Help desk
< December 30	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	January 1 >

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.

December 31[edit]

article on not-for-profit organization[edit]

I am interested in writing a Wikipedia article on a not-for-profit orgaization that sponsors a self transformative event every year - for the past 17 years. There is an existing community of those who have attended this event, which is loosely connected with various other alternative communities. I would have clear copyright on all materiels. Would this be something that will be appropriate for this venue? Please advise.

Thank you,

Kenn Day. --Kenndeigh (talk) 00:00, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. --teb728 t c 02:16, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kenn. I see you've also added a mention of "Kenn Deigh" to an article, and that in the past you edited the Kenn Deigh and Lumensgate articles (both now deleted via the Articles for Deletion process. Due to the source and content of that text, and your screen name, I'd also make sure you read up on the Autobiography and Conflict of Interest guidelines. Writing about yourself or events you run is strongly discouraged. Thanks. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 07:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Show/hide[edit]

I cannot view any "show" or "hide" buttons. I run Internet Explorer 6 on Windows XP Professional. Thanks, –thedemonhog talk • edits 00:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean you don't see the links, or that they don't work, or that you cannot make your own? What do you see here:

Click show or hide to the right

This text can be hidden

You should have seen a box with a clickable hide or show to the right.

PrimeHunter (talk) 01:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot even see the "hide" or "show." For all I know, it is not even there. –thedemonhog talk • edits 01:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It requires JavaScript which exists but can be disabled in IE6 for security reasons. See Wikipedia:NavFrame#Accessibility and try [1]. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, it worked! Thanks for the help. –thedemonhog talk • edits 02:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Four tildes[edit]

FOUR TIDES After logging on you told me to enter FOUR TIDES to display my user name ................... I do not have any TIDE(s) on my Laptop. I suggest that this TIDES thing is the figment of someone's imagination and should be done away with - it makes a bad beginning to introduce a new user with FOUR TIDES - it is an aberration. Please substitute Four Elephants or Four Monkeys!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leistina (talk • contribs) 00:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you edit, look at the edit buttons. One button will have a signature on it. Click that to sign a post. JetLover (talk) (Report a mistake) 00:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I first assume you are referring to "Four tildes" as opposed to "Four tides". There is no other name for it, other than "squiggle" (used by some of my former teachers). The tildes (not tides) are located left of the 1 on a US keyboard layout or to the right of the apostrophe or quotation on a UK keyboard layout. The US keyboard requires a shift first. x42bn6 Talk Mess 00:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The message at User talk:Leistina says: "Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~)". The tilde symbol ~ is probably on your keyboard but the position can vary. See tilde#How to type a tilde. As JetLover said, you can also make all 4 with a click on the signature button. You can also click at "Sign your username: ~~~~" below the edit box. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:05, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully Liquid Threads will make it simpler for users new to Wikipedia (and other MediaWiki wikis) to get started. Currently we have our rather novice-hostile talk pages, which are pretty good for experienced users, but they burden the novice user with the need to learn a bunch of wiki editing concepts just to be able to ask that first question. The majority of people who pose questions on the Help desk, and have few or no previous edits, do not sign their questions - this is another chunk of cognitive burden our current system imposes on the probably-already-confused newcomer. Liquid Threads takes care of signatures automatically. --Teratornis (talk) 02:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merlin's beard, real threads would be a welcome improvement! Well hopefully it will not spoil the flat code simplicity of the talk page format, but it would certainly improve the simplicity of use. • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 03:07, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EIW#Talk_p has a sub-entry with some links relating to Liquid Threads:

It looks like Liquid Threads provides real threading of replies, but you can still use wikitext markup. Maybe it's the Holy Grail: as easy for novices as every "normal" online discussion forum, but powerful enough to keep wiki editors happy. I don't know because I haven't played with it yet. --Teratornis (talk) 03:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

content I add to a page is constantly taken off[edit]

3 times now I have added content to the page <XL Airways> and each time it is taken off. Just a few succint lines in the History and Incidents section. The current version of the page suggests that XL Airways stopped flying deportation charter flights out of 'sympathy' for asylum seekers. There is no mention in the History section of deportation flights that were carried out under Home Office contracts, without 'sympathy', and the subsequent protests against the airline that led to them withdrawing from the deportation charter business completely. These are minor, but essential, facts to give a balanced view of the companies activities. How do I stop my additions being constantly removed? Underbelly12 (talk) 01:40, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You were reverted by User:SempreVolando (see [2]), with edit summary "Revert: Not an incident / accidnet [sic]." Perhaps you would do best to follow the steps at dispute resolution, of which the two I suggest you take are: Take your concerns to the talk page of the article, Talk:XL Airways or ask the user himself, at User talk:SempreVolando. x42bn6 Talk Mess 01:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or instead of getting into dispute resolution, you could try posting in the History section rather than the Accidents section. Be sure to cite your sources. If it is still removed, then WP:DR is the way to go. NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 01:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please include references to reliable sources, especially when you add quotes and controversial information. And note Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons which applies to all articles. Your edits could also easily have been reverted as unsourced. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the aviation industry, the terms "accident" and "incident" have specific technical meanings involving flight operations. Your facts may very well be relevant to the airline article, but they are not aviaton accidents (chrashes, etc.) nor aviation incidents (near-misses, loss-of engines, etc.) As is says above, put you information into the "history" section of the article, but as with any othre importatn fact, please cite your sources. -Arch dude (talk) 02:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I change the Title of my article?[edit]

How do I change the Title of my article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casanovafisher (talk • contribs) 04:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To change the title of an article, you move it to the new title. Only users with accounts over four days old can move pages, but you can also place a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 05:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, if moving to a new title could be considered in any way controversial, you should discuss any page moves on the article's relavant talk page to establish a consensus first. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia "accuses" me of spamming - NOT resolved[edit]

Dear PrimeHunter

Your reply to the query by the same subject (above) was not helpful at all - everybody is here naturally to give of their time and to contribute to this project. So please take into account that MOST people have only a superficial understanding of how some of the features work.

So if there is a link to a YouTube page that I cannot see, I am presume it is concealed, why would this be so? If if it concealed, what is the purpose, seeing that noone will see it to be able to click on it. I've looked for this link in all modes, including "View Page Source", where I see all other links, but I don't see one to a YouTube page.

--Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 08:13, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know why you can’t see them. They are in the second and third list items here. They are no more concealed than the pt.wikipedia.org is concealed behind the link “here” --teb728 t c 08:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see the youtube link as well. Maybe there is a problem with your internet browser? --Hdt83 ^Chat 08:56, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hindi wikipedia[edit]

59.96.101.217 (talk) 09:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)how do i get info in hindi[reply]

Here is the link to the Hindi Wikipedia: [3]. You can also look up something in English and then check the lower left language box to see if the Hindi Wikipedia has the corresponding article. --Hdt83 ^Chat 09:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- By the way, if while wondering around the Hindi Wikipedia you find an article about the same thing as an English Wikipedia article, and the English article doesn't have a link to it, we would greatly appreciate if you could add the code [[hi:ARTICLE NAME IN HINDI]], and vice-versa. Thank you. Jake the Editor Man _(talk) 22:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi frnd any body over there help[edit]

dear sir, my orkut account always happen that it accept scrap but can't rply frm my scrap book so iwill be help ful to u i u would help me in this matter as its creacting a lot of problem —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.50.218.29 (talk) 09:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what your talking about, this area is for help with using Wikipedia, maybe the Wikipedia:Reference desk might help? VivioFateFan ^{(Talk, Sandbox)} 10:09, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just for quick reference, this user is talking about Orkut, a social networking site run by Google. GlassCobra 10:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

adding a page[edit]

how do i add a page

11:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)~

sam moss

If you want to add a page follow Help:Starting a new page however if you want to add a new article proceed to Wikipedia:Your first article for further details it'll include instructions on what to do. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 12:01, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confused about the replies to postings[edit]

Hi

The posts on "Wikipedia 'accuses' me of spamming refer.

The people who reply to the queries pos(t)ed here, are they some kind of uber-users with special privileges, knowledge etc, or are they NORMAL users trying to help but not always knowing what to do? If the latter, I could understand and forgive. If not, your attitude and working ethics are a great disservice to the project and I will take this up with Jimmy.

Whether I can see the links or not is immaterial,* the point is that if you are there to help, then you should be telling me how to work around the spam filter. The first person suggested that I remove the links. Someone put them there for good reason, so having to remove them to be able to edit a page is not a solution. Imagine every link having to be removed each time you have to make a small edit.

Smart-ass answers to the effect that "the links are there, I can see them" are at best puerile, at worst a great disservice and a disappointment. All that this kind of behaviour accomplishes is to annoy the contributor (unnecessarily) and make them vent out their frustration of this page for all to see - including a substantial phalange of Wikipedia detractors.

Ok, why I couldn’t see the links:

looking for text in links cannot be done on the display page, as the URL is embedded; looking for the text in edit mode with Mozilla, it does NOT search the edit template, only around it - I managed to see it them using Opera; looking for it with your eyes, I did not think of looking all the way down the page, believing that if each 'block' has an edit button, the top edit button would apply to the top block - and in the top block there aren't any links to any YouTube videos.

So, fine, I can see the links, but no-one has deigned to contribute a worthy solution.

Have a nice day

--Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 12:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone trying to help out here at the Help Desk is a volunteer. We have no special privileges, knowledge etc. However, perhaps we are a little more experienced with some knowledge of Wikipedia's policies. Astronaut (talk) 13:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the page history, I see the External Links to the two youtube videos were added on 31 jan 2007 by user AdriAg. Maybe the check for such external links is only done when trying to save an edit; and I don't know for sure, but is it possible that the policy to block such external links was introduced after that date? If so, it is unfortunate but removing the links is the correct solution. Astronaut (talk) 13:33, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned, those who reply here are just ordinary people. While they may be more knowledgeable than average, they are not mindreaders. If they ask clarifying questions or make suggestions, the correct reaction is not to assume they "do not know what to do" (though, naturally, this also happens), but rather to clarify your situation and explain why the suggestions are uneffective. Threatening to "take this up with Jimmy" is not welcome, and I'm not sure he is even aware of the existence of this desk, or cares one way or the other.

There is a limit to what people in the English help desk can do to help you. Each language of Wikipedia has its own policies and technical measures, so the problems you are describing might be unfamiliar here. They are also generally incapable of looking at the pages in question and figuring out what's wrong. You really should consider seeking a Portugese Wikipedia help desk and take the issue there.

The "edit" links for sections relate to the section below, not the section above. The same works here in the help desk - if you want to reply, do not start a new section, but rather click on the "edit" link at the top of the section and add your reply. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 13:52, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all who have helped or tried to. Perhaps I do/ did have the wrong idea of the people who reply here, as to the extent of their functions. I was not threatening when I said I would take this up with Jimmy, it is just that other than posting it here, and not knowing what other avenue to follow (I've seen posts about decalring disputes etc, which I feel is not necessary, nor is it the case), all I wanted was to get the feeling that someone would acknowledge that there is a problem here and resolve it, task someone with its resolution or alert the person responsible to look into it. If there is a more adequate forum to report this, then please be so kind as to enlighten me.

Also, perhaps I did not express myself clearly about the edit buttons - yes, I do know that the button refers to the section immediately below it - what I was trying to say is that I was not aware that the TOPMOST button applies to the whole page. In effect this means that unlike all other sections, the top section does not have its own dedicated edit bitton.

As for the YouTube link, I've just tested editing page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorilla_%28Cadbury%29 which contains various external links - including a link to a YouTube video - and I had no problem saving the edits. It would not have occurred to me that such a fundamental issue such as blocking possible spam would differ from language to language in terms of policy to handle it. I'll post the issue on the Portuuese Wikipedia and see if it gets resolved.

I've until now never responded below responses to my posting in the belief (obviously wrong) that only the editors use this space to answer queries.

Best regards and have a happy, fun-filled, rewarding 2008 full of personal and professonal accomplishments.

--Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 14:26, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The previous posts are at #Wikipedia "accuses" me of spamming!!! ;-) and #Wikipedia "accuses" me of spamming - NOT resolved. You described this as a technical issue with disappeared links and you were told where the links were and that your browser might be unable to search text in the edit window. Whether and how to keep the links is a content issue for the Portuguese Wikipedia and this is the help desk for the English Wikipedia. I don't know Portuguese and cannot say whether the links are worth keeping or how the Portuguese Wikipedia policies are. The link is not blocked on the English Wikipedia or meta which is why it can be saved here. It was blocked by this addition on 20 July 2007 to the local Portuguese blacklist at pt:MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist (on 4 December it was removed for 1 minute [4]). I don't know whether the Portuguese Wikipedia permits to display useful blacklisted links in an "external links" section without linking them. This could be done with <nowiki>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp2HMX2T72k</nowiki> or www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wp2HMX2T72k. The Portuguese Wikipedia has a short message when a link is blacklisted. To see the longer English message, try saving a link that is blacklisted here, for example http://automotiveoilchange.net. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:34, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia project is extremely complex, with lots of detail to befuddle newcomers. Even using this Help desk is arcane and unobvious, since the Help desk doesn't work like any other (non-wiki) discussion site. Although Wikipedia poses as "the Encyclopedia that anyone can edit," in practice, not everyone looks at Wikipedia and immediately gets all the correct ideas about how to approach it. You had the disadvantage of trying to edit a page that happened to contain a fairly serious problem that a new user would be unlikely to understand. Wikipedia isn't really designed for beginners; it's designed for the kind of people who design Wikipedia. Those are generally people with thousands of edits, who communicate with each other by reading and writing hundreds of pages of complex manuals. Many of the more experienced editors have high IQs, enabling them to be comfortable with complexity. Complexity is essential to a project of Wikipedia's size and popularity. The English Wikipedia, for example, ranks somewhere in the top 10 or 20 Web sites in the world. Most of those other sites are run by large corporations who employ hundreds (or thousands) of skilled professionals to build them. Many things get more capable and thus more valuable by becoming more complex; for example, a Boeing 747 is vastly more complex than a Wright Flyer; modern medicine is vastly more complex than folk medicine; a Pentium microprocessor is more complex than an abacus; and in each of those examples, there is a large educational infrastructure for training all the people who build the complex things. All of the world's most popular Web sites are extremely complex too, but only Wikipedia invites everyone to wander in and try editing stuff. Many people who accept the invitation will have problems, and their enjoyment of Wikipedia will then depend on their ability to diagnose and solve problems. The first thing to understand is that almost everything a person could need to know about editing on Wikipedia is already written down somewhere. Learning how to search for answers is therefore essential for enjoying Wikipedia. When you can't find an answer on your own, then you need to learn how to ask questions the smart way. Wikipedia is an Open Source project, and therefore it works like other open source projects - the primary motive for people to get involved is fun. When you aren't paying money to get other people to help you, you have to make it fun for them to help you. --Teratornis (talk) 17:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are quite right - I was immediately struck by those high IQs. They knocked me completely off-balance, such was the impact like an unexpected wave when you are standing on the rocks admiring the view!. And I knew at once they could be nothing else but High IQs because I happen to have one myself! lucky for me! --Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 18:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I boldly removed the youtube links from the Portuguese page. So now you should be able to make your edit. --teb728 t c 23:28, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

metric conversion[edit]

does 40 milligrams=20 milliliters? 13:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Grams is weight (or more specific:mass) and liters is volume, so they can not be compared like that in general. However, you can compare it for a specific material if you know its density. In the future, please use the WP:Reference Desk for general knowledge questions, the Help Desk is for question about using Wikipedia. Arthena^(talk) 13:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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)} 13:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the diference between static and changing menu[edit]

i just want the diference and that is all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.210.19.83 (talk) 14:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by the "menu"? NF24^{(welcome, 2008!)} 14:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well... static means stationary, inactive, unchanging, and changing means..... changing, with the change presumably referring to the content (text) of the menu items. Slightly out of context sort of question, is there any more to it? • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 15:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over two million articles, and thought that we were directly affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the online free encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand side of your screen. If that is not fruitful, we have a reference desk, divided into various subjects areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox Fashion Designer template & photo[edit]

I have uploaded a photo of Ralph Lauren to which I own the rights to Creative Commons. I've placed that image name and caption into the template, but neither appear on saving the page. What am I doing wrong? Thanks Doc ♬ talk 15:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed it for you. =) Take at look at the edit I made. Even though it says image= in the template, you still have to use the full image syntax after it. This allows for more flexibility (e.g., customizing the image size). • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 15:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much. I had looked at other template examples and they had inserted just the image name, as in Eleanor Roosevelt so that was what I followed. I'll know next time. Doc ♬ talk 16:41, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opps...now how do I get the caption to show? Again, I followed the above example of Eleanor Roosevelt. Thanks again. Doc ♬ talk 16:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The templates are not always consistent in the way they work you see. If you check Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Infobox Fashion Designer you can see other uses of that exact template. However it says on the template page at Template:Infobox Fashion Designer that the caption parameter should work.... yet it doesn't seem to be actually used in the template source. Actually it's possible that other pages are using it without the caption appearing too. I think it needs someone who's good with MediaWiki template syntax figure out how to make the captions work. • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 16:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a read up on template syntax and fixed the infobox so that the caption parameter now works as it ought too. I'll check all the other pages that use the template to make sure I didn't break something, but hopefully that's it now. Phew! • Anakin ^{(contribs • complaints)} 17:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks once again, ever so much Doc ♬ talk 17:49, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citing a PDF document[edit]

How do i cite a PDF document? Thanks. Sunder land 06 17:22, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming it's a reliable source, you'd just cite it the same way you'd site any other URL. WP:CITE#Inline_citations may shed some light on this if you're unfamiliar with wikipedia's inline citation markup.--69.118.143.107 (talk) 17:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) You can use {{PDFlink}}, or just cite it like any other online source (I assume it's online). PrimeHunter (talk) 17:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle[edit]

How do i gain access to twinkle, it says my account is too new, although that's true but i'm not new to wikipedia, this account is my secondary account which i want to use for finding vandalism and then fix it. My first account which i tend to use for editing is Yun-Yuuzhan could someone please grant me access. →Yun-Shuno→

The account that you are using is less that a day old. It needs to be at least 4 days old so that it is autoconfirmed. Please wait 4 days before trying to install Twinkle. Hope this helps! Happy New Year! The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contributions)} 17:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll use this account then for the moment and wait until the secondary account is four day's old to start hunting for vandals. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 17:48, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good for you, Yun-Yuuzhan! Jake the Editor Man _(talk) 22:38, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've had Yun-Shuno closed down, i'm using this one instead for doing editing or reverting vandalism. there's no-point in having two user accounts on wiki, and it'll be easier on user's who try and post a message on my talkpage. →Yun-Yuuzhan→ 12:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good choice, it would be too confusing! The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contributions)} 19:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Interpreting the different colors associated with an authors works[edit]

What do the various colors mean when viewing the works of an author? Please see the works of James Michner as an example. 216.201.210.204 (talk) 17:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, where and what is the sandbox?

A Wikipedia search on James Michner found nothing and I don't know which page or colors you refer to. "The sandbox" refers to Wikipedia:Sandbox. The term is not made by Wikipedia as Sandbox (software development) shows. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The question probably refers to noted American author James A. Michener. --Teratornis (talk) 17:54, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing the "colors" are the red links for many of Michener's book titles. --Teratornis (talk) 17:57, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Some people amuse themselves by solving crossword puzzles; a few of us like to decode questions on the Help desk.) To the questioner: the red links on many of Michener's book titles mean that nobody has written articles about them yet. If you would like to write about one or more of Michener's books, you will need to create an account, and then read a bunch of instruction pages about how to edit on Wikipedia. You should also join Wikipedia:WikiProject Books to see how other Wikipedia users have written articles about books. --Teratornis (talk) 18:02, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Blue text has a link to an existing article. The blue may turn purple if you have viewed the article. Normal black text means there is no link (but in some cases there may exist an article which hasn't been linked yet). PrimeHunter (talk) 18:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Editing References[edit]

On "Mario Strikers Charged" page, I wanted to add a review from a gaming website. I added the review under external links. I was then going to put the link under references as well. When I went to add the reference, for some reason or another, the other references got erased. It was unintentional. Is there anyway to reboot the references that were there? And how do you add a reference without having to enter all the references that were previously there? When I clicked "edit refrences," it left me a blank page and I thought I just needed to add the reference I used and all of a sudden when I saved it, everyone elses was erased.Deasterday1 (talk) 18:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You accidentally deleted {{reflist}} in [5]. {{reflist}} tells the software where to display previously written references. See more at Wikipedia:Footnotes. Another editor has restored reflist. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I want to make an edit to the opening sentence on a page.[edit]

This is the sentence that I want to edit: 'Kinetic art are sculptures that contains moving parts.' At this url: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_art

Hitting the edit button at the bottom of the Kinetic art section where that sentence appears takes me instead to the editing page for the section on Kinetic sculpture. Usercode9623 (talk) 19:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The edit links to the right are for the following section. The lead has no edit link to the right. Click "Edit this page" at top instead. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another way to edit the lead section is to select My preferences > Gadgets > Add an [edit] link for the introduction section of a page. It is unfortunate this is not the default. --teb728 t c 21:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yet a third way (a bit esoteric) is to copy the url of one of the side edit links on a page, change the last digit to zero, i.e., "http://www....edit&section=8"--->"http://www....edit&section=0" and then go to that address.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:21, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having trouble with citing info on Bob Eubanks page.[edit]

I added some info that I thought was sorely missing from the Bob Eubanks page. It had to do with his famous antisemitic quote that he gave in the documentary Roger & Me. I cited the quote from IMDB, but it doesn't seem to list correctly in the references section. There is no hyperlink, and the page keeps telling me that the citations need work. Any solutions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.207.9 (talk) 19:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. The url needed the initial http://. If you think the article is now sufficiently sourced, you can be bold and remove the tag yourself. Algebraist 19:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.250.207.9 (talk) 03:39, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template for canvass-prone xFD discussions[edit]

I though there was a template with a name like {{Notapoll}} to place atop deletion discussions prone to new and single-purpose accounts. Can't find it, and {{spa}} doesn't really explain enough. / edg ☺ ☭ 19:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you thinking of {{Not a ballot}}, perhaps? (Alternatively, {{!vote}} or {{rally}} might serve.) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:08, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moonriddengirl has hit it on the head I think with {{Not a ballot}}, because {{Not a Vote}}, which you've probably seen in the past, is a redirect to that template.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{Not a ballot}} is what I was thinking of, but {{rally}} looks useful as well. Thank you much! / edg ☺ ☭ 20:53, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revised Peer Review[edit]

O.K. where do I go to see currently on-going peer reviews. WP:PR seems to bbe revamped and I am at a loss.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 20:45, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A list is present at User:VeblenBot/C/Requests for peer review. Where are the discussions are transcluded is beyond me. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 20:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Username Usurpation question[edit]

The first instruction for the Username usurpation is: "Be sure the account you wish to usurp has no edits or log entries (except in the account creation log)." I wish to Usurp User:Spencer, who has only made one edit, to his userpage. That was ~5 years ago, and has not made an edit since. Before I waste my time trying to change my username, I was wondering if it would work, based on that one critea. S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s ^{(Talk to Me)} 21:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming you mean changing usernames by username usurpation? If your proposed new username has been previously created I don't beleive that you can change your username to it, regardless of whether edits have been made or not by that account. If you want to change your username, find a name that isn't in use and do not create it yourself, request the change and a beauracrat will create it for you. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could also ask a developer, though I'm not sure they would do it, even if the only edit made by User:Spencer was five years ago. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can usurp usernames. See Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations. S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s ^{(Talk to Me)} 21:38, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I didn't realize that adopting a dormant username was even possible! (I'm fairly new!) It says users with GFDL contributions can not be usurped, userpage contributions I don't believe are considered GFDL unless specifically said so. You could give it a try, it may be possible, make it clear that the only edit by your proposed account was a userpage edit. Mr Senseless (talk) 21:43, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks dude! S♦s♦e♦b♦a♦l♦l♦o♦s ^{(Talk to Me)} 21:46, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a limit to the number of ((citation )) entries per page?[edit]

Hi, and Happy New Year,

My "thing" with Wikipedia is appending lists of source materials to articles on New Zealand place names.

Yesterday I created a fairly large list for the article "Hawera": more than 100 entries. The last section of the bibliography is headed "schools" and has from a dozen to twenty entries in it. However, instead of displaying these citations, it gives "Template:Citation" in place of each entry.

Given that these citations are formatted in the same way throughout the list - I'm stumped as to why this is happening. Is there perhaps a limit to the number of (( citation ...)) permitted per page??

TIA,

Boethius65 (talk) 21:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is limit problem with many {{Citation}}. See Template talk:Citation#COinS. Hawera#Further reading also seems far too long for a Wikipedia article. I suggest to shorten it a lot (not just enough to get below the template limit). PrimeHunter (talk) 22:18, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can somebody good with tables help me?[edit]

Tables and divs are very difficult to use. I have a simple task I'm trying to do. If someone could help me, I'd appreciate it.

On my talk page, someone please make it so that my table of "guidelines" is on the top right, while the table of contents is on the top left. If you don't want to do it, please refer to me to someone who can. Zenwhat (talk) 22:04, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Tables has tons of information and tutorials on table syntax. That might have the information you need. Mr Senseless (talk) 22:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia: External Links in need of policy revisement?[edit]

Recently, there were varying opinions on whether Opeth should get links to both their MySpace and Facebook pages. I realized that number 11 of Links normally to be avoided at WP:EL states that MySpace pages should be avoided, yet several bands with featured articles (such as Slayer, Godsmack and Megadeth) all have Myspace links in their EL sections. I was just wondering what to do in this scenario; the Facebook page for Opeth is linked to on their official site, so authenticity isn't an issue. Any help would be appreciated. Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 23:25, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]