Help desk
< December 3	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 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.

December 4

OGG

Hi

I want to play OGG files, but can't figure out how to download appropriate codec. I am running Windows XP.

Have read various Wikipedia pages on the subject, but just can't identify right link to go to. Any assistance much appreciated.

M.

Check out Wikipedia:Media help (Ogg). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone merged an article that I opposed on the talk page - what can I do?

Bananadine was merged into Hallucinogenic effects of banana peels by User:Seth Nimbosa even though I opposed the merge and listed good reasons (IMHO) for it at Talk:Bananadine (I didn't log in that time, but the comments are mine). What can I do now? The 'Bananadine' article existed since March 2005, but 'Hallucinogenic effects of banana peels' was created just over 2 months ago. In fact User:Seth Nimbosa removed a tag proposing a merge from the new article to the original and changed it to his merge to [1]. Psychonaut3000 00:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should post this at Talk:Bananadine too. Since this merge is obviously disputes, I think it should be discussed on Wikipedia:Proposed mergers and perhaps even undone until a concensus is reached, especially in light of how Seth altered the tag after you added it. - 131.211.210.15 08:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That ^ was me. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spam?

Need 2nd opinion: is this spam? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. --Wo o ty Woot? contribs 00:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summary

Is it possible to change the Edit Summary text after one has already posted the changes to an article?The Dreamer 00:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For all practical purposes no, but if it's important you can make another edit (with an updated summary). If it's extremely important it is possible to undo a specific change to an article, which makes the edit and its summary go away. -- Rick Block (talk) 01:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You mean "it's possible for an administrator to delete an edit and its summary", surely? --ais523 08:54, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

Yes, that's what I mean. -- Rick Block (talk) 14:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong name on article - but can I prove it?

What can I do when I know the name of a biographical article is wrong, and I have sources to verify it, but there are other sources that disagree? The article about John Tewksbury is in error, because that is not his real name. (His correct name is Walter Tewksbury; I knew his daughter personally before she died a couple of years ago. The explanation of the name change is on the talk page.) Anyway, since I made the comment on the talk page, I have discovered documentation that his name was Walter (although nothing about the reason for the change). The International Olympic Committee and the Pennsylvania Historic & Museum Commission have him as Walter Tewksbury. However, the University of Pennsylvania athletics site has him as John. — Michael J 00:57, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can post a requested move at WP:RM. I would advise you to do it under the "controversial" section, as it appears there is some disagreement on the subject. Good luck. BTW, make sure you use the right notation, as is explained in the rules ((e.g., WP:RM, not WP:RM2; you'll see what I'm talking about when you get there). Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 01:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If he changed his name, then both names are correct. Wikipedia naming conventions say to use the most common name for a person. I would just add a redirect to the article instead of requesting a move. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

can I talk to an IP whose address keep changing?

Someone keeps creating new articles about cricket players at the talk pages. For example, Talk:Amandeep Singh, and Talk:Abe Bailey among many others. I have no idea if the information given is good. It keeps coming from 210.55.X.X where the X's are different. There are a lot of these edits. You can find others by checking for red-links at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket/Articles. Is there any way to contact this person and let him/her know how to properly create an article? Ingrid 02:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, no. I didn't think user's could create talk pages. If this keeps on being a problem, please say something again here, and maybe someone can bring it up at WP:AN and try to change it so that IP's can't create talk pages of pages that don't exist. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has a problem.

When those annoying problems keep occurring is there some kind of a Developer log to let me know what they're doing to make the database so busy? --⁪froth^{T C} 02:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've found the Wikipedia Status page to be very helpful. Ziggurat 02:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit section link

Jay Leno

The first two section links are displaced into the text a little ways down. Is there a way to get rid of them?

66.23.230.34 02:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding __NOEDITSECTION__ removes the edit links, which is probably the easiest way to fix that problem. I'll go ahead and do that. —K e akealani 03:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the __NOEDITSECTION__ markup and moved an image tag. The image was floating on the right margin, same as the infobox. Since the infobox is as long as two or three sections and the image was in an earlier section, anything else that was trying to do any float-like magic was getting stuck below the infobox. Moving the image down to the section which it belonged in fixed this. Note that moving the image does not affect the position of the image on the article, since it is still being pushed down by the infobox. The difference is, it isn't being pushed as far and isn't taking section edit links with it. Took me a while in a sandbox with a copy of the article to figure that out. BigNate37_(T) 05:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User editing own bio

What's the template for use in the talk pages when a user had edited a page about himself or herself? -- CoolGuy 03:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

66.23.230.34 04:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

{{ConflictOfInterest}} and {{userfy warning}} (found on WP:UTTM) may also be what you are looking for. BigNate37_(T) 04:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Numerous edits

What's an advisable way to write to someone who has edited a single page many times, saving instead of using "show preview" or using the sandbox, etc.? I think the user is just new to Wikipedia and would certainly appreciate some advice. Any templates for that? - CoolGuy 03:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'll be looking for {{preview}}. —K e akealani 03:34, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Creating another disambiguation

Stupid question, but i did at least I try looking it up in the FAQ. I'm trying to add parachuting, the method of ingesting drugs, but I don't seem to know how to make a link or new page with the same kind of title, it just takes me back to the skydiving or parachute page. Could someone explain how to (or just create it for me, this is my first time trying to edit)?

See WP:DISAMBIG. In this case, you might want to create a page like parachuting (drugs) or similar. —K e akealani 04:45, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Change Name from Michelemoore to MicheleMoore

Can a bureaucrat please change my user name from Michelemoore to MicheleMoore? I didn't notice it was wrong until after I hit return. Thanks so much!!!! ;-)

Follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Changing username. ColourBurst 05:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

radio

what is a radio public service announcement? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.14.196.196 (talk • contribs)

You may want to check out Public_service_announcement. --Simonkoldyk 06:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Skins

I changed my skin and I don't like it, how can I change it back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChloeMaria (talk • contribs)

Go to Special:Preferences click the Skins tab and change it to any skin you want. --Simonkoldyk 06:25, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per the Wikipedia:Very Frequently Asked Questions' section entitled I changed the skin and can't get it back to normal, If you changed to another skin and cannot change back, use this link. BigNate37_(T) 06:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dealing with .ogg files

I haven't been able to open any of the ogg files no matter what I tried. I bought my computer only 3 mos ago so it should be able to handle it. Anyone has any idea on how to make it work?

Try reading Wikipedia:Media help (Ogg). --ais523 09:18, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

Which kind of pages Wikipedia counts to achieve 1.5 million articles?

Hi,

I would like to know, which pages in Wikipedia are summed up to achieve 1.5 million articles. I am parsing the XML dumps (4 million pages) and have to discard many unwanted articles. Maybe, I discard too much.

I discard at the moment all disambiguations and articles containing a colon in the title. Also, I discard pages containing less than 5 sentences. Result: only 760.000 "useful" articles out of 1.5 million.

Is it ok or do I discard to many articles. I am not sure, if I am good in doing a discard, if an article includes a colon (want to remove templates, images etc.).

Best regards 09:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I can answer that by quoting Special:Statistics:

The English-language Wikipedia currently contains 6,915,513 articles. This number excludes redirects, discussion pages, image description pages, user profile pages, templates, help pages, portals, articles without links to other articles, and pages about Wikipedia administration.

Hope that helps. --ais523 09:40, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

Thanks. It seems, that I am rejecting too much.

141.54.158.41 10:14, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

can i use picture/images

i want to help wikipedia by putting pictures,but how can i do it? i have collection of many those pictures/images that required by wikipedia i got those pictures from different sites and from online friends,i think many of those that i got from diffenert sites are not copyright ,can i use those picture here?

For each picture you'd need to be able to tell us where it is from, and show that it wasn't copyright, and show that the web site says so. (If a web site says nothing, then the pictures are copyright). If you are unsure, pick a picture and tell us the web page it is on, where to look, and we can offer an opinion. Notinasnaid 10:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After you've got the copyrights taken care of, you can upload pictures at Special:Upload, more help can be found at Wikipedia:Images. ~ Flame vip e r 17:33, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

help me what to do now

i have other question i am working on articles here those are related to area or those article are related to my tribes and places here , and i have collected much stuff on those articles but on native language. I try to write and I even wrote articles here but some of members are daily making changes and cleaning that for no-reason, i have book and i can mail those to u, if any one of them wants to get authentication, ok I want them help me to correct my spelling/grammar in articles rather then to remove all stuff that I wrote. I do not know what to write because every thing i write is changed and always cleaned.i have asked those user not to clean it, and there is not much stuff on those articles online ,i do not know from where they are getting information and writing beacuse all about tribes are written in our native languages.some time it looks what i work was use or what i work will be useless ,some one come and will remove it ,and my efforts go on where

User:khalidkhoso

You say "no reason" - have you looked in the page's history to see what the edit summary says in each case? If so, an idea might be to let us know a particular change you make - give us the URL from the history - and the people here can make suggestions about how you can contribute in a way that won't be deleted. Alternatively, for particular articles you can use the talk page to discuss your changes in advance (recommended). Notinasnaid 10:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Please note: I have taken the liberty of moving your reply, so it is all part of the same discussion. This helps people to keep track of the discussion. If you have more replies, it will be helpful if you add them to this section, so we all know what is going on. Thanks! Notinasnaid)

these is article that i made changes you can some of user have deleted.i knw i made some spelling mistake but stuff i wrote is 100% from book and i can scan it and send those pages if i asked to do it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khoso

the upper part local langaue "stupa" of moen jo daro is broken and it was made now again with mud, i worte that some one have deleted so that world should not know what is happening with meon-jo-daro much ,no stpes are taken by our grovment to protect it ,that i wrote some one have deleted this but this truth,i will go moen jo daro and will show these pics what is happening with moen jo daro then u will belive..

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mohenjo-daro&action=history

i have source for it and i have article of authors on things

www.dailykawish.com by manjo kumar/ and some part of Hpark.

2nd thing author is write "Flooding by the Indus is thought to have been the cause of destruction" this one of cause could be but no buddy is sure abut it. even if i wrote those cause will change it ,but i have book on it ,i am not writting some thing of my own. User:khalidkhoso. will be thankfull for help

Welcome Khalid and thanks for contributing. You had made your last edit to Khosa in October. The nature of wiki is such that articles keep getting updated. If a good faith edit was lost in between, you are free to add it as long as it is written per the Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. Infact all edit pages carry this disclaimer: If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it. — Lost^(talk) 11:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

rss feeds

Hi, I know there's a recent changes RSS feed, but would it be possible for me to get my watchlist sent to me via RSS? Most of the changes I don't need more than a casual glance. So getting all of those in RSS would greatly increase my productivity in those articles, and also allow me to notice when something's wrong with an article. thanks! ... aa:talk 10:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's a watchlist RSS feed available at the moment, possibly for performance reasons. You may want to ask at WP:VPT. --ais523 16:39, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

There isn't one, for security and authentication reasons. See bugzilla:471. Tito xd^(?!?) 16:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it seems that one's just been implemented (you have to be logged in to use it, that is, the login cookies have to be in your browser). Try http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?action=feedwatchlist&feedformat=rss .--ais523 16:55, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

Watchlists and logs

Hi! Is there any way for me to know whether some pages I'm editing are on anyone's watchlists, or even just whether someone has been looking at them at all? Is there maybe a way to know whether a page has been accessed, and how many times, etc.? Knowing that someone is checking my edits would make me feel more comfortable. Also, knowing which users are watching a certain page would make it easier to cooperate with them in case of any major edits. Thanks! SFinamore 11:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pages that are not on any watchlist are accessible as a list to admins only. The feature to tell you how many times a page has been accessed has been shut off as it puts a lot of load on servers. To get your article more visibility, you should either identify a relevant wikiproject and request them to have a look or else list your article at Wikipedia:Peer review — Lost^(talk) 12:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hydralic formulas

i want to know about hydralic press formulas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.144.73.190 (talk • contribs)

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's what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. — Lost^(talk) 12:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

can any buddy explain it?

Few months back ,i was reading article about Hammed Haroon,one of user wrote here in wikipdeia he is gay and he is living with UK based boy friend, now as i am member here, even that article is changed but i am afraid if some one comes up with same idea and write this about him? then ? because every buddy thing wikipedia is baby sister of encyclopedia and it is trustable ,Mr Hameed Haroon is living legendary person of pakistan , u need to watch such articles written for so great person and i know him personally there is no gay about him no he does not support gayism and yeah he support sindhi culture and art related to sindh, but i was shocked to see article here in wikipedia even i can show that history page and i do not know how long that article was on wiki? can any buddy explain.

here is article link http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hameed_Haroon&diff=60815677&oldid=60766893

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hameed_Haroon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Khalidkhoso (talk • contribs)

This is known as Wikipedia:Vandalism. Since it can be edited by anyone, vandalism tends to creep in sometimes. Our recent change patrollers are quite vigilant but sometimes such edits do creep in. Since we are all volunteers here, no one can promise to look after an article which you value. The best way is to put it on your Wikipedia:Watchlist and look out for changes. — Lost^(talk) 12:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting others' comments on one's own talk page

Is there a consensus within the community as to the acceptability, or otherwise, of a user deleting from their talk page comments that another user has made on it? Wikipedia:User page doesn't seem to have anything on this. Many thanks. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 14:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are people who don't like it, but there are lots of editors (including Admins) who do it, and as far as I know there is no rule against it. Anchoress 14:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You really shouldn't delete it if it's a vandalism warning, or another formal notice. Idle comments you probably can ~ but you can always archive the talk page if you just want to shorten it. WilyD 14:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's not true, as far as I know. From what I can see of the discussions on the AN/I board, there are no rules against deleting warning messages. Anchoress 14:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which is why I choose shouldn't rather than can't - you can delete vandalism warnings, but it's strongly disapproved of, likely to be contraversial if it ever matters again. FWIW, I wouldn't feel comfortable deleting accusations made against me off my talk page - expressly forbidden no, but bad form, yes. WilyD 14:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree that it's strongly disapproved of; I see lots of instances of Admins defending editors who do so, and furthermore blocking editors who repeatedly replace the warnings. Anchoress 16:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think archiving is the way to go - once the page gets past a certain length. --Charlesknight 14:42, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To the original question, any consensus or lack thereof on the issue would likely emerge from Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Removing warnings. BigNate37_(T) 16:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing warnings means has the bad side effect that people assume you're trying to hide the message. It probably won't matter if you send whoever placed the message a notification you've read it and will take it to heart. Problems arise with people ignoring the warnings after deleting them. I'm with Charlesknight. Just archive it. Once you've done over 20,000 edits like I have, you don't want to go through the entire edit history for a page to track down that one edit from an old discussion you need to read. Going through a bunch of archive pages with a text search is a lot easier. - Mgm|^(talk) 18:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a Category to an article without adding the article to a Category?

Hi, Wikipedia has a general article on the National Film Board of Canada as well as a category Category:National Film Board of Canada productions. I thought it would be useful to direct users to the Category page from the article, but I can't seem to find a way to do it without adding the article to the Category, i.e., listing National Film Board of Canada as a National Film Board of Canada production, which is obviously wrong. When I try to add Category:National Film Board of Canada productions to the see also section, THAT doesn't work. Is there anyway to do this correctly, or is this simply a disadvantage of the Category option, as compared to a List? thanks, Shawn in Montreal 14:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a ":"-sign before the link makes it act like a regular link instead of a category. - Mgm|^(talk) 17:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This also works for images, like [[:Image:Flameviper.PNG]], which produces Image:Flameviper.PNG. ~ Flame vip e r 17:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Tips for working on multiple sister projects?

Aside from the tip-of-the-day "Reserve your user name on sister projects", are there any tips or "best practices" for using accounts on multiple Wikipedias? One example I've discovered is that I can make interwiki links between my english and spanish user pages, but I can't seem to make an interwiki to/from my account on the commons. Ideally I'd like some sort of unified way to browse watchlists and changelists on multiple wikis. --Dgies 15:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the most requested features on Wikipedia ever, but it's proving quite hard to implement. The developers are working on it (see m:SUL), but it's not clear when the feature will ever become available. --ais523 16:37, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

Commons interwikis work the same as interwiki links from other projects, just add 'commons:' to the start of the link (without the quote marks). - Mgm|^(talk) 17:54, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A question about tables

Hi Folks...

I need to know how to align two or more line entries to the top left of a tabel cell.

I created these entries: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Air_Force#Western_Air_Command plus the whole she bang about the airbases...

Most rows have a line break. so how do i align the stuff where there arent any line breaks? Its kindda looking ugly at the moment...

Ranten 15:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might be able to do something with CSS, if you know how to use that. Otherwise, just use <br/> to create a line break on lines which don't have one. --ais523 16:36, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

deleting a page that has since been redirected to correct page

I created 'the city congregation', then redirected it to 'The City Congregation' and finally to 'The City Congregation for Humanistic Judaism.' How do I now delete the first entry, 'the city congregation' one?Heather Chait 16:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you make a page by mistake, you can request its deletion by placing {{db-author}} on it. To edit a redirect, follow it through a link (e.g. the city congregation) or type it in the search box and click Go, then click on the link saying 'redirected from' at the top of the screen. --ais523 16:34, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

Don't worry about redirecting it. It looks like a title people will search for, so a redirect from that location is useful. - Mgm|^(talk) 17:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

new article

Hi, I've created a new article (in fact from a redirect I set up yesterday) at Erhard Reuwich. I'm sure I've seem somewhere a list of new articles that you can/should add a new article to. Is this right? If so, where is it, or is it automated? Thanks Johnbod 16:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're thinking of Special:Newpages, which is linked from Recent Changes. It's automated, so you don't have to worry about updating it yourself. --ais523 16:43, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

helicopter parents

What are the negative effects of helicopter parenting?

Probably makes people unable to read simple instructions. This page is for questions about Wikipedia. If you have any suggestions on how we can make this clearer, we would love to hear them. Notinasnaid 16:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't try to parent a helicopter. Their blades are sharp, so they're too dangerous to cuddle or play with. -Mgm|^(talk) 17:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lawl. ~ Flame vip e r 17:36, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions, and will try to answer any question . Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps.

This template is used on the help desk and the reference desks, which are frequently misused by users seeking the wrong area of expertise. For example, many users ask questions about science at the miscellaneous desk. ~ Flame vip e r 17:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Gee, Helicopter parent is a real term. I never heard of it. I knew Curling parent but we don't seem to have that. PrimeHunter 03:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Those funky table thingies.

I am editing the article "Autoroutes of France" and I want to know how to edit that funky little table thing at the bottom. To put the table in the article, you simply type {{Autoroutes}}, but I was wondering how to edit this table itself.

Forcesdumal13 17:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC) Forcesdumal13[reply]

This is a navbox, a sort of template. To edit it, you can type Template:Autoroutes into the search box and click Go. Another method is to edit an article with the template in, scrolling right to the bottom of the page (below the special-characters box), and there should be a list of templates used on the page there. --ais523 17:11, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

Where can one ask for more people to edit an article?

I recently created the Centchroman article and I would like to locate people who can help flesh it out. Is there a place where a person can call attention to a certain article and ask for assistance with it? Thank you! Joie de Vivre 17:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the article's reasonably long, you could try placing {{expand}} on it; if you do this, it is likely to eventually be listed at the Community Portal if it hasn't been expanded by others before then. --ais523 17:27, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

External Links

Hello, I wonder if someone could help settle a question concerning external links. We are told on the Mary Kay Cosmetics talk page that external links are not allowed. This seems rather arbitrary to me as they ARE allowed on other, including controversial pages.

After user WikiWikiP removed them I asked some questions but there's been no response yet (maybe it's too soon).

Anyway here's the latest comments to which I refer. Could someone clarify it?

Regarding the new set of external links that was added to the article on 12/03/06 (which I removed a few seconds ago), most of them were blogs which, according to the Wikipedia External Links guideline, should normally be avoided. The others seemed to be the usual pinkingshears and a maybe a newly named upyourcaddy site. Again, if there is content in any of those pages that is worth noting, take some time and figure the proper way to add it to the Controversy section of the article. --WikiWikiP 06:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

If I may, I would have thought that blogs would be allowed if they are single topic blogs that happen to be on the topic under discussion on a Wikipedia page and if they would add qualitatively to information on that topic, but it doesn't look like that angle has been considered yet. I did see this statement "Self-published material may be acceptable when produced by a well-known, professional researcher in a relevant field or a well-known professional journalist." Wikipedia:Verifiability Might you give such an exemption to Pink Truth since Tracy Coenen, the creator of the site, is a professional fraud investigator and is a well-known, reseacher (to those within the industry) (please see [4])? Additionally much of the time she is quoting from reliable third party publications. As for the others mentioned like Pinking Shears and PinkLighthouse I don't understand why those are removed since "anti" topic sites are listed in other Wikipedia pages. For example Operation Clambake is listed on the Scientology page, or take a look at all the negative sites in "External Links" on the Sun Myung Moon page etc, etc. I suspect that Unification Church members would rather those weren't allowed either, but in the interests of well-rounded fairness they are allowed. Is there something about those sites (the non-blog anti-MK sites) that in particular disqualify them from the page? Perhaps the issue can be mitigated by allowing an equal number of pro-MK websites (as on the Sun Myung Moon page previously mentioned)? Thanks for the last part about allowing non-pro MK info on the page. I hope that someone with more experience than I will take you up on that and that it won't continue to be deleted. There is indeed a dark underside to MKC and that needs to be reported. 4.246.202.91 07:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mary_Kay#REMOVAL_OF_External_Links_Discussion

Thanks.

You may want to see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution for your options. As a point of policy, it would be unusual to have blogs as external links on an article, unless it could be shown that they added a lot to the article and would be useful to readers, and weren't advertising. --ais523 17:48, 4 December 2006 (U T C)

Thanks. I tried to request an advocate via [2] page but it looks like since i'm not registered and am only using an IP address it isn't allowing me to proceed. Could someone else request it for me? I think that the blogs and non-blog websites that deal with the subject under dispute (yes links to them were removed too) do add a lot to the discussion since they are the main avenue that ex-MK consultants and directors use to get the word out on the other side of the Mary Kay industry. Thus they are essential. I suppose any link might be considered "advertising" for that site, I don't know how you'd avoid that. 4.246.206.217 19:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Thursturain Chronicles

I have added a hyperlink to The Thursturain Chronicles via Simon Langton Boys article, but it does no recognise it. The whole of Wikipedia doesn't recognise it!!! it only recognises a lower version, i think,: The Thursturain chronicles, IT HAS A LOWER CASE C FOR CHRONICLES!!!. can you link it to the real one,please? It has ONE WHOLE PAGE of The Origin(book, not classified on Wiki) and updates etc...

I've moved the page to The Thursturain Chronicles for you, also you may want to make sure the article passes WP:V. --Simonkoldyk 19:00, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never Mind...

HELP

I cannot log in! My name has been changed and I cannot log in under that name! Go see the last fullfilled requests section of the name changeing section. My name is I'm_Missing_No_Teeth. And when I try to log in the warning says I have no such name!!!! HELP!

See Help:Logging in under Wikipedia:Very Frequently Asked Questions. Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 19:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know, BUT I copied the name directly from the name change section. And, the password is known by heart, it is used by my whole being. It is in every thing I do and in every thing I say. It is my name, my true name.

Well, User:I'm_Missing_No_Teeth, I'm afraid, is an account name that was never created: [3]. Without more information, I can't really help you.-Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thats odd.. See Essjays contributions december 1. You will see that he marked it as done. Also go veiw Missingno's user contribs, there gone. Under what name could they be put under?

I believe I've found the account at Missing_No_Teeth (talk • contribs). Is that correct? Canderson7 ^(talk) 22:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You need to get your username exactly right. For example, if I just type in "Martian" it won't find my name:martianlostinspace 11:31, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Add anonymous contributions to my user account?

I made a bunch of changes using a static IP [4] in 2004, before I had created a Wikipedia account. Is there any way I can get the list of changes incorporated into my account [5] ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinned (talk • contribs)

No, I'm sorry, you can't. Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 20:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can't, but you can put a little note on your user page if you want, saying something similar to what you've said here. Confusing Manifestation 06:03, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redlinks

I created a few pages in late November (Nov. 28 or 29). In order to more easily navigate from one to another, I listed the pages on my user page. However, a number of the articles are still appearing as redlinks: Gary King (political scientist), The Soldier and the State, and others. If I type the articles in the search box and click "Go", I get the message "No page with that title exists", although they are the first recommended results. I've tried bypassing my browser's cache (Ctrl+F5), but that didn't work. Should I simply wait some more for WP to update? Black Falcon 20:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well basically you need to make sure that you are typing the article exactly how it is named. Like make sure you use the correct number of spaces and punctuation and the correct cases.__Seadog^♪ 20:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I had copied the links directly from the article titles and just rechecked them--they match. Black Falcon 20:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried purging the cache or bypassing your own? BigNate37_(T) 21:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have. Could it be a lag in updating from WP? Black Falcon 21:37, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that the links from your page show in my address bar with a "%E2%80%8E" in front of the name, though I can think of no reason why. ST47Talk 23:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I managed to fix them by simply retyping the links (maybe the problem was because I copy-pasted the text). Thanks for noticing this. Black Falcon 00:02, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Article and No Original Research Question

Hello,

I have written an article about Supranationality in International Organizations. Basically, I first have a short paragraph defining supranationality, and then I list different organizations and the supranational elements they possess. I am concerned that I might violate the No Original Research policy however, because I cite many different sources in the article and I did have to look through many online public documents. On the other hand I do not use the article to argue a point/advance a position. It's simply a compilation/list of a large number of facts from different sources. I can link a PDF printout of the preview of the article if requested.

Thanks, TParis23—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tparis23 (talk • contribs)

Original research means you should avoid using your OWN findings, not that of others. If you find a bunch of articles and use them as sources, that isn't original research. Your article sounds perfect. --Wo o ty Woot? contribs 20:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That being said, it may violate the WP:NPOV policy if you write an article to advance a certain position. I haven't looked at the article, but I do think it's worth double-checking that the article is written with neutral language when possible. —K e akealani 07:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where to lodge a complaint

A user has been removing images of politicians from numerous articles on a faulty legal premise. To whom should I complain? --JesseBHolmes 21:21, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First let us know who you are talking about. And if it is a big problem maybe refer to the WP:ANI. I think the Ani would be right but I have no clue since I have never been in a non-vandalism editor issue. If the editor is flat out vandalising refer to the Aiv.--Seadog^♪ 21:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't consider it vandalising; I think Chowbok is just trying to remove images that he/she considers in breach of copyright. But she's removing many state government-produced images that clearly fall within fair use. --JesseBHolmes 21:30, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the more info. Can you please provide some diffs so that I and others may examine what you mean.--Seadog^♪ 21:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here are a few. Arthur Williams Jim Risch Mitt Romney Canadian Politician Arnold Easter

All these pictures are fair use under US and Canadian law & Chowbok is removing many more like them. --JesseBHolmes 21:43, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm erm...Tell him how you feel about this. There may be a logical explanation for all this.--Seadog^♪ 21:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have; Chowbok claims that Wikipedia counts as a commercial source (making profit?) under the law & that these images are therefore illegal without tacit consent. But Wikipedia isn't making any money from the images; it's not a pay service.

To quote US law (1976 Copyright Act), Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes. --JesseBHolmes 21:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the first one [6], it is clear that (1) it does not have a fair use rationale: it just says "To the uploader: Please add a detailed fair use rationale for each use". This has not been done. (2) The tag states there is a reasonable chance a free alternative can be found. Under Wikipedia's rules a free alternative must always be used in preference to a fair use image, if one can be found. You need to deal with the specific, and legitimate, issues raised. Notinasnaid 22:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You will notice that what you quote only says "In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include...". It does not say, as you seem to interpret, "...if the use is nonprofit educational, unlimited fair use is always OK." That is not the case. Fair use must be justified and Wikipedia's policies are designed to make sure that we do not get sued. Please learn them, and respect them, because nobody will benefit if we don't. You may have some grounds for recovering these pictures, but you cannot just complain loudly and hope that overcomes legal arguments. Notinasnaid 22:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note, too, that while US (Federal) government-created images and text are public domain, this is not the case for all US State governments. Many state gov't DO claim copyright on images and text created by their employees. Cheers --Geologyguy 22:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know, but almost all (if not all) state constitutions have a provision that allows for non-profit use of state material. See Idaho Code 9-350 for an example of this sort of provision. See, I have a legal argument too! --JesseBHolmes 22:56, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's good. Maybe if you make this assertion on each image page, it will be sufficient. Clearly, the pages don't contain a valid legal argument at the moment. Notinasnaid 23:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia fair use is not the same as the legal definition of fair use - it is more restrictive in an attempt to encourage free content (whether you agree with that is widely disputed, see the talk page). So arguments for fair use must use Wikipedia policy and guidelines, not legal ones. Trebor 23:24, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that in some cases, copyright information already exists & is ignored. See Billhayden.jpg's history for an example. --JesseBHolmes 23:26, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chowbok has been involved in a quite extensive dispute with many editors concerning images. In fact, check out Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Chowbok, which has many complaining editors, counter-points from Jimbo Wales, and much more. Just to let you know this is not at all an isolated incident.

However, please know that if a state even allows non-profit use of its material, that is not enough to satisfy Wikipdia's free-use inclusion guidelines - something must be released into the public domain, because there are Wikipedia subsidiaries that may use Wikipedia in for-profit purposes. So if you can find a state guideline which allows for something to go into public domain, I encourage you to include that on the politician's page. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 06:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Figure not right

Hello, I just created a page "chemical imaging" and I screwed up the figure. Somehow, it is someone else's figure that is on there... How can I add my figure? Thank you!—Preceding unsigned comment added by JD 2450 (talk • contribs)

You haven't uploaded anything yet. Which image do you want to add?--Kchase T 22:08, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

untitled question

For the Wikipedia page on "Suicide," I think that the page should be reserved for the actual article on suicide, rather than for a user. I also believe there should be a disambiguation link that can direct a user between a user's page and a factual article.

User pages are automatically differentiated from articles by the "User:" prefix, therefore, there is no need to do so. --Wo o ty Woot? contribs 22:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to have been vandalism, but has since been reverted. Thanks for telling us.--Kchase T 22:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My contribution

It does not appear that my contribution has been reviewed. Will it be reviewed? Was it missed by the editors? Thank you very much. Geses 22:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. WP:AFC is horribly backlogged. I will review it now.--Kchase T 22:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reference Needed

Can't find what to type to insert the [ref?] tag... help please!

Simply put <ref> whatever reference information is required </ref> where you want the reference. If there's not already a reference section, you can make one with: ==References== <references/> at the bottom of the page.--Kchase T 22:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias! Jmdustin 22:32, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]