Help desk
< March 2	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 4 >

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.

March 3[edit]

parser function "#if"[edit]

When using this, will the function still work if the positive result is left blank/empty? flaming lawyer^c 02:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to the help page for parser functions, both may be left blank, so I'm assuming that's a yes. I'm not too good with code; read further to make sure. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 02:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. That answered it. 02:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flaminglawyer (talk • contribs)

Removing Search History[edit]

How can the search history be deleted? I get tired of everytime I do a search, all of my previous search criteria pops up in a window.Cochrunjt (talk) 02:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's part of your browser, not Wikipedia. It depends on what browser you're using, but usually just go to Tools/Options and look for the option to clear remembered fields. Hope that helps, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 02:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or clear the history, that works too (Tools>>Clear Browsing History, or something similar). flaming lawyer^c 02:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome template[edit]

I made a template for speedily welcoming newcomers to Wikipedia some time ago, and just recently (tonight) updated it to appease the eyes. Could you take a look at it? It consists of a welcome message (duh) and, if they have not already created a userpage, it prompts them to do so. When their userpage is created, the table goes away. Take a look at it here, or take a look at the make-a-userpage prompt on User talk:Skie crowther, a page that I recently posted it on. It's still in black-and-white, I know, I know, but it'll get colors later. What I am asking for in this post is some criticism or comments about this, preferably constructive criticism if any. Please post on my talk page. flaming lawyer^c 03:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For more personal responses, I'd suggest {{helpme}}. Anyway, I'd suggest some helpful links; try User:Master of Puppets/Welcome for some samples. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 03:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah - I've got something serious to compete with... I'll improve it!!! flaming lawyer

Names of people on disambiguation pages[edit]

On dab pages for words which also happen to be the surnames or given names of individual people, should there really be entries for these people on the dab page?

For example: The dab page for Reuben

On this dab page some of the entries include:

David and Simon Reuben, billionaire entrepreneurs in the UK
Reuben James (c. 1776 - 1838), a Boatswain's Mate of the United States Navy
John Reuben, an American Christian hip-hop artist
Julie Reuben, historian interested in the role of education in American society and culture
Reuben Garret L. Goldberg (also known as Rube Goldberg), famous cartoonist and creator of the eponymous Rube Goldeberg devices.

My questions are:

Should entries such as these really be included on dab pages?
Is there truly an expectation that someone searching for any of these individuals would do so simply by typing "Reuben" in their search?
Shouldn't we only be listing individuals who are commonly known simply as "Reuben"?

Marchije (talk) 04:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"dab" itself is ambiguous, and typing it in all lowercase makes it even harder to recognize, so if you must abbreviate it, you will be easier to understand if you link your first mention of it: "dab". When a disambiguation page title is a surname or a given name of some people, another option might be to follow the style of Gates, which has these entries:

People with the surname Gates:

Gates (surname)

People with the given name Gates:

Gates McFadden, American actress and choreographer

Personally, I'd rather have all the entries on one page. As to whether "there is truly an expectation" of what people will type when searching for articles, obviously we can have no rational expectation without data about what other people actually type. What you or I happen to need is unlikely to determine what everyone else will do. Jakob Nielsen says the only way to understand what users do is to actually observe a bunch of users. Since we don't actually do that on Wikipedia, we do the next best thing (or perhaps a better thing): we let users themselves add whatever improvements they want. Presumably, if someone added people to disambiguation pages, that someone probably finds it convenient to search for people that way. Since these entries probably do not harm people such as yourself who don't need them, it looks like a net improvement. --Teratornis (talk) 05:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info and suggestions. Marchije (talk) 13:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking my answer in stride (upon re-reading, it sounds a bit harsh). In any case, note the general method I used to come up with an answer: I chose the first word that came to mind which is likely to be the surname or given name of several notable people, and then I looked at the corresponding disambiguation page: Gates. It turned out to be relevant to the question. I also looked at Wikipedia:Disambiguation to see if it gives any relevant guidelines about surnames or given names, but it doesn't really seem to. On Wikipedia, a vast number of users have considered a vast number of things, so there are lots of document pages listing the good ideas, as well as examples of well-thought-out pages that implement good ideas. The trick is to find them. Or just ask on the Help desk and someone else will know the trick. --Teratornis (talk) 16:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

confusing box "multiple issues"[edit]

I keep encountering a box at the top of an article (example:) {{articleissues |OR=September 2007 |POV=September 2007 |citecheck=October 2007 |citations missing=October 2007}} which I cannot edit. It has confusing jargon in it: "Multiple issues" could mean several things: It could mean that the page has been re-issued several times or that it appears under different names in Wikipedia. Better to say "multiple problems." But I cannot find the original (prototype) box to edit. Carrionluggage (talk) 04:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most things that are stuck between two pairs of curly braces are templates that are being transcluded on the page. It's possible to transclude something that's not a template (or at least not in the template namespace), but especially on articles not recommended. In any case, to get to the template itself to edit it, you can do two things - first, any templates transcluded by a page will be listed, with links at the bottom of the edit page, so try clicking on "edit this page" and scrolling down; secondly, a template named {{foo}} is located at Template:Foo, so just take the text inside the curly braces (up to the first pipe, i.e. |, and this marks template parameters which are not part of the name) and add Template: in front of it in the search box. For example, the "articleissues" template is as Template:Articleissues. However, when making a change to a template like that one, which is used on a lot of articles, it might be an idea to discuss changes on the template's talk page first. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 05:01, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Viral text reference in article?[edit]

There is a poem Green Eggs and Hamlet which presents the To be, or not to be speech as if written by Dr. Seuss. The poem, apparently by Tim Hnetka--NB: unconfirmed but almost always attributed to "Anonymous"--spread through academia as a viral phenomenon in 1996 and onwards (copies can be easily Googled; I'm sure in Way Back many more exist). A feel for the work can be seen in one of its lines: "To sleep, to dream, aye, there's the rub/I'd drop a toaster in my tub."

I think the poem is too good to be left out, and is in fact a reference of sorts. The link I give is good because it gives the poem and is at least one testimony to the author; but it's part of a signed Usenet message.

Can I put it in the To be, or not to be entry as a footnote or something? And if so, how would it be worded?

Best, --Shlishke (talk) 04:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I don't think it specifically has a place here, though it might do well on your user page under a {{humor}} tag. Realize the following policies would apply: WP:V and WP:N — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do I use an image...[edit]

...from wikimedia (specifically: this one) on my user page? — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wikilogo7.png doesn't seem to work. — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Images must be at Wikimedia Commons or the English Wikipedia, so the image must be copied. It's used in the same way in both cases. meta:Image:Wikilogo7.png says it has unknown copyright status. You can ask User:Gareth Owen for permission. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AWB help[edit]

I have never used AWB before. I would like to set an AWB session up for it to find any article with {{F1-bio-stub}} in the article mainspace, and produce the following statement in the article's talkpage if not already there -- {{WikiProject Formula One|class=stub}}.

I am manually classifying these articles, and this will simply make a multitude of obvious stubs (there are many) faster and easier to classify.

When I use KingboyK's assessment plugin, it does not work. How do I have the assessment tool load everything in the category Category:Formula One people stubs and let me quickly get to work? Guroadrunner (talk) 07:19, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't get an answer here, you might ask at: Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser#Discussion. It looks as though people who know something about AWB monitor that page (there might not be any Help desk volunteers checking in just now who are familiar with this tool - we don't know everything about everything, but we have an idea where to look for just about everything). You can also search the archived AutoWikiBrowser discussions. For example, searching for load category finds some questions that might be similar to yours. (I love the {{Google custom}} template.) --Teratornis (talk) 16:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

clicking on edit-this-page brings up index.php as a save-file option[edit]

greetings all,

Looking for answers on why I get an option to Save As a file named index.php to my hard drive, when I click on "edit this page" or the "+" symbols.

I tried looking for answers in wiki help but get automatically directed to a wikipedia page, rather than a help page.

Also saw the {{helpme}} hint, but cannot paste the link !

thanks,

jason

avaiki (talk) 07:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ps: sorry for the double posting, somehow only shows up in edit as one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avaiki (talk • contribs) 07:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Go to Special:Preferences when you are logged in to your account, click the 'Editing' tab and make sure that 'Use external editor by default' is not checked. Raven4x4x (talk) 10:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

stub files[edit]

I've read in some papers that there are stub files available for downloads instead of those containing the complete history of all pages. I am looking for a dataset which depicts the interactions among editors (who revises whom). The data contains information about revisions (i.e. timestamp, Usename, comment)excluding the articles themselves (text) are sufficient.

Could any one tell me where I can download the mentioned files. I did download a dump from download.wikimedia.org/. I downloaded as an XML format. But When I arranged to open the file it was a huge amount of unstructured messy data. Dont know what was wrong. But I couldn't handle to see it as an xml file.

All helps and comments are appreciated.

Thanks --Naz (talk) 10:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:EIW#Export and WP:EIW#Query for links to relevant documentation, tools, and people. The technical details of your question may exceed the knowledge of the Help desk volunteers who happen be checking in just now. However, the links I gave should tell you where to look for answers. --Teratornis (talk) 16:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

export page[edit]

I am trying to convert the edit histiory page of an article into an xml format. The export page is supposed to the exact thing. I chose an article and the result is as follows.

 <sitename>Meta</sitename> 
 <base>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page</base> 
 <generator>MediaWiki 1.13alpha</generator> 
 <case>first-letter</case>

- <namespaces>

 <namespace key="-2">Media</namespace> 
 <namespace key="-1">Special</namespace> 
 <namespace key="0" /> 
 <namespace key="1">Talk</namespace> 
 <namespace key="2">User</namespace> 
 <namespace key="3">User talk</namespace> 
 <namespace key="4">Meta</namespace>

.....

Could any one explain what the above describes? (namespace????)

I thought that the interactions among editors would be depicted in the revision history but it sounds that the codes contains something totally different? The export page says that it the xml file contains text and editing history of a particular page or set of pages. But I cant see that.

Thanks --Naz (talk) 11:40, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Namespace explains what namespaces are. I wasn't actually aware until now that XML dumps can contain this information. I will look for more information that may be relevant to the rest of your question. --Teratornis (talk) 16:02, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A basic tool for researching Wikipedia is: WP:EIW. Go there and do a Ctrl-F search in your browser for "XML". That finds some potentially useful links:

Wikipedia:WikiProject Database analysis - collaboration of editors who use XML database dumps
WP:EIW#Export

A very large fraction of all there is no know about Wikipedia is already in writing somewhere. WP:EIW is the most complete index to that knowledge which we have constructed so far. --Teratornis (talk) 16:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Printing Categories[edit]

How can I print a complete Category? 212.25.107.145 (talk) 11:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just like an article: click "Printable version" in the left-hand-side toolbox. Xenon⁵⁴ 11:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - Is it possible to print not only the category text, but also all the linked pages within it? 212.25.107.145 (talk) 14:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would imagine whole forests are crying out, "Let's hope not!" As far as I know, there is no simple automatic method to print all pages in a category. This would probably require some programming. If you are a programmer, you might get somewhere by following the links under WP:EIW#Export and WP:EIW#Query. --Teratornis (talk) 16:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copying my own work from another wikipedia[edit]

I've made some lay-outs for the dutch Wikipedia. When I am the only author can I copy/reuse these designs again here without giving any explicit attribution to the author (myself) or source? Free style 12:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What exatly do you mean by lay-outs? You are allowed to copy your own work without attribution but it would be practical to mention the original anyway. Otherwise people may think you copied it inappropriately from somebody else. If the lay-outs are just ways to organize a page and not the text of the page then I don't think the source has to be mentioned. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Number of administrators in 2008[edit]

I'm writing an essay about cognitive authority and Wikipedia and I need to know where I can find information about its administrators. My main question is - how many admins does Wikipedia have, as of March, 2008? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashrawi (talk • contribs) 14:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1511 as of now. See [1] and keep clicking Next 500 to count. Or simply view this number which is a magic word: 861. x42bn6 Talk Mess 14:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Administrators. The number is displayed by the magic word {{NUMBEROFADMINS}} which produces 861 and automatically changes. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a New Term.[edit]

How can I verify that I have an account? I have previously contributed knowledge to existing Wikipedia, but cannot start a new entry topic.

Please tell me:

1- Do I have an account with you?

2- How do I start a new topic; :planetary Nebulae" (Astronomy).

Angelo Campanella —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.247.72.101 (talk) 14:41, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The English Wikipedia has 47,327,010 accounts with user names at Special:Listusers. We need more information to say whether you are one of them. There is no account called User:Angelo Campanella. If you remember a page you have edited then you can click the "history" tab and look for a possible username in the page history. It's OK to create a new account if you don't remember whether you have one, or if you cannot access it due to a lost password. About starting a new article:

You will need to first register an account, which has many benefits, including the ability to create articles. Once you have registered, 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 Help:Starting a new page. You might also look at 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. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a featured article at Planetary nebula. Do you mean a specific nebula? PrimeHunter (talk) 14:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry; the entry is singular (nebulA) whereas I was addressing plural (nebulAE).

So indeed the topic exists now in your Wiki. (it wild be nice if your searcher would accommodate such near-spellings.

I should say that the images shown are not the most intriguing or interesting.

I have on my web page three additional images that show an intriguing hour-glass form that indicate structures new to our thinking.

Continuing;

Take a look at my previously referenced personal page, and decide whether some content is appropriate for the Wiki planetary nebulA.

Angelo Campanella —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.247.72.101 (talk) 15:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia we accommodate misspellings and variations on word stems with redirect pages. --Teratornis (talk) 15:58, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

planetary Nebulae and planetary nebulae both redirect to Planetary nebula. What did you search? Where is the web page with the images you mention? You can make suggestions for the article at Talk:Planetary nebula. See Wikipedia:Image use policy. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(undent) To comment further on the possibility of recovering your user name, if any:

On Wikipedia, you do not need to log in before editing most of our existing pages. (Only the relatively few semi-protected pages require users to log in before editing.) Creating an account and logging in is necessary to create new pages. Thus if you only edited existing pages in the past, you might not have created an account.
If you did create an account, and you created a user page, and you can recall anything you might have typed on it, part or all of your user name, you can Search Wikipedia's User: namespace.

If you cannot remember your user name, you will just have to create a new account if you want to create any new pages. However, note that new pages by new users have a high rate of getting deleted by administrators for violating various policies and guidelines. Most new users are better off gaining experience by editing existing articles and reading the friendly manuals before tackling the difficult task of creating new articles. Also see Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomy which you might want to join. --Teratornis (talk) 17:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citation broken[edit]

Subject line says it all. My refences show script and a box! Virginia-American (talk) 15:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but it doesn't say it all to me, and I couldn't find problems in examined edits in Special:Contributions/Virginia-American. Can you give an example? PrimeHunter (talk) 15:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Country - United Kingdom being added whereEngland used.[edit]

I've noticed that United Kingdom is being suffixed on to England - [2]. This appears to be a widescale process. Has their been a decision/guideline/MoS edict to do this ? Thanks -- John (Daytona2 · Talk · Contribs) 16:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In what way is it suffixed onto England? Please expand on your question. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 17:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean 'England, United Kingdom'? It's just one of those things, like <Insert US state here>, USA. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 17:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the questionner. "England, United Kingdom" sounds just-plain-daft to British ears. Have you noticed lots of instances of this? AndyJones (talk) 08:28, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems just as daft to me as the repeated need to indicate that American locations are in the USA, such as Phoenix, Arizona, USA, for example. That's over-linking, as far as I'm concerned. Corvus cornix_talk 18:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a category[edit]

How do I create a new category? Category:People's United Party politicians exists, but a United Democratic Party equivalent does not. Therefore, I'd like to create Category:Category:United Democratic Party members for UDP politicians. DO56 (talk) 20:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Add the new category to an article, and you'll get a redlink in the categories section. Then click on the redlink to create the category. You should try to put the category in other appropriate categories that are broader than yours is. --ais523 20:52, 3 March 2008 (U T C)

All right, thank you. Is Category:United Democratic Party members correct? Also, other than a URL, is it possible to provide a link to that category that does not put this page in the category as well? (Using a URL seems clunky.) DO56 (talk) 21:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Put ':' in front to make a link, for example [[:Category:United Democratic Party members]] to make Category:United Democratic Party members. See more about categories at Help:Category. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:46, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Essay Contest[edit]

Hello. I founded an essay contest, The "I'm Proud to be a Wikipedian" Essay Contest. I need help to make it known so people will know about it without canvassing Signed, Nothing 444 22:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, it seems to me that you have come up with another thing that Wikipedia is WP:NOT: An essay contest. —teb728 t c 23:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is just something so that wikipedians can show how proud they are to be a wikipedian, and get an award for it. There is the Wikipedia World Cup and they did nothing about it. Besides, I think Mr. Wales will be really happy to see how much people appreciate him for helping found Wikipedia. Signed, Nothing 444 23:49, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOT refers mostly to what articles are not. Off in the project (Wikipedia:) namespace, we have a bit more latitude to indulge in a bit of Metapedianism. You might look at Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is so great. As long as what you want to do contributes somehow to building the encyclopedia, even if indirectly, there may be a place for it somewhere. --Teratornis (talk) 00:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest searching through The Editor's index a bit to be sure you aren't reinventing any wheels. Also, there may be a WikiProject your idea would fit logically under. --Teratornis (talk) 00:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As an example of the difference between what we say and what we do (so to speak), WP:NOT#HOWTO says Wikipedia is not a how-to guide. Clearly that refers to our articles, because in our Help: and Wikipedia: namespace we have hundreds of how-to guides for editing on Wikipedia. In fact, Wikipedia contains one of the most amazing how-to guides anywhere, with the how-to information being all about how to organize millions of strangers from around the world to build the largest encyclopedia in history. A project this size needs a vast quantity of instructions, so we write them along with the articles that are the real goal of the project. --Teratornis (talk) 00:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]