, and the articles are writen from a Neutral Point of View (so no opinions or personal comments), it is OK to write an article. :) -- Stwalkerster talk 14:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are these the articles your looking for City of Heroes and City of Villains. the second part of your question about personal comments, Wikipedia isnt a blog all articles are expected to be neutral there isnt anywhere that you can express your opinion about them here. Gnan garra 14:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

joining

i recently added a piece to Wiki but can't remember where please show me how to get to that page and how to log in —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.152.125.60 (talk)

Apart from your request, there are no registered edit for the IP address used to post this, so we cannot say what you added. You can click create an account, or see Help:Logging in. PrimeHunter 14:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name of this wiki is Wikipedia. "Wiki" refers to the WikiWikiWeb, the original wiki. You may be able to find the pages you visited on Wikipedia by checking your Web browser's history feature. --Teratornis 16:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

weed and emotions

why does weed bring out your emotions and are those emotions true like if you liked some one will they intensify —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.30.247 (talk • contribs) 15:02, 2 August 2007

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions, and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that's what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. :) -- Stwalkerster talk 15:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Mackey says "drugs are bad." M'kay? --Teratornis 20:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New page?

I have no idea how to start a new page. Can you help me please?

Hello! First type in the page you desire in the search box in the left column. Press search and then press search again. In red it should say "Create or Request this article", clcik this and then type away. Hope I've helped. Onnaghar (speak.work) 15:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:Your first article and Help:Creating a new page, also please do make sure your article meets the notability guideline. All the best, Peacent 15:40, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation

Hi, I added a new meaning in Moon Cresta. Then I knew that i had to create an disambiguation article but, even reading the help, i can´t do it. Can anybody make it? Thanks ;)

--81.34.33.106 17:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Created the band page and added a link from Moon Cresta since it is the most intended target of "Moon Cresta". You may edit the band article at Moon Cresta (band) -- VegitaU 18:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Error creating thumbnail..."

"...Invalid thumbnail parameters"

What is that about? There's an example to the right? Are PNGs of large size unable to be thumbified? -- VegitaU 18:13, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think your problem is that you have spaces in the filename. Try uploading again with a shorter title. AndyJones 18:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's no problem with having spaces in filenames, but I'm not sure what the issue actually is. Try asking at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). --Cherry blossom tree 19:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Top 50 Banks

While doing research on some of my competing banks (specifically National City Corporation) I scrolled down to the bottom of the page and noticed you had links to the 50 largest banks. My company Counrywide Bank (a member of Countrywide Financial Corporation) is currently the 16th largest bank (and top 20 in every publication I have seen), however is not listed as a link. If you could add Countrywide to that list, it would be appreciated. Thank you.

http://nyjobsource.com/banks.html

Jeff Jones Countrywide Bank Talent Acquisition jeff_jones@countrywide.com

Could you please specify the article name? Or you could simply edit it in yourself, but if you need help I would be glad to contribute. --Kk r ou ni 20:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Remember to sign your posts with four ~'s

The top-50 box at National City Corporation is from {{US Banks}}. It can be discussed at Template talk:US Banks. PrimeHunter 22:13, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing incorrect entries

I changed the birth year of a subject to the one that I know is correct. ("Ken Medema") I even gave the subject's business phone number to contact in case anyone doubts it. But it has been changed back to the incorrect year. Should I just give up? How many times may I change it back before I'm kicked off? ESass 18:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully I can explain a few things to you. Information on Wikipedia must be verifiable; just because you know it's true doesn't meet that criteria. Often, playful vandals will change dates around, so many are wary of edits that change dates and will often revert if no source is provided. As for your adding of the subject's phone number, Wikipedia does not allow personal information in articles and edit summaries (like phone numbers, email addresses, etc.) and those edits can be deleted via the oversight process in order to keep the information confidential. Finally, the three-revert rule should answer your question about how many times you can continue adding the information. If you violate the 3RR, you will be blocked for 24 hours, not "kicked off". I would encourage you to find a source that supports your version of the birth date in order to prevent reaching 3RR, though. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 18:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

help me!!!

When I am editing a page, how do I insert a picture? When I say "Embedded Image," I enter where it says "Example" the name of the file I am trying to upload. It does not work. Please, HELP!

-Mary629

You need to add [[Image:Test_(student_assessment).jpeg|right|thumb|This is an image, examine it's code]] but if you dont want the border then remove the thumb part, however images have to be uploaded to Wikipedia to display, this can be acomplished via Special:Upload. Best Regards, Ds.mt 19:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have question about a page you can edit

I know a fact about Walt Disney. And I was wondering is there a way i can tell someone so that they can put it on fact: Walt Disnet had a close friendship with the founder of publix supermarkets —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beebee49 (talk • contribs)

All "facts" must be documented by a valid source. If you have a source, feel free to edit the article yourself. -- Kainaw^(what?) 20:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, Wikipedia:Reliable source describes what we consider a valid source to be. In this case I'd guess a good source would be a biography of Disney or the Publix bloke, a corporate webpage from either corporation, or a citation of a magazine or newspaper article describing their friendship. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Although, unless there is some wider context for this fact, it would probably count as trivia, which is currently being weeded out of Wikipedia articles (see WP:TRIVIA). Confusing Manifestation 23:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My account

I recently made an account in Russian to ask their admins a question, and then accidentaly navigated my way onto English Wikipedia. When I got to our Main Page I was loged into my English account and wondered about this, so I made an edit and checked the page's history and it said I made the edit. I was wondering if this was normal. If it helps, the account in Russian was also named Kkrouni just like me.--Kk r ou ni 20:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh and I don't have Remember me checked in my prefrences and loged out before I opened up Russia's page.--Kk r ou ni 20:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like you've got "Remember Me" checked on the English Wikipedia, but not on the Russian one. -- Kesh 22:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudo Reference

In Baked bean sandwich it says:

Baked beans are also being more widely regarded - and marketed - as being "healthy" (although this fact is widely disputed) increasing their popularity.

As you can see it basically uses "disputed" as a reference, I know that using Wiki articles as a direct reference isn't allowed but is this slightly different, can someone who knows whether it's right or wrong fix this? Thanks, Jeffrey.Kleykamp 20:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Baked bean sandwich should copy the external reference from Baked beans and not, as you say, cite the latter article as a reference. Worse, Baked beans doesn't cite its source properly either. So it's {{fact}} tags all round, methinks. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On reading my reply back, I think my "as you say" can be read in two contradictory ways. I do indeed mean "yes, you're right Jeffrey" :) -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:53, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Templates

How do I add a template to my talk page?

First remember to sign inquiries with four ~'s and second you place the template name inside the {{ }} symbols. If you have any trouble please don't hesitate to ask me.--Kk r ou ni 20:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinates

I asked a question about a month ago about how to add coordinates (Degrees-Minutes-Seconds) and you told me what to write on the edit page (I have forgot now). I tried what you told me, but instead of them coming out in the corner as usual, they just came out at the top of the article. Please tell me how to add coordinates again and where to write them in the edit page. If it helps, I am trying to add coordinates for three high schools and a college.

69.230.216.237 20:44, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have experience with coordinates. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Geographical coordinates mentions some possibilities. You can use a template like {{coord}} at a chosen place in the article where you want coordinates displayed. Some US high schools use {{Geolinks-US-buildingscale}} which gives links in the corner. For example Glencoe High School (Hillsboro, Oregon) which contains {{Geolinks-US-buildingscale|45.542187|-122.993188}}. PrimeHunter 01:03, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how to revert to old version?

The article, Jason Defense Advisory Group, was repeatedly vandalized and corrected and eventually, the article was given protected status. The upshot of all the changes is that the protected article, as it stands, has a few errors and a lot of unnecessary deletions. How can the article be reverted back to the pre-vandalized version of July 2, 2007? AKath 20:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:REVERT for detailed instructions on how to revert vandalism and disruptive edits. --_Hdt83 ^Chat 23:19, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the page is protected in m:The Wrong Version^TM, you can add the {{editprotected}} template on the Talk page, along with an explanation, to get an administrator to fix it up for you. Confusing Manifestation 23:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JASON Defense Advisory Group is only semi-protected, so account must just be 5 days old to edit it. The semi-protection should expire on August 4, before AKath's account becomes 5 days. PrimeHunter 23:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need to amend title of page to correct minor typo

I need to change the title of a new page I've just created. I didn't realize until too late that I failed to capitalize the second word. The page is titled "Rockway institute" and should be "Rockway Institute." Please let me know how to make this change. Thanks!

Please remember to sign posts with four tildes (~~~~). You can move a page via a tab at the top of the article. Take a look at WP:MOVE for more details. AndrewJDTALK -- 21:27, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User Box Summey Edits

Please reply to my talk page if possible

Hi, I have sceen on some user pages (I cant remember which) a box that explains how many incodents of vandilism they have revered, how many articles they have created ect. I woudered if you knew how I could put this on my user page, and if it updates its self. It is not just a user box, it is a table of its own. I know I havent been overly clear, but it is hard to explan. Thank You! Tiddly Tom 21:47, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can simply use a standard userbox template - {{Userbox |side-box colour |main box colour |side-box content |main box content}}. For example, {{Userbox|blue|red|4|This user has started 4 articles}} would produce the following userbox.

4

This user has started 4 articles

Hope this helps. --Cherry blossom tree 21:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am still looking for an automated system for this, but thanks for your help, much appreached! Tiddly Tom 22:06, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are also lots of pre-made userboxes listed at the bottom of WP:Userboxes that you might like. --_Hdt83 ^Chat 23:20, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[1] The Nobel Foundation (1950). Bertrand Russell: The Nobel Prize in Literature 1950. Retrieved on August 2, 2007.

[1]