Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2007 October 17

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.

October 17

rottweiler

I have just adopted a 4yr old rottweiler,name is Max,hes about 120lbs a gentle bear from what I can tell so far. Going to take us both to classes so we can learn together,I dont believe he would ever hurt someone or a thing but I was told not to trust them!can anyone give me some helpful hints?Thanx Mark —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.240.69.130 (talk) 00:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

this page is for questions about Wikipedia itself. You might be better off asking the question on our Reference desk. -- Kesh 00:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Software Development life cycle on Mianframes

Hi,

i am very happy to see your Articles...it's really great. also i would like to know how mainframe life cycle innocents i want to know the software development life cycle.

Thanks&Regards Shiva —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivagoparapu (talk • contribs) 00:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

change the picture

in International School Bangkok page Chanusa 00:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Do you have a better picture that we could use? If so, upload it, make sure it complies with our image use policy, and then place it in the article. GlassCobra 01:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Getting a little tiresome

I don't "really" know where a complaint of this form would go, but the users repeated changing of the icons HAS to stop. The only result of the repeated and indiscriminate changing of icons is mass confusion. Resolution by consensus would likely be flawed as Wikipedia is not known for its transperancy, the underlying network below the front is very hard to find, let alone navigate.

The fact is repeated modification of default icons should NOT be allowed. The addition of reflective effects to an icon does not make that icon any more representive than without the effects, and in some occasions it makes it more difficult to understand what the icon is trying to convey. Similarly, replacing the icon with an icon that is vastly different than the original not only confuses those who identify certain templates with the icons that support them, but is completely unnessicary.

All icons, once their initial form is decided, should be locked from being changed. Similarly, all templates, once their initial form is decided upon, should be locked from being changed. The point I make here is that unless there is a reason, exclusive of astetics, to change a "official" part of wikipedia, it should not be changed.

As I said before, I do not know where this "should" go, and I'm not one to try and work the system to get my way. If this is read, I would prefer it to be placed in the corrosponding location rather than me attempt at putting it where it should be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.238.179.195 (talk) 01:34, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Let me be the first to say... what the hell are you talking about?

ahem In a more polite fashion: what "icons" are you referring to? We need some context to understand what you're looking at and form a reply. -- Kesh 01:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Not entirely sure, but the user may be referring to Wikipedia's rule about having no fair use images in the userspace, and that these images in userboxes constantly get changed to free images? I'm not 100% on this one, but happy editing, ( arky ) 01:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure they're referring to all the interface changes that seem to be happening lately, everything from navigation box changes to template standardization has happened in the last few months, it's reasonable to assume that this sort of thing can be confusing to outsiders. There is something to be said for not making unnecessary interface changes, I mean wikipedia pretty much looked the same from 2003 to 2006, and then all of a sudden we get drop down menus in our user contributions, templates with large colored bars on them, page sizes in our watchlists and page histories, instruction creep run amok with different prompts for every page you edit, and to top it all off now when you hit the history tab you get "Revision history of ...", more instruction creep. I can understand why this would be frustrating for an anon user who can't use custom css to disable these changes.--VectorPotential^Talk 12:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Exact things to do

me 10/11/07:

"How do you do that? i have a great idea its just ive never cretaed a article on Wiki."

you said go to the "tutorial" and read my "first article" but what should i EXACTLY do to make an article. the tutorials dont exactly help. i need exact things to click

--THE CHUBACCA HAS LANDED 02:07, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Mcspazatron

Just search for the title you want your article to be, click on the red link, and put your text in. If you don't read the tutorial, though, you may wind up with an article that will be promptly deleted for failing one of our policies, such as notability or verifiability. -- Kesh 02:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

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

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

If you still think an article is appropriate, see 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 02:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

defragging

03:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)03:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)03:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)~how do i defrag john

For more information, please read our article on Defragmentation. You can also ask your question at our reference desk. Good luck! GlassCobra 04:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Can't get my user name out of the article I edited.

I was adding a paragraph about David Foster Wallace and my name appears in the article at the end of my edit. It probably has somethung to do with the fact that I originally placed the paragraph wrongly withi the article, so went back to "edit this page" and used CNTRL X and CNTRL C to move it. Now I cannot get rid of my name.Cross Reference 03:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Basically, you don't need to sign your edits to article with ~ symbols. However, I've reverted your addition to the article for now. There were too many of your own, original interpretations of the interview material. Be sure you're only reporting the facts, rather than assuming what was meant. -- Kesh 04:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

How to insert Chinese characters?

The article at:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_London_Missionary_Society_missionaries_in_China

has a table with "Chinese Name" as one column. In this is the name of the person using Chinese characters.

How can these characters be inserted?

Stubbo of Oz 06:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Stubbo Of Oz

Generally, these are inserted by typing them in, usually via a program that allows a person to type in the Roman alphabet (i.e. the alphabet we're using now), and convert that to the relevant characters. This is available in Windows XP and Mac OS X in a group of settings called either "Language", "Internationalization" or "Keyboard", and may require extra installation of components. Confusing Manifestation 14:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

getting a title for my article

How does my article get a title and get posted so that everyone can view it?

Thank You.

J H Hess —Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesHess (talk • contribs) 07:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• By posting the material in the main namespace. You put the content on your userpage. I would recommend you go through the Wikipedia:Introduction and Wikipedia:Tutorial, though, as the current version of the article is missing some basic formatting and hasn't got any links. - 131.211.210.15 08:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

In the news links

On the main page there is a section called "In the news". Clicking on any of the links within the headline does not take you to that story, but to the individual pages. This seems really odd. I'd like to read the full story that the headline advertises, but there is no way to do it. 222.155.182.122 08:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• There is no full story. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and so we don't publish newspaper articles. The In The News features are newsworthy facts that have sparked a significant update in one of our articles. If the whole story is mentioned, you want to find it in the bolded article link. - 131.211.210.15 08:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

You can find news at our sister project Wikinews if that helps. Pedro :  Chat  08:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi. The bolded link is there so most of the information that has changed recently is mentioned in the bolded article. Hope this helps. ~AH1^(TCU) 19:09, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

what is the baking processes

what is the baking processes because —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.105.73.52 (talk) 10:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Baking process of what? Pancakes? Bread? Pots? Please be a little more specific. If you aren't talking about baking Wikipedia, please post this question to the reference desk instead. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Consequently removing neutral text about satanic ritual abuse in the Netherlands

On 13 October 2007 I wrote a new chapter in the already existing article about satanic ritual abuse. It contains the discussion about satanic ritual abuse in the Netherlands. Two days later I found out that my chapter (which I have kept as neutral as possible, because I am very well aware that this discussion is very polarized) was almost entirely removed by someone who is not Dutch, who does not speak Dutch and who probably is not familiar at all with the discussion about satanic ritual abuse in the Netherlands. Therefore I have put the original text again in the chapter.

However, a day later, this contributor, an Australian student who calls himself Biaothanatoi, removed again my whole text. Since then, every time when I put the text again in the chapter, he removes it and replaces it with a biases text on the situation in the Netherlands. A text with is based entirely on the research of Fred Jonker and Ietje Jonker-Bakker. That research is widely criticized both in the Netherlands and in the United States, because their findings are far from objective.

Furthermore Biaothanatoi accuses me of violating Wikipedia's policy of NPOV and balance. He says that any additions I make to this section should be statements of fact, not an endorsement of one opinion over another. But that is precisely what I am doing. I wrote a neutral text with lots of footnotes containing relevant literature, while Biaothanatoi only refers to a very questionable source: the research of Fred Jonker and Ietje Jonker-Bakker.

Since I follow the discussion about satanic ritual abuse in the Netherlands since 1994, I am very well informed about the ins and outs of this discussion. Therefore I asked Biaothanatoi several times to stop replacing my neutral text by his biased text. Since he refuses this, I would like to ask you how he can be stopped.

Yours sincerely,

Criminologist1963 11:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

(Removing duplication of conversation from talk page. Please see the originals at Talk:Satanic_ritual_abuse#POV_pushing_in_the_Netherlands_section, Talk:Satanic_ritual_abuse#Neutral_stance_toward_satanic_ritual_abuse_in_the_Netherlands)

What you probably need to do at this point is take a look at the dispute resolution guidelines. After the first two steps—conversation with the other editor and brief disengagement to reflect—the next move is to seek wider community input. Since there are only two editors in this discussion, you might choose to start with Wikipedia:Third opinion. If you do, please be sure to follow the directions for listing a dispute on that board, particularly as applies to providing a brief, neutral summary of the dispute and signing with five, rather than 4, tildes. We see a lot of people confused about those steps there. :) It can interfere with editors responding to your request. An alternative to WP:3O might be to ask for feedback at the talk page of Wikipedia:WikiProject Religion. Sometimes it is helpful to request assistance at a project page instead of from miscellaneous other editors when some specialized knowledge of the subject might be useful in resolving the dispute. Good luck. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Saving pages

How do I download articles —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.161.73.29 (talk) 11:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• In Internet Explorer: Alt+F then select Save or Save As. If you want all the articles --> Wikipedia:Database download. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Of course if you do download an article, it won't look the same because all the css will be missing--VectorPotential^Talk 12:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Hi. Of course there will be anotehr problem: saved articles never get updated. So, you will be missing out on any breaking updates to the article. Therefore, I reccomend you bookmark the article to your favorites (Ctrl+D on IE). Hope this helps. ~AH1^(TCU) 19:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Moving pages over redirects

I can move a page to a name that already exists that is a redirect page (say film title (film) to film title (2007 film)) and it gives me a edit summary of "moved over redirect". However, this doesn't always happen - IE it tells me that a page name already exists (it's still just a redirect page) and I need to contact an admin to get a move done. Why is this? Lugnuts 11:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

You can only move over a redirect to reverse the redirect (that is, move over a redirect that's pointing to the page you're moving over), and then only when the page only has 1 entry in its history. This is to prevent non-admin users deleting pages by moving other pages over them. --ais523 11:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Brilliant - thanks for the speedy reply! Lugnuts 11:34, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality

I thought editing an article was supposed to be unbiased? I have found information that is clearly biased as a disgruntled employee must have posted a paragraph (clearly at the end of the description) that is unflattering and sounds very biased. I have worked for this company for 7 years and I know for a fact that its untrue! Clearly the wikipedia site has lowered is credibility in my standards for allowing this type of information on its site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.5.65.235 (talk) 13:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Which page are you referring to? GlassCobra 13:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:34, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Users are what make the "Wikipedia credibility" what it is, so if you read something that doesn't meet the policies and guidelines, you can fix it yourself. It's not like articles get peer reviewed with every change. Someone has to find and fix it. You found it, so... Leebo ^T/C 14:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

And of course, since you work for the company, you yourself must be conscious of our rules about conflicts of interest. --Orange Mike 17:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Our tag line is "welcome to Wikipedia, the encyclopedia anyone can edit." We make no pretense about our credentials. When you read anything on this site, it could have been added or modified ten seconds ago by a ten-year-old. This means you as a reader must take responsibility to check the references. As it happens, just about any publication has editorial bias and inaccuracies. Ours are just different from others, and we are more honest about it. As it happens, we have so many editors that most inaccuracies and biases are found and fixed quite quickly. This is not possible for more traditional publications. Your experience should teach you to be wary of any informatin source, not just Wikipedia. -Arch dude 21:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Making a Page

how to make a page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr-novak (talk • contribs) 13:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

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

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

If you still think an article is appropriate, see 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. GlassCobra 13:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Ghana National Party

Please why has my article on Ghana National Party begin deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.23.124.81 (talk) 14:15, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The deletion log says it was deleted as "Party advert". All contributions to Wikipedia have to use neutral language, and include verifiable information from reliable sources. It is also suggested that if you are personally connected with the subject of an article, and hence have a conflict of interest, that you not create or edit the article directly, but propose suggestions for less potentially biased editors to implement. Confusing Manifestation 14:23, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I think you are referring to the Ghana National Party article, and the account you used was User:Kka65? The article was deleted because it was blatant advertising (see the speedy deletion criteria) for the party. It was written in such a way that it clearly showed a bias toward the party, violating Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. It was not written as an encyclopedia article, but as an essay with the intent of persuading the reader. Leebo ^T/C 14:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

If you want to try again, you might want to first read a few articles on similar subjects, such as political parties in other countries, to get an idea of what is generally done. Then, write your article in a sub-page of your user page (e.g., User:Kka65/Ghana National Party, and ask for comments on your article to make sure it is WP:NPOV. If one or two experienced editors think it's OK, then move it into the normal spot. make sure you cite sources so we know the party is actually notable. Good Luck! -Arch dude 20:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

incomplete article

There is an article 'Surat' which is displayed incompletely. When I click it's 'Edit Page' link, the article has many other sections, references and other things. But the article itself shows only first 6 sections. Please help as I think, because of a minor change I did on October 12, this might have happened.

Thanks

The problem was in the reference tag. I'm not sure what you meant to put there, so I have temporarily replaced it with a "fact" tag, indicated that the point is unreferenced? If you were attempting to provide a reference at that point by adding a footnote, here is how. :) In a nutshell, the <ref> tag told Wikipedia that the material following it should go into a footnote. Since there was no closing tag, </ref>, after the footnoted material, it didn't know where to end the footnote. If you meant some of the material in the article to go into a footnote, just edit it again and put <ref> and </ref> before and after the relevant material. Hope that helps. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:16, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

What the user had done was to insert a reference into the References section, manually numbered it "3", then he inserted a "(3)" with a <ref> in the Demographics section. I added a note on his talk page explaining that references are to be inserted inline, in the Demographics section in his case, then the system automatically displays the content of the reference down in the references section, automatically numbers the references, and inserts a numbered link from the cited Demographics statement down to the References section.

I've seen this same mistake by other users and other mistaken ways to add references. More and more I think that WP:Cite doesn't have enough "how to" information about the mechanics of inserting references. Sbowers3 21:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Citing a historical marker

How do you properly cite information from a historical marker, monument or plaque? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.137.222.48 (talk) 15:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. Leebo ^T/C 15:32, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• I don't think this is a reference desk question. It's a legitimate question about how to use a marker as a source for article information. I don't think there is a standard method to do this. I'd mention the name of the marker, its location (either approximate or coordinates) and the date you visited it - even markers can change. If you know when it was written and who did it those are useful bits of info too. - Mgm|^(talk) 17:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I suggest that an article about a historical marker needs an infobox, similar to what we have for articles about other things relating to locations: {{Infobox country}}, {{Infobox city}}, {{Infobox protected area}}, {{Infobox bridge}}, etc. See Category:Geography infobox templates for more examples. My very casual glance at that category didn't find an existing infobox that would be suitable for a historical marker, but I might have missed one. If no suitable infobox already exists, you can get help with designing a new one at Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes. --Teratornis 17:57, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Nobody's suggesting an article about a marker; the querent wants to know how to cite a marker as a source document. (The question is whether these markers are really reliable sources for us to cite.) --Orange Mike 20:29, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it's a legitimate technical question. May I recommend that you take a picture of the marker and upload the picture to the commons? Please add the date and location (street address and/or GPS co-ordinates) to the description, together with your copyright release for the picture. We treat a picture as a valid reference, not as WP:OR (I'm not sure why, but it seems right to me.) You can then reference the picture from the article, and if the picture itself is appealing and relevant, you can add the picture itself to the article. -Arch dude 20:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Re-directs

When I search for wizetrade, I am immediately brought to a page about 'James Dicks' Is there anyway to change this re-direct so that it does not end up on this page?

Thank you

John Akers —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wizetrade (talk • contribs) 15:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

It's a redirect. You can edit the page here if you want to make it an article instead of a redirect. You should be cautious about editing this article though, since your username is User:Wizetrade; you need to be careful not to violate our neutral point of view policy because you may have a conflict of interest if you are affiliated with Wizetrade. Leebo ^T/C 15:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

download dictionary

is it possible to download the english dictionary?? please reply to <email removed for your security> Thank you15:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)208.252.120.162

Hi, this page is only for questions about using Wikipedia, as is clearly mentioned. Please try a Reference Desk to answer your question and don't post your email address. ::Manors:: 16:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manors (talk • contribs)

Hi. We do have a sister site called Wiktionary, so maybe you could download that, or at least save a few pages. Hope this helps. ~AH1^(TCU) 19:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Editing an Article Title - Need Help

I need to edit the title of a new article. It's called "Henry hurwitz" and should be renamed "Henry Hurwitz Jr."

How do I do this?

-Michael —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbi381 (talk • contribs) 15:35, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Is there a Henry Hurwitz Sr. who he will be confused with if it's just Henry Hurwitz? Is he always referred to as Henry Hurwitz Jr.? You can move the page after your account is 4 days old, or you can request the move at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Leebo ^T/C 15:40, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes, actually, there is a Henry Hurwitz Sr.(his father) who was the founder of the Menorah Society, a pioneering Jewish intellectual movement started at Harvard in 1906, which laid the foundation to modern Jewish youth movements, such as Hillel. Also, the original title had Henry Hurwitz Jr.'s last name with a lower case "h". That is part of the reason I wanted to update it. So, I should wait a few days and request a move? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbi381 (talk • contribs) 16:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I've done it for you, please tell me if it needs altering again. Kind Regards, ::Manors:: 16:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manors (talk • contribs)

Corporate Entry - Vandalism

I am tired of having to remove the ridiculous and persistent vandalism that is occuring to the entry related to the entry about our company. These are not logged in users it appears and there is no reason to "warn" their IP. The company name is Biscuitville.

Can this entry be locked down so that edits must come from logged in parties? How can I tell who this is? What other means are there to deal with this? I am not a proficient user and your "help" section doesn't seem to make this too easy. Please help me deal with this and eliminate the issue.

As nice as the concept of a free forum is, we take our trademarked and copywrited material very seriously and look forward to your assistance in quickly dealing with this annoyance.

Thank you.

Hi, this page should help you. You require "semi-protection". Kind Regards, ::Manors:: 16:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

A couple of points strike me. Firstly, I don't think there's much chance of getting protection for a page that's only been edited ten times since June: even if half of those were vandals and the other half were people repairing the damage done by the vandals, it's hardly a high level of vandalism. Secondly, what "trademarked and copyrighted" material are you talking about? This is an open project: there shouldn't be anything on here that is your (or anyone's) copyright (except in limited cases where there is "fair use"). Please let us know what you mean, since it may be necessary to take the page down. AndyJones 16:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Temptations article has been hacked

The Wikipedia article on "The Temptations" has been hacked. Typeface has been corrupted beyond reading.

Here is the address http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Temptations

thanks Rexxx Black

 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rexxxblack (talk • contribs) 16:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC) 

Fixed. Some idiot had added a size 14 font tag, screwing it all up, so I removed it. Remember, you can fix articles yourself as you can edit any page yourself. Kind Regards, ::Manors:: talk to me 17:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi. You know, any single edit can usually be reverted — see Help:Reverting. Simply correctly click on edit or undo in the diff, or add a tool such as popups to your monobook. If you want to revert several vandoulous edits in a row, with the current edit being vandalism, simply click on "(edit)" over the last good version. Hope this helps. ~AH1^(TCU) 19:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Publisher

who is the publisher for this site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.241.161.54 (talk) 16:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• See Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. - Mgm|^(talk) 17:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Hi. When you cite Wikipedia, the publisher is noted as "Wikipedia publishers". If you're desperate, you can find who added any specific piece of info from the "history" tab, and its source. All information on Wikipedia, according to our policies and guidelines, needs to be referenced by anotehr website, book, printed work, etc. If you want to find out who published a specific piece of info in the first place, you can find the specific reference and you might be able to find out the publisher there. No one person publishes Wikipedia. In fact, we have, on the English Wikipedia alone, about 5 million registered accounts, of which around 30% of them have edits, and an additional 3 million or so anonomous editors, around 60% of which make constructive edits. Hope this helps. ~AH1^(TCU) 19:30, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

MLA source

I am writing a paper for my college class. I have referenced several itmes found in wikipedia. Do you know how I can cite these works using the MLA format. Can you give me a general format citing Wikipedia as a source.

George Lymbouris

Please see Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. Cheers, Ariel♥Gold 18:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it should be noted that most college professors and universities don't allow citing Wikipedia as a source. Firstly, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and you shouldn't be using these kinds of tertiary sources for college work. Second, Wikipedia does not guarantee validity of any information found on the site. You should look for references in the articles and cite them after you've verified their reliability. Leebo ^T/C 18:10, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

creating

can i create a page for somebody on wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hisalness (talk • contribs) 18:36, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you can create a page for somebody, but you should review Wikipedia's policies and guidelines first; your edit to Jennifer Lopez indicates you are not familiar with these rules. If you review them and feel comfortable with them, see Help:Starting a page. Leebo ^T/C 18:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

create

how do i create a page —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hisalness (talk • contribs) 19:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi! you might want to look at Help:Starting a page. :-) Stwalkerster talk 19:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Moved here from another talk page

I don't know where to really look for help, so I thought someone can kindly point me in the right direction or at least 'set me straight'. I am having a disagreement with fellow members of WP:PW. I nominated a wrestling article for deletion. All the members disagree with me but have no material to backup their up their argument, instead the are citing what they fell is a general opinion as their reasoning for keeping the article (not sources, as there are none). I feel I have a concrete arguement, but was not able to find anywhere in Wikipedia's guidelines where an opinion or perception disqualifies an article. Maybe I'm wrong? Can someone help?

PS I'm not phishing for support, I would like to something that will help my case as I really feel this article does not meet Wikipedia standards.

Thank you for any help or insite :)

--Endless Dan 19:08, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

If they say it's "general opinion" but have no sources to back them up, then it's Original Research, which is to be excluded from Wikipedia. --Orange Mike 19:26, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• I've seen a number of wrestling articles unjustly deleted, but this isn't one of them. Unless they can cite sources or point someone else to sources to back it all up, it's deleteable per policy. And if "This show is considered by many as one of the pivotal broadcasts that led to the downfall of WCW." can't be backed up, it's not even a valid article subject. - Mgm|^(talk) 19:52, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• • Thank you all for the help. How is deletion decided though? Is it decided by majority? I enjoy editing wrestling articles and agree that a lot of wrestling articles have been unjustly deleted, but this seems a bit ridculous. Also is there a specific rule that says 'articles can be kept by meer perception of importance'? --Endless Dan 20:23, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Articles are deleted by consensus; that is, people must agree on its fate. See:WP:CONSENSUS. NASCAR Fan24^{(radio me!)} 20:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• • • Those standards are here in the Notability guidelines. To quote from the lede, "The topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice". This concept is distinct from "fame", "importance", or "popularity"." --Orange Mike 20:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• The deletion will be decided when an administrator evaluates it (after 5 days) and determines whether the arguments support deletion per policy, or retention per policy. Reasoning that is based in policy is generally considered stronger than non-policy opinions. Leebo ^T/C 20:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you all for the clarification! I've sorta unintentionally alienated myself on WP:PW because of this proposed deletion, but I really don't see any encyclopedic value to this article. --Endless Dan 20:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Note that consensus at such a debate does not override core content policies. If fifty people state that an article should be kept because they like it, and one person presents uncontroverted, compelling evidence that the article is unverifiable, the article should be deleted.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

John Brisben Walker

To whom it may concern, I have 12 issues of "THE COSNOPLITAN" magazine;9 copies dated 1899 and thee copies dated 1900. Issue price ten cents per copy. Do these issues have any collective value. Thanks Gene —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.232.99.215 (talk) 19:38, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

This sounds like a knowledge question rather than a "using Wikipedia" question, so I would recommend you go to the appropriate reference desk, where such questions are typically handled. Leebo ^T/C 19:42, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Admins

I am doing an english paper on Wikipedians. I am confused as to what the Wikipedia Admins are responsible for, and if there is anyway of contacting one of them to ask some questions.129.89.107.135 19:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)English Student

You can read about administrative tasks at Wikipedia:Administrators. As for contacting one and asking questions... you just did! :) I wouldn't mind answering other questions. You could go to my talk page or email me. Leebo ^T/C 19:44, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Through this method however, you may not get an admin, there is a proper contact system for admins on that page though. ::Manors:: talk to me 19:46, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• See Special:Listadmins. You can contact each of them on their user talk page, although some will be more active than others. I'm an admin too and if I can spare a few minutes, I'd be happy to answer your questions too. - Mgm|^(talk) 19:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi. By the way, if it helps, I've answered your question about why we contribute on Wikipedia talk:Wikipedians. Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 19:35, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

An English paper? Well, well, well. And I though teachers didn't like us. :-) ΚαροτΜαν 13:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

how to survery contributors

how can I distribute a survery (5 questions concerning editing articles in Wikipedia) among contributors? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.239.216.14 (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure about policies and the like, but people might not want a survey sent to them so I doubt there is an official way to ask the questions. ::Manors:: talk to me 19:48, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Post them to an external website and post messages with links to places like the help desk and the village pump to let people know. - Mgm|^(talk) 19:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Hi. Well, unless the policies are more restrictive than that, you may be able to get an answer on one of our reference desks. Hope this helps. ~AH1^(TCU) 19:38, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Statistics about size of articles?

Are there any statistics about the size of articles? E.g. the median size, the 90th percentile size, etc.? Sbowers3 20:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

There is this page but I dont think that exactly answers your question. Sorry. ::Manors:: talk to me 22:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I too do not know the answer to your question but here's a few other links you might find of interest: Special:Longpages; Special:Shortpages; and Page history statistics tool.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:11, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Font Weirdness

I installed a bunch of fonts into Windows Vista last night and it appears to have mucked with how Wikipedia is displayed in IE7. Thus far the problem has appeared only on Wikipedia. I also know that the browser text size is set to Medium.

FWIW, Firefox does not appear to be afflicted. Only IE7.

Here's how things used to look:
Image:Xpanmanx_good_wiki_fonts.jpg

And here's how it looks now:
Image:Xpanmanx_bad_wiki_fonts.jpg

The difference is most visible in the line of hyperlinks that begins with "Welcome Tutorial Cheatsheet." The smaller text is barely readable, especially when I'm browsing articles.

Does anyone know how I can quickly set things right again without upending my world? Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xpanmanx (talk • contribs) 22:36, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Go to Tools -> Internet Options and click on Fonts at the bottom. Make sure that the fonts haven't changed your settings. NASCAR Fan24^{(radio me!)} 22:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. The fonts are set to Times New Roman and Courier, which I suspect are the defaults. Interestingly, when I used the accessibility options to turn of font styles and sizes in the webpage, things looked better...but alas, only on Wikipedia. Google News looked pretty silly. Any other ideas? xpanmanx 22:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps try un-installing and re-installing the font or restarting your computer? NASCAR Fan24^{(radio me!)} 23:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Definitely restarted several times since this happened. Don't know which font is causing the problem. Very frustrating! xpanmanx 23:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

If nothing else works you could try System Restore or some equivalent if your computer has a recent restore point.--Fuhghettaboutit 23:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

/sigh, no recent restore point. What typeface does Wikipedia expect to use by default? I bet that it's either missing or corrupted and if I can drop a good copy in its place things will get better real quick. Thanks...12.25.236.118 15:37, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

(change to image links) --h2g2bob (talk) 16:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Signatures

I've seen a lot of people using (Talk | contribs) after their signature. How do I make my signature do this? Jeff Dahl 23:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

All the info you need is at WP:SIG. Good luck! GlassCobra 23:53, 17 October 2007 (UTC)