Help desk
< May 10	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 12 >

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.

May 11[edit]

Image altered?[edit]

I need a second opinion. Is the first image of Wallis, Duchess of Windsor for real? Hard to tell, but it looks like she's cross-eyed and that nose looks like it was borrowed from Jimmie Durante. Clarityfiend 01:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was uploaded by User:Astrotrain, who seems trustworthy (10051 edits, here since July 2003). However, the user has been blocked a lot, for 3RR and personal attacks. However, I would say it is probably a real photo, since there is no evidence the user would do that. A bad photo, so if you have a better one... Prodego ^talk 01:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[1] shows another photo from their wedding. Similar; same unfortunate lighting on the face. Notinasnaid 08:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

.OGG walkthrough[edit]

Can someone give me a short walkthrough on what to use, and how to record a pronunciation in .ogg format? Is there freeware available to convert an MP3 recording into .ogg? LaNicoya •TALK• 01:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VLC basically does everything. We also have WP:OGG [Mac Δαvιs] ❖ 04:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could just avoid conversion and use Audacity. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:51, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add an intricate header to my talk page[edit]

such as this?

{{User:Nihiltres/Header}}

You know, without too much work, as I need to get back to editng, of course.

This was messing up the page format, so I commented it out. If you go to User:Nihiltres/Header and click on "view source," you can see how he made that page. To make one of your own, go to your userpage, and then in the URL bar type "/Header" at the end. Create you page then on your user page, add {{User:YOURNAME/Header}} at the top. This is referred to as templating. --Auto^{(talk / contribs)} 03:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

links[edit]

What's the policy here - use links in as many dates (e.g., 2005 etc.) as possible or link only those that are truly meaningful? Likewise, are links to common-knowledge topics encouraged or discouraged? Thanks, Ibn Battuta 03:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Full dates should always be linked so a user's preference can take effect. So May 11, 2007. Whether you link a partial date depends on how useful it would be in the article. I'm not sure what you mean with common-knowledge topics. There's always something about a topic that isn't common knowledge, but say for example you are writing an article on cutlery, then you should link to fork, spoon and knife, no matter how basic it sounds. Wikipedia is also distributed to people outside the Western World who may not be familiar what you consider common knowledge. Also, make sure articles start with a definition. Don't forget to mention a Ford Taurus is a car. It may seem obvious to you, but it might not be to everyone. (If anyone has better examples, please share them). - Mgm|^(talk) 08:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But, while linking everything relevant beware of linking the irrelevant too: Wikipedia:Only make links that are relevant to the context. Notinasnaid 09:22, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) for more on what dates should be linked. Dates are a special case, because full dates are routinely linked to activate date formamting preferences for logged-in users. Many such links would be overlinking (at least IMO) were they not needed for the prefernces to work. Since linaks to years without full dates have no foramtting effect, there is IMO much less reason to link to every occurance of a year number. There is not universal agreement among wikipedia editors on thsi point. DES ^(talk) 15:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that helped (I had no idea about the date formatting thing). Yes, and common knowledge to me are words like USA - although the article obviously contains information that the majority of the readers don't completely know, this knowledge is not relevant to most articles that mention the US. The basic information relevant to the article (it's a country etc.) is known, and whoever is interested in finding out more, can type it into the "search" field by hand. If I was talking about the US constitution, about the capital of the US or similar stuff, this would be different because the content of USA (or links from there to further Wikipedia sites) are relevant to the article. Or in you case: I might link to knife or chopstick if talking about cutlery, wooden carvings, etc., not if someone was stabbed with a knife. (BTW, knives are not just a Western invention. Nor are spoons.) Anyways, I got the idea: The English Wikipedia doesn't seem to be as critical to linking as others... --Ibn Battuta 18:21, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checking the IP of a Registered User[edit]

Is there anyway to check the IP address of a registered user? (For example if I suspect that a person may be using an IP address to make a claim and then support it with a registered account). Thanks! Zomic_13 03:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a [[WP:RFCU|CheckUser process]; however, such requests are generally only done if somebody has a good reason to believe (e.g., similar writing style and nearby contribution times). Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 04:00, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. I was just checking to see if there was a quick and easy way to do it, because I don't really have much reason to believe that is the case. More of a curiosity thing. I will keep that in mind if I ever come across a serious case of it. Thanks though. :) Zomic_13 04:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a tiny correction of Veinor's comment; it's not only if somebody has good reason to believe two editors are the same, there must also be evidence that if the two editors are the same, they have used their dual entity in collusion somehow to gain an advantage or evade sanction. If there is no evidence of gaming the system somehow, all the textual analysis and similar edit summaries in the world won't convince one of the few trusted admins to run a CheckUser. Anchoress 04:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Templates[edit]

Can you substitute citation templates? --Ali 05:09, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably, but it would severely inhibit readability and add a lot of unnecessary code to the article it's used in. Even if it's possible, I don't recommend you do it. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article Size is stuck[edit]

I am trying to edit an article (porta esquilina) that was a stub and it turns out that I want to add a lot more information to it. Unfortunately, not all of my text shows on the page after I press save. How can I make all my updates show up in the actual article.

Thanks

Kfd182 06:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed up some ref errors, see the article's talk page for more info.--Commander Keane 07:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Micronations[edit]

I have a question about the copyright status regarding Micronations' flags. Specifically, those nations who either aren't recognized as sovereign, or those who don't have their own copyright sanctions. The Flag of Sealand seems to exist with PD, and Sealand was never recognized as independent. Empire of Atlantium's flag is again PD, but Atlantium I think, is a legit movement with legit citizenship (I know nothing about the subject).

The images in question are ones like Flag of Sedang, from Kingdom of Sedang, a bizarre situation, where still I don't know if anything was done about copyright. So what kinds of tags should be on these images? ALTON .ıl 07:50, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If no free (to use) flag exists (short sighted of the micronation, I would say), then none can be used, I would say. Notinasnaid 08:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The flag images are all created by someone (.svg) who claims that file under PD. Is that correct? ALTON .ıl 05:37, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube[edit]

Hello, is there any Wiki policy on linking to a Video Sharing website like YouTube? Can we write a "Wikipedia:VideoSharing" policy? BirdHunters 08:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No special policy is needed, this is covered by other policies and guidelines. These include Wikipedia:External links, which indicates we should never link to a copyright violation, and gives guidelines on what kinds of links are appropriate. Where "anyone can post", links are rarely appropriate. In general, too, YouTube videos are not valid sources. Notinasnaid 09:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While YouTube has many copyright violations, some television channels like CBS and certain celebrities have their own channels, the videos of which are not a copyright violation. Linking to those would not be a problem. -Mgm|^(talk) 11:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe it is not for us to judge whether a video at YouTube is a copyright violation, that would be between the entity that has copyright control and YouTube. In other words, if CBS or others wanted the videos to be removed they would just have to ask YouTube to remove them or threaten a lawsuit. YouTube videos provide good advertising, I believe they want them left up or they would have them removed. BirdHunters 11:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This does not sound a valid argument. Copyright law does not only take effect when someone else threatens a law suit. Copyright law does not take into account any "good advert" effect for unauthorized reproduction, so far as I know. We should be confident of the copyright status of what we link to, and seeing a reproduced commercial news program, without any apparent legitimacy, would be enough for me to remove it. If it appears to be an official channel, that seems enough research for me on YouTube. Notinasnaid 11:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Again, the question, if CBS or others did not want the news story on YouTube, why would they not request it be removed and any other copyright material of theirs removed ? BirdHunters 11:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Whether CBS want it there or not has nothing to do with whether it is copyright. Unenforced laws don't grant legitimacy or immunity. But anyway, that's both of our opinions. Can anyone find what policy actually says about this? Notinasnaid 11:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
According to Wikipedia:External links, in the section Linking to YouTube, Google Video, and similar sites: "There is no blanket ban on linking to these sites as long as the links abide by the guidelines on this page (which would be infrequent). See also Wikipedia:Copyrights for the prohibition on linking to pages that violate intellectual property rights." So some such links would be ok, but most would probably not, IMO. DES ^(talk) 15:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

about downloading[edit]

How to download differant articles? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.54.42.229 (talk) 08:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

In your browser menu bar, click File and then the save option. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:46, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Creating template similar to Template:Infobox Country[edit]

I would like to create a new infobox similar to the infobox mentioned above, but I want to create one about school. Can anyone please help me how to modify from that infobox into something suitable to talk about school? Such as independence day -> establishment day, etc... --Edmundkh 09:19, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No reason to do double work. We already have Template:Infobox School and I found it by guessing. :) - Mgm|^(talk) 11:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But I don't like that infobox. I want to create one for Malaysian schools, and I like the infobox for countries. Please have a look at Sekolah Menengah Poi Lam (SUWA). I've attempted to use the country infobox, but failed to function properly. Please SOS!!!! --Edmundkh 13:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A A A[edit]

The statement that appears on wikipedia "A A A is a government run, boys and girls school in , India. The A A A has earned bad reputation for the poor quality of its ..." is incorrect. And I think it is absolutely unethical to allow unwarranted changes or editing into the articles of organizations. This statement appears when you search "A A A " on the google bar. Please correct this or at least allow the article for deletion so that we can avoid vandals to the article completely.

It is left entirely up to you. My own sentiments have been hurt thanks to such vandalism that prevails in the wiki articles...

Please, please help us delete this article and avoid embarrassment from parents who wish to visit the school but encounter such an alarming statement via google. This is the link: http://www.google.co.in/search?q=+A A A &ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tekkaranla (talk • contribs) 10:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It appears to have been removed. Claiming someone or something has a bad reputation instead of just being in dispute with one person needs to be proven with reliable sources, if those aren't included, such claims can be removed. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Geotagging articles and GoogleEarth integration[edit]

There is a small problem regarding geotagging of cities. Apparently Wikipedia uses two different systems for geotagging (to show up in the upper right corner of the article). Generally articles use a coor tag, which shows up in GoogleEarth (GE) fine. Cities can a have different geotag inside a Infobox Town tag, which does NOT show up in GE. Unfortunately it does show up in the upper right corner, so if you add a coor tag to enable GE, both are rendered above each-other which looks like gibberish. Is there any official solution for this? 80.129.90.106 13:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The solution would presumably be to edit Template:Infobox Town so that it works the same way as a coor tag with respect to Google Earth. You can request changes to a protected template by placing {{editprotected}} on its talk page along with a description of (and preferably coding for, if you can write it) the change you want made. --ais523 13:54, 11 May 2007 (U T C)

{{Infobox Town}} uses {{Geobox coor}} which uses {{Coor dms}}, {{Coor dm}}, and {{Coor d}}. The documentation for {{Coord}} claims it supersedes several older templates, including {{Coor dms}}, {{Coor dm}}, and {{Coor d}}. Therefore, if you want to update {{Infobox Town}}, you should update {{Geobox coor}} to use the new {{Coord}} which is supposed to replace all the other coordinate templates from now on. The bottom of the {{Coord}} documentation mentions this:

Google Earth Geographic Web Layer FAQ – Information on how Google uses Wikipedia's coordinate information.

so presumably {{Coord}} works with Google Earth. --Teratornis 15:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

St.Colum's GAA?[edit]

just asking why is this page going to be deleted? was there something offensive about it?? --Kealkill 14:55, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has proposed St.Colum's GAA for deletion with the reason "NN sports club ". Follow the link to Wikipedia:Notability to see the guideline the editor referred to. This does not necessarily mean that the article will be deleted. You can try to influence the decision by following the instructions in the box at the article. PrimeHunter 15:14, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

problems saving changes[edit]

Hello, I've been trying to edit the page on mechatronics, but although the preview looks ok, my changes are not saved when I click on the save button. Am I doing something wrong here? With kind regards, Cubber 15:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably something's going wrong; our records show that you've never edited the page, so for some reason the save signal isn't working. However, you managed to save an edit to the Help Desk. Try again, and if that doesn't work, come back here with details about exactly what you were trying to do and any error messages you saw. --ais523 15:14, 11 May 2007 (U T C)

It could be possible that during the time you were making changes in the edit box, another user successfully made a change. This will prevent your save from being made. A message should appear letting you know this. After a successful change, you are taken to the page for which you edit. An unsuccessful save returns you to an edit page. The top edit box containing the current changes, the bottom edit box containing your changes. The message appears above the top edit box and details the situation.

Regards, LaraLove ^Talk/_Contribs 15:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article history shows no edit today before the question was asked. I just saved a minor change without problems as a test. Other things can prevent a save, for example attempt to add a blocked external link, but I think all things should give an error message if the software works. You must click the "Save page" button next to "Show preview" and not choose save in your browser's menu, but I guess you know that when you could save your question here. PrimeHunter 15:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Free online learning?[edit]

I would like to know: Is there anywhere in Wikipedia that qualitative free online learning, such as the fee based education offered by various schools of higher learning, can be accessed by Wikipedians?

Thank you for any help, ScaiacS

No, but there are the associated Wikibooks (textbooks, etc) and Wikiversity projects, both also run by the Wikimedia Foundation. —Dark•Shikari^[T] 15:26, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

experts[edit]

Hello I'd like to know how an expert on a particulat subject can get involved as one and do the needful for articles that have been tagged "This article or section is in need of attention from an expert on the subject." and also who is regarded as an expert if the article is biographical in nature.

Thank you. 59.92.11.45 15:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no registration or evaluation of "experts". Everybody can edit most articles (some articles are protected). An editor placing such a tag may just think that special knowledge is required or at least beneficial to make good edits to the article. If you feel qualified and know something about Wikipedia editing guidelines, then just go ahead and edit. PrimeHunter 15:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All you have to do is start editing; you don't need to be an official "expert" but what the tag is implying is that the article needs attention from someone who knows more than the average Wikipedia editor on the topic. This does not mean they should contribute their knowledge to the article--that would be original research. What it means is that the expert should use his or her knowledge to better organize and fact-check the page, and to write better prose based off reliable sources such as journal articles that the average Wikipedian might not know about or have access to. —Dark•Shikari^[T] 15:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone can get involved at any time by simply editing the article, or by editing the talk page to comment on how the article could be improved. "Experts" have no special standing in wikipedia, since all information ought to be cited to one or more reliable sources, the credentials of the editor are of little import, and we have no way to verify them in any case. it might be helpful for you to create an account and log in -- this allows all your edits to be considered together, which can help you build a reputation, and some editing tasks can only be done by logged in suers, such as creating and moving (renaming) pages. This also helps in building an on-wiki reputation, and it hides your IP address, which in some cases might be linked to personal information about you which you might choose not to reveal. The only advantage that an "expert" has is that an expert may know better where to find reliable information and sources. DES ^(talk) 15:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To "get involved" on Wikipedia you just pick an article and start editing. Wikipedia has an extremely complex set of policies, guidelines, and procedures; the more you learn about them (by reading the friendly manuals), the more pleasant and productive your involvement with Wikipedia is likely to be. If you plan to do lots of edits and interact with other editors, you should create an account so others can identify you and track your edits (users who answer question on the Help desk tend to be pretty involved with Wikipedia, and almost all of us have created our accounts). As far as what makes a person an "expert," that's open to debate. In my opinion, perhaps the most important measure of "expertise" on Wikipedia is being able to produce reliable sources. That is, what you know is not as important as what you can source. Therefore, if you see an article tagged with one of the "expert needed" templates, and you are aware of some reliable sources which the article does not currently cite, you can add those citations to the article, and edit the article text as necessary to reflect what the sources say. If you don't know how to edit the article, you can list your sources on the article's talk page and ask someone else to edit the article. --Teratornis 15:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help! 59.92.53.141 19:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

warning users[edit]

how exactly do you warn a user about vandalism, a speedy deletion of a page they created, or anything in that matter when they dont have a user or talk page?The juggreserection 15:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You create the talk page. —Dark•Shikari^[T] 15:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i feel like an idiot now. thanks for the helpThe juggreserection 15:43, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

information incomplete regarding "LexisNexis"[edit]

You need to do more research on LexisNexis. Your article only touches on a small portion of what the company does.

Your first sentence is incorrect - "LexisNexis (sometimes simply called "Lexis" among users) is a popular searchable archive of content from newspapers, magazines, legal documents and other printed sources. "

That definition is not an accurate representation of who LexisNexis is. The searchable archive is just one of our product offerings. There are many solutions available and adding more everyday. Many products that you have not mentioned are industry award winning pieces of software.

Please look into other LN offerings such as: HotDocs, Time Matters, Billing Matters, PCLaw, Clause Manager, CaseMap, TimeMap, NoteMap, NetDocuments, Total Litigator, Total Practice Advantage, Courtlink, and TopForm. 198.185.18.207 15:34, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can always edit the article yourself to add the information that is missing. However, you should first read the important Conflict of Interest guideline, as it sounds as if you are an employee of the company, and while you're still allowed to edit the article, you need to be careful in your additions. You must also remember that the reason the article focuses on the archive is most likely because it is by far the most well-known aspect of Lexis, and is covered the most by reliable sources. Any additional services you want to mention in the article should have sources other than your official website. —Dark•Shikari^[T] 15:39, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, along with the considerations forwarded by User:Dark Shikari, please remember the distinction between accuracy and comprehensiveness. There are many Wikipedia articles that contain "accurate" information that is nonetheless only a partial description of known facts -- not all facts related to a company and its product offerings necessarily merit inclusion in an article. This is one reason (for example) why Wikipedia does not contain restaurant menus, even though a restaurant may merit an article.

If you find an inaccuracy in an article, by all means please mention it to someone, or feel free to fix it, but please also note that Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. WP:NOT#IINFO. Thanks for addressing your concerns here. dr.ef.tymac 16:36, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

prefab template for "please re-word"[edit]

Is there a pre-made in-line template (similar to {{fact}} and {{dubious}}) that states "I don't dispute what you are saying here, nor do I even insist that you provide an in-line citation immediately, but I do think this needs to be re-worded because it is imprecise and conveys the exact opposite meaning of what was intended". (or something similar). dr.ef.tymac 16:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The standard templates are located at Wikipedia:Template messages/Disputes - I'm not sure if any of the existing templates exactly fit your requirements. Accordingly, I would suggest that you be bold and rephrase. Addhoc 19:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist by multiple namespace[edit]

Has anyone figured out a way to hack the URL for Watchlists to filter by more than one namespace? I tried &namespace=X&namespace=Y but that just ignored the first parameter... -- nae'blis 17:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't, not at least in the current version of MediaWiki. Adding the '?namespace=X' to the URL creates a HTTP GET request that sets a single variable, $nameSpace, to that value. MediaWiki then makes a database query looking for changes only in that namespace. Doing a HTTP GET with the same variable set twice (e.g. "?namespace=X&namespace=Y") sets that variable to X then sets it to Y with the later value being the one sent to the PHP page. —Mitaphane _?|! 23:44, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiant lost!![edit]

Hi! Yesterday I went to look again at the funny cartoonlike picture about a wikipedian (pictured as an antlike creature with seven hands) on the site:Wikipedia:Wikipedian. To my great dismay I saw that it had been removed. I have nothing against the new picture, but the wikiant happened to refresh my mind and keep up my spirits during the ups and downs of editing, vandal fighting and the like. Do you have a copy of it somewhere? Could I have it on my user page? --Tellervo 18:21, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The image is here. Dismas|^(talk) 18:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can use it on your user page. ~ Bigr Tex 19:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't log in![edit]

I'm Bavaria and I am unable to log in. I'm typing in my password correctly, I made sure of everything including cap locks. I don't know what do do and I could use some help. You can reach me at 71.232.148.13. Thanks.

If you supplied an email address when you registered your account, you can have a new password sent to that address by following the "forgot your password?" link on the login page. Dismas|^(talk) 20:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've experienced the same problem (see this), it's now solved. But I'd like to know: was there an official decision and warning that all weak passwords will be rejected by the server? Did I missed such a warning? Or WP developers played a bad joke on me and other users? Ukrained 08:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Thanks to the user that responded to my help request. I'm joining the helping team to do the same for other people. Ukrained 08:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what is the coding to help me in user pages[edit]

i really need to know, i desperatly need help —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sir de wario (talk • contribs) 19:56, 11 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

If this is what you're asking... place {{helpme}} on your user talk page for help. Or you could just ask here. -SpuriousQ (talk) 20:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What template message to put on user page[edit]

I have been reverting vandalism the last hour or so. After reverting some vandalism from particular user I checked their contributions to discover and then revert about seven other cases of recent vandalism. What sort of tag would be appropriate to put on their user page ? Level 3 ?, 4?, or is there a general purpose tag in which all the instances of vandalism could be listed in one tag ? BrianGV^talk 20:14, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I normally just escalate up to the next warning level as usual regardless of how many separate vandalism edits there were since their last warning. If they haven't seen the next warning level yet, you can hardly hold that against them. In exceptional cases, such as rapid or clearly malicious vandalism, I may jump to level 3 or 4. -SpuriousQ (talk) 20:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, There were six articles vandalized with 16 minutes. I put on a level 1, anyway. Alot of gray area here it seems. BrianGV^talk 20:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kerry Park (Seattle)[edit]

Since there isn't anything on the talk page for Kerry Park (Seattle), does anyone know why this page couldn't exist at Kerry Park? The second redirects to the first. Why have a disambiguator if other similar pages don't exist? Dismas|^(talk) 21:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because this is one of those things that is likely to exist in more than one place. The creator pre-empted dabbing by going ahead and doing so before any clashes occured. Makes things a lot easier for the next person to create a similar aritcle. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:31, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Search Assistance[edit]

How can I search for animals that begin with a specific letter of the alphabet? DeidreDeztnie 22:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could start by looking at List of animal names. Addhoc 22:09, 11 May 2007 (UTC}

Userboxes[edit]

Um, is there a complete list of Userboxes somewhere? Thanks, Meldshal42 00:47, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:UBX —Mitaphane _?|! 00:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could also take a look at Category:Wikipedia_userboxes for more pages containing userboxes. ~ G1ggy! _{Reply | Powderfinger!} 02:16, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]