Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2009 June 4

Help desk
< June 3	<< May | June | Jul >>	June 5 >

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.

June 4

Table question - when to collapse, how to maintain uniform color

I've added some tables to the USA women's national basketball team. So far, I've added Coaches for FIBA, Coaches for Jones Cup and Players for Jones Cup. I'd like to add others, such as FIBA Players and Olympic Players and Coaches.

Some of these tables, especially the Players, are getting long. I thought I'd try making them collapsible.

Two questions:

• Is there a rule of thumb for how long a table could be and left uncollapsed? One possible rule is that a table that fits on one screen (I realize this isn't a well-defined length) should be left open, and longer ones collapsed. In particular, my two coaches tables are just over that limit, but the players list is well over.
• My attempt to make a collapsible table interferes with the desired color of the first cell. I've tried a few things, but can't seem to fix it. Here is the test: User:Sphilbrick/Sandbox for USA Head coaches--Sphilbrick (talk) 00:30, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Accessibility#Scrolling and collapsible sections. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 02:34, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, it will help me answer the first question - FTR, the second question is still open.--Sphilbrick (talk) 14:39, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

monsterVisionTV

Yes, I've been trying to submit an article about monsterVisionTV... ...it was removed by wikipedia claiming it was a corporation. Is Ghost Hunters not listed here? Yeah. Also, monsterVisionTV is already listed under the link you have for webisodes, yet you refuse an article about the actual monsterVisionTV. They are a non profit group, unlike Ghost Hunters and others you have listed on Wiki.

This is ridiculous.

I say this, if ever, and I mean ever, in any shape or form, monsterVisionTV or any of the characters or subdivisions are EVER listed on this site, legal action will be taken, since apparently you are very "selective" of what you allow.

Unbelievable. You DO NOT have our support.

Complaints WILL be filed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.212.60.13 (talk) 00:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:No legal threats. You risk being blocked. This is the only edit by your IP address. I don't know which page you are referring to so I cannot see what happened, but I doubt anybody said content was removed purely for being about a corporation. More likely it was judged to not satisfy our guidelines, for example Wikipedia:Notability or Wikipedia:Spam. List of Web television series#M mentions monsterVisionTV but there has not been an article with that title - at least not with that spelling. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I now see you have already been blocked for 31 hours. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:52, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Primehunter. I'm curious what account you found. I just blocked User:Fingercallous indefinitely for making the legal threat above and that user has never been blocked before. Did I get the wrong user?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I only found 67.212.60.13 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) who made the above post and was blocked by Juliancolton. I guess I should have tried other capitalizations and found Monstervisiontv. As I guessed, nobody said it was removed just for being about a corporation. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:17, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Got ya. I thought you might have found a different deletion in the log and thereby found a different account.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:23, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I see you wrote "monsterVisionTV is already listed under the link you have for webisodes" without saying it was yourself who added it there.[1] I wonder whether you will take legal action against yourself. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:29, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

For clarification, I reported the legal threat to WP:ANI, which resulted in the ip's blocking, but I forgot to drop a note here. So are Fingercallous and the ip one and the same?Fingers^OnRoids 02:43, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't have CheckUser access but it certainly looks like that. Fingercallous created Monstervisiontv today and it was deleted 11 minutes before the ip posted here. The deleted article was about something "based out of North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, USA", and the ip resolves to there. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:56, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

NO LEGAL ACTION WAS THREATENED. PLEASE READ AGAIN. OUR ADMIN SAID, IF WE EVER SHOWED UP HERE, WE WOULD SAY SOMETHING ABOUT THAT. THE REASON GIVEN FOR DELETION WAS "Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject" By the way, why was a banned? For what? What kind of organization is this? If you argue an article deletion you are banned? I apologize for coming across a tad bit harsh, but I just don't understand why a non-profit group isn't allowed to have an article submitted here. I allowed one of our admins to access my account on wiki to post the article. Again, why was I banned?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.61.211.241 (talk)

You were blocked, not banned, because you made a legal threat. You did in fact make one, with this sentence:

"I say this, if ever, and I mean ever, in any shape or form, monsterVisionTV or any of the characters or subdivisions are EVER listed on this site, legal action will be taken, since apparently you are very "selective" of what you allow.

That was a definite legal threat, and thus a blockable offense, as Wikipedia takes these kinds of things very seriously. Now, addressing the issue of why it was your article was deleted, it was deleted because there was no assertion in the article of how the organization was significant. Please see WP:YFA, before rewriting it, and make sure it is up to standards. However, you are evading a block right now by posting this, another blockable offense. I highly suggest you stop until the duration of your block is over, unless you want to be blocked again. Regards,Fingers^OnRoids 15:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The block on the user account is indefinite. If the user wishes to attempt to recreate the article, the legal threat has to be clearly withdrawn, or the block will not be lifted. This IP has been blocked as well.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:24, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi

How do I make it so that the references do the little miniature blue number by it. Is there like an engine or something in which you do it because I can't figure it out --Genovese12345 (talk) 02:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Click show for a guide to placing inline citations

Visual inline citation guide

Formatting references using inline citations

All information in Wikipedia articles should be verified by citations to reliable sources. Our preferred method of citation is using the "cite.php" form of inline citations, using the <ref></ref> elements. Using this method, each time a particular source is mined for information (don't copy word-for-word!), a footnote is placed in the text ("inline"), that takes one to the detail of the source when clicked, set forth in a references section after the text of the article. In brief, anywhere you want a footnote to appear in a piece of text, you place an opening <ref> tag followed by the text of the citation which you want to appear at the bottom of the article, and close with a </ref> tag. Note the closing slash ("/"). For multiple use of a single reference, the opening ref tag is given a name, like so: <ref name="name"> followed by the citation text and a closing </ref> tag. Each time you want to use that footnote again, you simply use the first element with a slash, like so: <ref name="name" />. In order for these references to appear, you must tell the software where to display them, using either the code <references/> or, most commonly, the template, {{Reflist}} which can be modified to display the references in columns using {{Reflist|colwidth=30em}}. Per our style guidelines, the references should be displayed in a separate section denominated "References" located after the body of the article.
Inline citation code; what you type in 'edit mode'	What it produces when you save
Two separate citations.<ref>Citation text.</ref><ref>Citation text2.</ref> Multiple<ref name="multiple">Citation text3.</ref> citation<ref name="multiple" /> use.<ref name="multiple" /> == References == {{Reflist}}	Two separate citations. Multiple citation use. References_________________
Templates that can be used between <ref>...</ref> tags to format references {{Citation}} • {{Cite web}} • {{Cite book}} • {{Cite news}} • {{Cite journal}} • Others • Examples

See also, Help:Footnotes and more generally, Wikipedia:Citing sources.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:08, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

problems hitting internal links

hi sometimes when i hit an internal connection, rather then go to page itself, I get a windows dialog box askong me to save a file. problem exists in both hebrew and english wikipedia i use ie8/vista home answer by email to <blanked> would be most appreciated Rzg (talk) 15:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

It sounds like you have a box checked in your preferences that shouldn't be. Go to the "My preferences" tab at the top of the page, then click on the "Editing" tab. Make sure that "Use external editor by default" and "Use external diff by default" are unchecked. Let us know if that fixes it. TNXMan 15:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

I am not editing. Just browsing through wikipedia and hitting an internal link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rzg (talk • contribs) 09:05, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

nope. no help!!!Rzg (talk) 04:05, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

I get this sometimes— I think it is a connection issue. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 11:10, 9 May 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.134.102.16 (talk)

nope.not a connection issue  !!!Rzg (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:43, 14 May 2009 (UTC).

here is a screenshot of the error msg i got when hitting the link pyongyang File:Pyongyang error.jpg

(outdent) I notice that that specific article has 2 direct links in the body text to articles on the Korean Wikipedia, and I suspect that this is causing the problem; the foreign characters are being converted into unicode, and it is confusing your browser.

These links are coded like this: [[:ko:아사달|신시]] and [[:ko:낙랑|낙랑]]

They appear like this:

신시 and 낙랑

As far as I am aware, using interwiki links in this manner is not the norm - but I'm not certain enough to remove them. I will therefore note the issue on the articles discussion page.  Chzz  ►  11:35, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

(outdent)

glossary

do you have a special page for terms used in your articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.22.124.238 (talk) 05:50, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

terms like what? Give an example. There is a glossary here you might be interested in :Wikipedia:Glossary 211.30.23.232 (talk) 05:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd say an odd word would be linked to its Wikipedia article. If not, you can always look it that one word on Wiktionary. If one finds Wikipedia's wording too confusing in general, try using the Simple English Wikipedia. hmwithτ 12:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

mediawiki shortcuts definition

Hello. Where is it defined that [[WP:]] => [[Wikipedia:]] ? --almaghi (talk) 07:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

• If you want to know the technical background of this, you might want to ask at the technical village pump. - 131.211.211.234 (talk) 09:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

• Ok thks. --almaghi (talk) 10:05, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

• They only recently changed it, because it was being used for shortcuts anyway. It's discussed in more detail at WP:Namespace. hmwithτ 12:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Editing existing articles

How do I edit an exisitng article about football club

St Ives Town FC

UCL

Nnania (talk) 08:15, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

There's a link in the tabs at the top of the St Ives Town F.C. page labelled "edit" - if you click that you'll be taken to a screen where you can edit the article's content. To find out how to use wiki syntax and how to make sure your edits conform to our guidelines, why not take the Wikipedia tutorial? It's a short walkthrough of the procedures for editing Wikipedia. Or, if there's some specific edit you want to make, you can ask again here and we'll tell you how to do it. Gonzonoir (talk) 08:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Making a template

Hi all,

Can anyone give me a hand with making a template for DottyQuoteBot, which gets the quote of the day from Wikiquote & brings it here-I'm looking for a template so that people can put it on their page as described on the userpage of the bot. Any help would be appreciated! Thanks! Dotty••|☎ 10:08, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I made a few ideas at User:hmwith/sandbox. A & B are slight variations of a basic quote template. C is a bit more advanced (and color, border-size, and font can be easily changed). This is helping out with the "the boxy one" request (as seen on User:DottyQuoteBot). Let me know, hmwithτ 12:36, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

User Page

My UserPage link is currently in red and when I try to click to it I just get a page saying 'This Page Cannot be Found'. How do I actually create my user page and then create subpages after that as I would like to create some articles but want to practice editing in there first. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephenpenndb7 (talk • contribs) 10:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I've started the page for you ... just click on the edit tab, and you should be able to add the content you want. Welcome, and I hope you enjoy Wikipedia. ;) — Ched :  ?  10:24, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

See WP:YFA and WP:LAYOUT for pointers. Since you seem to be writing about a corporation, see WP:BFAQ. Beware of the common mistake of not providing enough reliable sources that assert the notability of an article's subject. You are going about this in the recommended way by practicing on a user subpage first. --Teratornis (talk) 19:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Colored link

Resolved

I made a userbox on User:Debresser/What's up?. It contains a link. I'd like the link to be the same silver color as the rest of the text. How should I do that? If I'd want to place a few dots underneath it (to show the link), how should I do that? Debresser (talk) 10:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

You can make it silver with [[Wikipedia:Wikignoming|<span style="color:silver">fix</span>]] which renders as fix (don't do this in articles). I don't know about dots. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. That is like any text. I thought there might be something special for links. But actually your method is better, because it will work the same for used and unused links. Thanks again! Debresser (talk) 11:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

You can also use {{color}}. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 11:35, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

That's a straightforward template, looking at its code. Same as what the previous user answered, just in a template. Debresser (talk) 11:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

There is {{H:title}} to make the dots under the link. Debresser (talk) 11:37, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Could somebody make a documentation page for {{H:title}}? I made it work, but I have no idea why it works and how it should really be done. Debresser (talk) 11:45, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Private school infobox template

Eastern Mennonite School has a Private school infoxbox template, but I cannot find a description of this template. Can you help me? I am writing an article, and would like to know the parameters. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

It's all on Template:Infobox School, "infobox private school" was merged into this a while back. Nanonic (talk) 14:20, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Pictures

I came accross a weird picture just now on a school page. The picture has repeatedly been changed back and forth probably due to a simplified file name. It only links at this time to one page, and a user page (where i cant find the image anyway). Im aware that you can use 'move' to change the name of the article, but is it possible to change the name of the picture without uploading a new image. The image may be against copyright issues as it stands anyway. but im curious as to what the best fix option is, thanks a bunch Ottawa4ever (talk) 15:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

For more details the image is File:Lucas.jpgOttawa4ever (talk) 15:56, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Or linked: File:Lucas.jpg. – ukexpat (talk) 16:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The file name should be changed or re-uploaded to 'A.B. Lucas Secondary School logo.jpg' or something similar or it will keep getting changed. The original image was of a dog and was released under GFDL; I highly doubt that the school logo is available as such- it should be tagged with {{Non-free logo}}. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 17:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

• I've restored the old file and moves the logo to an appropriate page with a fitting license (and changed the file in the school article) - Mgm|^(talk) 08:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Problems with an infobox

Resolved

 –  – ukexpat (talk) 17:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I was trying to find a tag that says something akin to "infobox needs cleanup" but couldn't find anything on it. As difficult as it is to find the kind of help you need on wikipedia, I'm getting tired of trying to help. I don't want to have to learn all the formating tricks or memorize all the {{}} tags, and can't seem to be able to find them when I need to. In that case, it would be nice if there was a "to-do" list for regular editors who have that kind of knowledge. I have a feeling there probably is, and I'm hoping this is that list. But once again, hard to find out anything in regards to help here.167.7.17.3 (talk) 16:13, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Tags aren't the only way of notifying people there's a problem. There may very well be a tag about this, but if there isn't (or, even if there is), if you tell us which infobox you have a problem with, someone can take a look. Or, add a section to the appropriate article's talk page saying what the problem is. Or the talk page of the infobox template. The peculiarities of Wikipedia editing can be annoying, but it's made up for in the fact that most people are happy to help out when asked, and that it's a pretty flexible system; there are usually several ways to attack a problem. Ask in the wrong place, or the wrong way, and someone will either help out anyway, or suggest where you can go to get your question answered.

So, which infobox is it? --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:21, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, I see you've already left a note on the article talk page. That's the place for it. It isn't a problem with the infobox format, so much as the contents in the infobox, so it's article-specific rather than infobox-specific. People more knowledgeable about coding than you (and more knowledgeable about the article subject than I) will likely have that talk page watched, and should respond in a while. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree that it is difficult to learn all the Wikipedia templates, and other techniques. One way to learn more is a book, Help:Wikipedia: The Missing Manual, right here and of course as a paper book, too. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:23, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup shows {{Cleanup-infobox}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help and hopefully I can remember to use those sources next time something like this comes up!167.7.17.3 (talk) 16:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

FTR, I had to fix the US Confederate State infobox - it was broken, and put 'unknown's in because the parameters are not optional (converting it would be a pain). Did my best, it's only actually transcluded in two places and one talk, it doesn't work very well and is underused in those places. There are, as pointed out on its talk, some anachronisms. Did my best. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 18:38, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Possibly bad claim of fair use

I noticed this image: Image:Vigil1936.JPG is copyrighted and the rationale states that it is being used for critical commentary. It's only used in one article, Vigil of the Princes, as a simple illustration. Doesn't that mean it should (at least) have a better rationale? 86.130.138.39 (talk) 16:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I think the rationale right now is pretty strong, seeing as it fits this entry in the list of fair use rationales.

"Paintings and other works of visual art: For critical commentary, including images illustrative of a particular technique or school."

The painting is being used for critical commentary an event, and there is no free alternative to it because no images of that event exist, according to the image page. If you can think of a better rationale, then I suggest you be bold and add it.Fingers^OnRoids 16:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think a different rationale could save it if it is not being used appropriately. Generally, for works of art such as this, the only acceptable use is for articles where the art itself is directly discussed, not necessarily the event the art is depicting. A free alternative to a picture is words; and since words can describe an event, there is not necessarily a rationale for including a copyright picture of an event unless such a picture is itself transformative in nature. I don't think this one qualifies, but if you seek additional input on this, you could ask at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. People who patrol that noticeboard are frequently experienced in dealing with issues such as this, and you likely will receive better responses there. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:08, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Freezing a web page for use as a citation

I know that there is a technique for freezing a web page for use as a citation, thus avoiding a dead link in the future, but I don't know how to find it. Please point it out for me. --DThomsen8 (talk) 16:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Citing sources/Further considerations#Pre-emptive archiving mentions WebCite. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

That's the one I use: http://www.webcitation.org  – ukexpat (talk) 16:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I tried it twice, both times it said in red, Internal Error. --DThomsen8 (talk) 22:58, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi I started an article last night come back to try and work on it today and it has been redirected

Is there anyway I can get it back? I was doing that article concerning a single from an album released in 1997 that was a notable single. I cannot understand for the life of me why it was automatically redirected without anyone bothering to notify me and give me a reason for it. I would like the redirect gone and the article restored so I can have a chance to work on it because it was a major single on a major album and based on the criteria that I have read on this website concerning songs, it deserves an article.

The article was about the song "Make Em Say Uhh" (should be Ugh cause thats how its spelled). It was a single that reached platinum status and I believe that earns it an article of its own even though someone who doesn't like me and who obviously knows how to use this site better than I do doesn't

--Genovese12345 (talk) 16:53, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Considering that the entire content consisted of "Make Em Say Uhh' was a single from Master P's 1997 album Ghetto D.", I'm not surprised. I suggest you start this at User:Genovese12345/Make 'Em Say Uhh!. When you get it somewhere near the quality of All I Really Want, then ask for a review. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 17:00, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict, reply to OP). The problem was that the article was SO short that it contained no meaningful content. The facts that you note about the single, such as its sales and platinum status and the like, is nowhere mentioned in the article. Other editors are not clairvoyant and cannot be expected to know the details of this article. That being said, if you are prepared to expand the article, feel free to undo the redirect and expand the article so that there is enough referenced information in it so that it can stand alone as an article. There is absolutely nothing wrong with undoing the redirect, so long as you also expand the article so that it has enough information to stand on its own. You should probably make sure it clearly abides by the minumum standards spelled out at WP:MUSIC for example. But don't be offended or upset here. Just go back to your original article, remove the redirect, and add enough info to make it clear that it can stand alone. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

As a note, the person who redirected it back to the album most likely has absolutely nothing against you, they are just following policy.Fingers^OnRoids 17:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Yep. I patrol short pages, and look at them to see if they stand alone well enough, or if something needs to be done. If, as in this case, every bit on information in the first article is present in the second, with there actually being *more* in the second (featured performers and track length), then redirecting sends the reader to the place where they can get more info. As a lesser concern, but still a concern, there was no indication in the first article that the song was separately notable from the album. We do not have articles on every song on every notable album. So, between the lack on useful information and the lack of any indication of notability, my standard action in such situations is to redirect back to the parent album. This solution is a lot less extreme than any sort of deletion, and, as described already by others, is easily undone by anyone ready to actually expand the article. - TexasAndroid (talk) 17:27, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Need an admin to undelete article

I have extra sources from Northsound 1 and The Independent to back up the deleted article Scott Campbell (blogger). If you could reinstate it, that would be great. --86.151.197.246 (talk) 17:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The best idea is to contact the admin who deleted the page. It appears that it was User:Fritzpoll and you should be able to contact him on his talk page. TNXMan 17:33, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Jobs at Wikipedia?

How can I apply to work for Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.151.120.89 (talk) 18:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Anybody can edit Wikipedia, in much the same way as you posted this question. See the link I just posted for more information.

The Wikimedia Foundation has minimal staff, but you can stand in the next board election. See wmf:Board for more information. Dendodge _T\^C 18:13, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

A somewhat more realistic (although still quite difficult) option might be to start your own wiki and put AdSense on it. If you build up enough content, you might generate nontrivial AdSense revenue. However, of the thousands of wikis listed on WikiIndex, only a small fraction have attracted significant traffic, and only some of those are running advertisements. If you need to get paid right away, this would not be the best method. You would probably have to edit heavily on your wiki for months, maybe years, with no guarantee of success, to build up enough content to attract enough eyeballs. You would also need to master the arcana of MediaWiki administration. --Teratornis (talk) 18:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

For job openings at the WikiMedia Foundation, see this page. – ukexpat (talk) 18:55, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

There are some other opportunities to get paid for editing on Wikipedia. See:

• Wikipedia:Reward board - some users offer rewards, some of them monetary, to other users who complete specific tasks.
• m:Philip Greenspun illustration project - there was a grant to pay people to create illustrations for Wikipedia. See Commons:Commons:Meet our illustrators.
• If you are a software developer, see mw:Summer of Code.

However, your question only specifies "work for". You did not specify whether you want to get paid for your work. The vast majority of Wikipedia's contributors are unpaid volunteers. --Teratornis (talk) 19:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)\

Am I allowed to Edit my own Talk Page?

Am I 'allowed to edit my own talk page' in the form of removing its content once I read and respond to it or is the user:talk page meant to just build up over time. Basically; am I allowed to clear User talk:Invmog once in a while, or is it to remain undisturbed and intact for some other reasons? Invmog (talk) 19:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

You can archive your talk page if you'd like. I use MiszaBotIII to archive my talk page every few weeks. Blanking is also allowed, per WP:UP#CMT. TNXMan 19:08, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

See the links under WP:EIW#Archive. I think archiving conveys more "honesty" than mere blanking. Blanking a talk page makes it look like you're trying to hide something. But it's up to you. --Teratornis (talk) 19:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Basically, you can do what you want, but here is what WP:TALK says: Users may freely remove comments from their own talk pages, though archiving is preferred. They may also remove some content in archiving. The removal of a warning is taken as evidence that the warning has been read by the user. This specifically includes both registered and anonymous users. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 19:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

A bit more useful infomation from wikipedia:vandalism that may be useful down the road:

"Blanking the posts of other users from talk pages other than your own, Wikipedia space, and other discussions, aside from removing internal spam, vandalism, etc., is generally considered vandalism. An obvious exception is moving posts to a proper place (e.g. protection requests to WP:RFPP). Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate, and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long talk page by creating an archive page and moving the text from the main talk page there. Note: The above rules do not apply to a user's own talk page. Editors are granted considerable latitude over editing their own userspace pages (including talk pages), and blanking one's own user talk page is specifically not prohibited. A policy of prohibiting users from removing warnings from their own talk pages was considered and rejected on the grounds that it would create more issues than it would solve. Since anonymous user talk pages may be shared by many users, removal of warnings is generally not appropriate."Ottawa4ever (talk) 21:40, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Invmog (talk) 21:48, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

louis phillipe medallian

hi, i have a medallion, i guess you call it that, that is about 2" diameter and on one side is "COMMEMORITIVE OF THE VISIT OF LOUIS PHILLIPE TO VICTIORIA QUEEN OF GREAT BRITAIN" and on the other side is a couple of figures facing each other and a couple of other figures. would you have any idea of the date and any other information, specifically does it have any value? thank you steve —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.86.14.135 (talk) 19:10, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

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. TNXMan 19:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Pictures in Commons

Resolved

 –  – ukexpat (talk) 15:10, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi everyone. I've uploaded this file in commons to illustrate an article I've written on the spanish edition of Wikipedia. Now I'd like to use the same picture on the english version of the article, but when using the file name of the picture ("Incognito.jpg") I get a picture of a Celine Dion's record called "Incognito". What should I do in order to use the right picture?

Thanks in advance for your help and sorry for my ignorance; I'm not a regular member on the english Wikipedia! --Serolillo (talk) 19:25, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

That's caused by having different files with the same name, one on each project. The easiest thing to do is re-upload your image to Commons with a different and unique filename so that there is no file name conflict. – ukexpat (talk) 19:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

But if that would be the problem, I would have the same problem with the spanish article. Actually I only have the problem with the English version of the article, the spanish, german and italian versions are working perfectly.--Serolillo (talk) 00:16, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The same problem would only occur if a picture called "Incognito.jpg" had also been uploaded on the Spanish, German and Italian Wikipedias, which is not the case, so the picture displayed there is that on Commons. On the English Wikipedia, however, a picture of that name exists (the Celine Dion record), and since local pictures have priority, this is the one that's displayed. I don't believe you can link to Commons explicitely (well you can, but only as a link : Commons:Image:Incognito.jpg), so you need to rename the picture on Commons with a more descriptive name (to avoid further name conflicts). Equendil Talk 12:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, many thanks for the info. As suggested, I've uploaded another version of the file with a different name on commons and now everything is working perfectly. Thanks again, --Serolillo (talk) 13:14, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Glad we could help and thanks for telling us the issue is resolved. It's always a good idea to make filenames as specific as possible, particularly on Commons where files are available to all the WikiMedia projects. – ukexpat (talk) 15:10, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Font Question

Is there anywhere I can see all the fonts that I could use on Wikipedia that most people have on their computer so I can choose one that works for everyone & is nice? Cheers! Dotty••|☎ 20:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The fonts are going to vary greatly from browser to browser and from computer to computer; it will depend on what people have installed on their own computers. There is no feasible way to deduce a list of those. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 20:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Font family (HTML) lists the standard HTML/CSS fonts. You should not use other than the default font in articles without a good reason. If you want to change the font that you see, I can help you. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 21:49, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Alphabetical list of Wikipedias

Is there a strictly alphabetical and comprehensive list of the languages in which Wikipedia appears? I have only across lists based on the number of articles or grouped according to language families. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.74.11.25 (talk) 20:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The main list at List of Wikipedias is sortable by whichever column you fancy (requires javascript). Algebraist 20:23, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

See also meta:List of Wikipedias by sample of articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Rewriting an article

I found this [[2]].. WP:BLP and thought it was very poor and almost an attack page and so started to rewrite it WP:BOLD I had got this far [[3]] when an editor reverted me and told me to talk about it on the talk page... what is there to talk about when the page is so awful? (Off2riorob (talk) 23:11, 4 June 2009 (UTC))

The guy's controversial; your edits came across as a whitewash (for example, changing the section heading in such a way as to indicate that anybody actually believes his claims to be a psychotherapist). I'd suggest that you post to the talk page a list of the sections you want to remove or change, with explanations of your reasoning for them. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I would have to disagree with you about the whitewash, I left a fair portion of negativity in, the article as it was is awful and a rewrite would be good and then people could talk about it. The poor guy has fallen out with the left and the right so he has no friends but that doesn't mean that wikipedia should allow or ignore... people to vent negativity about him online.Is citeing blogspots ok in political articles? (Off2riorob (talk) 00:02, 5 June 2009 (UTC))

I don't know about this specific case, but I should note that WP:NPOV does not mean we present an equally balanced view of a subject; we provide the mainstream view of a subject. If the negative outweighs the positive in mainstream media, then our article should reflect that, NOT a 50/50 split between the negative and the positive. Our article should reflect the actual balance of the coverage out there. If most of the material in reliable sources on a BLP paints that person in mostly a negative light, then we should present the same level of negative coverage, no more and no less. Making an article appear to show an even split between positive and negative opinions, where such balance does NOT exist in other reliable sources, is still a violation of WP:UNDUE. Again, these are general statements, I have no idea how this applies to this specific article, but its still an important idea to bring up. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 02:58, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes that is a interesting point Jayron and one I perhaps hadn't quite grasped. I was upset to have someone walk in and revert over two hours of my good faith work to tidy up the article and then just walk away, I will find more useful and rewarding things to do with my time.Thanks to you both for your comments.(Off2riorob (talk) 09:36, 5 June 2009 (UTC))

Don't give up - you could create your rewrite in a user subpage, then ask on the article's talk page for other editors to take a look at it. – ukexpat (talk) 13:03, 5 June 2009 (UTC)