Help desk
< March 13	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 15 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

March 14

Huy Nguyen

Dear Help Desk,

First off I just want to say this website is amazing; I learn so many things. You can search for anything on her and you guys will have it. However, I was wondering if I can be in Wikipedia. I would like to search for my name and have a brief summary of me. I noticed you have other sports player, model, and celebrities, so I thought can I write something about myself and be on Wikipedia....

P.S. It would be really nice of you guys. I will pay if I have to.

Thank you, Huy Nguyen

I'm afraid we can't do that unless you are famous or something. Please see WP:N and WP:DELETE.--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions|Guest)} 00:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, and also WP:NOT#FACEBOOK.--Sunny910910 ^{(talk|Contributions|Guest)} 00:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And see WP:BIO. If you are not famous enough to have a Wikipedia article about you, then you can write your biography on WikiBios, which accepts biographies about everybody. --Teratornis (talk) 00:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And to finish the alphabet spaghetti, there's also WP:AUTO. A ecis^Brievenbus 02:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Freezing computer II

Not sure if this is supposed to go here, or that anyone can do anything about it, but when I click on my preferences my computer will hang, freeze, and Internet Explorer will have to shut down. Does anyone else have a problem with this kind of thing happening and/or how I can fix it? Leobold1 (talk) 01:18, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm using Firefox and it works fine for me Superstarwarsfan (talk) 01:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It also works fine for me in Internet Explorer. I haven't heard of the problem but try this link if you don't use the MonoBook skin normally. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:47, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Superstarwarsfan, I used Firefox a few months ago for a couple of weeks and never liked it. Mainly had to do with the setup of the menus/tabs/search of it.

Primehunter, the problem is that I can't get into my preferences right now. I have the default skin right now (that's one of the things I want to change). Leobold1 (talk) 02:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for your prompt responses. Leobold1 (talk) 02:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The default skin is MonoBook. The link I gave goes to preferences in MonoBook whether or not that is the current skin, so I didn't expect it to make a difference when you already use MonoBook. Here is a similar link to go to preferences in Simple skin: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Preferences&useskin=simple. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How do I tag an article for not being neutral?

I found an article that is far from being un-biased. How do I tag it? Superstarwarsfan (talk) 01:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Neutrality templates. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can add {{pov|date=March 2008}}. If it's blatantly advertising, you can also tag the page with {{db-spam}} for deletion. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Like this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_drink Superstarwarsfan (talk) 01:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When you do add a tag, you should explain your reasons on the article's talk page. Sbowers3 (talk) 11:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How to report someone that may be 3RR

Is somebody reverting their own talk page repeatedly in violation of 3RR? Here's an example

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:24.27.176.11&action=history

Thanks 65.31.33.93 (talk) 01:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, per WP:TALK, users may undo warnings/messages on their talk pages, although archiving is preferred. Secondly, just go to WP:AN3 and follow the instructions at the top of the page. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 01:59, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Brain Anuerysm

This question has been removed. Per the reference desk guidelines, the reference desk is not an appropriate place to request medical, legal or other professional advice, including any kind of medical diagnosis, prognosis, or treatment recommendations. For such advice, please see a qualified professional. If you don't believe this is such a request, please explain what you meant to ask, either here or on the Reference Desk's talk page.

We can't advise you on your medical condition; I'm sorry. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Medical disclaimer. Wikipedia does not give medical advice. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question about editing article on hemorrhoids

I have recently developed several hemorrhoids and have found a handful of unorthodox ways to cope with them. Would you mind if I posted my personal experiences in your hemmorrhoids article? I also have two pictures of my own hemorrhoids which I think would be better than the pictures in the article because they're "hi-res". Would you mind if I posted them?

Thanks again for your help -- Great website!

Jason —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.53.22.53 (talk) 03:39, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal accounts are definitely out, as they count as original research. Photos are another matter, although you'll need to create an account in order to upload them. After that, I'd guess you could leave a note on the article's talk page. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 04:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

how in god's name can you justifiably create a page called "human history" & then have scant reference or indeed not even a dedicated chapter on ancient Greece and its enormous contribution to "human history"?

little wonder your cite is constantly criticized for accuracy & objectivity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.201.49.181 (talk) 08:25, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only bothering to discuss this with you don't have that much of an argument. I can't say why many don't like this site, but, the reason that much of the information you listed is not present is because it has not been written yet. It is a continuing process, not instant gratification. But like I said, I cannot say why people hate this site, the information on it is cited from reliable sources. It isn't original research.— Dædαlus T@lk\^{→(quick link)} 07:43, 14 March 2008 09:00, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That article, History of the world is a very "big picture" overview of history - it hardly spends more than a paragraph on any one civilization, since there have been dozens or even hundreds that have _all_ been important. We have an article on Ancient Greece. —Random832 14:12, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Human history redirects to History of the world which only has 13 content sections and doesn't devote one of them to any single civilization. Ancient Greece is mentioned and linked several times, for example in this text: "In the west, the ancient Greeks established a civilization that is considered by most historians to be the foundational culture of modern western civilization." Wikipedia probably has thousands of articles about ancient Greece, for example in Category:Ancient Greece and its subcategories. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Using material licensed under Creative Commons license

An article contains text copied from another web site. The other web site is licensed under a Creative Commons license (by-sa 2.0). Is that license consistent with the GFDL so that the text could be used on Wikipedia? I know that some of the CC licenses are not compatible but I don't know which ones are, if any, and which ones are not. More generally, where would I find the answer to such questions? I expected that Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright would explain whether CC licenses are compatible with the GFDL but it doesn't actually get around to doing so. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 08:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By-sa should be acceptable - the main restriction we have problems with in CC licenses is "nc," non-commercial, due to the fact that our content is copied elsewhere. You should probably check here to make absolutely sure, however. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 12:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not actually sure about that - we accept it for images, but text generally has to be GFDL or public domain. You could maybe ask the author to dual-license it? —Random832 16:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea whether the content was even suitable for Wikipedia. I just wanted to know whether it was a copyvio or a legitimate Creative Commons use. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:48, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tables

How do I use wiki-pipe to merge 2 cells under I column? 124.176.247.229 (talk) 11:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

{|class="wikitable"
|-
|rowspan="2"|This cell covers two rows
|normal cell
|-
|normal cell
|-
|colspan="2"|This cell covers two columns
|}

Produces:

This cell covers two rows	normal cell
	normal cell
This cell covers two columns

I hope that helps! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 12:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rude picture

Hi, I would just like to note that I have been offended by the following image on your site. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vulva_labeled_no_tags.jpg I am only 14 and i think you need to remember that wikipedia has younger readers too! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.238.161 (talk) 13:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to hear that, however Wikipedia is not censored for minors. Our content disclaimer states that the images we include in our articles are present for educational purposes, and may be offensive in nature. If you don't want to see images of that sort, I do respectfully suggest that you not go looking for them. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 14:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I'm 15, and started editing Wikipedia two years ago. If I don't like a topic, I just don't read it. Don't you there learn about human reproduction system (or whatever it is called)? --grawity ^{talk / PGP} 14:54, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm way older than 14 and I wasn't much taken with that image either. However, I do recognize the logic of the "Wikipedia is not censored" approach.

I see there is an article Wikipedia:Options to not see an image. I have not used these options so I don't know if they would be useful in this situation. Maybe someone else knows. Wanderer57 (talk) 23:20, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Beware, you may hear "Wikipedia is not censored for minors" and other users state other Wiki policy, the fact of the matter is there are legal issues at play here. For example, how do we know that pic is of a person who is 18? WE DON'T. The simple fact is that some users and admin quote policy like its gospel when in fact it puts wiki at risk. That pic will be removed over time, most likely by the foundation. We have to remember that most users do not have law degrees and lack managerial skills and thus don't realize that social good trumps policy.Thright (talk) 05:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia is not censored" is the only policy I feel a very strong support for. Thright, I don't see any "social good" it's obviously a picture that was put up willingly by somebody and doesn't break any laws (and any laws against pictures other than explicit child pornography should not exist). I hate to see quality compromised by a few sensitive individuals. Wikipedia is not censored period, if it was, it would be pretty much crap. The Dominator (talk) 03:04, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

I still do not understand how I can show references on the page I want to edit. Can someone explain in plain English? I try the <ref> thing but when I try that and type something in, for example <The Sun by John Jones> it does not show a footnote number it just inserts <The Sun by John Jones>. How do I insert a footnote number in the appropriate place in the text and then have the information show at the bottom in the References section? I have all this information to share but it is very frustrating because I don't know how to enter it and the instructions are too complicated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Myszkowiak (talk • contribs) 13:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See, I can't even get it right to ask a question here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Myszkowiak (talk • contribs) 13:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's programming (low-grade programming, but programming natheless). Further instructions can be found at WP:CITE. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See, I can't even properly ask a question! HELP! I'd use the {{help me}} thingy but can't figure that out either.Myszkowiak (talk) 14:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be e.g. <ref>The Sun by John Jones</ref> - though of course you'd need to provide more information than just "The Sun by John Jones". —Random832 14:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To understand how to make references, see: WP:FOOT, WP:CITE (already mentioned above), and WP:CITET. In particular, WP:FOOT is our attempt to write an understandable tutorial for footnotes. If it is still not understandable, you can help by telling us which parts you don't understand. Maybe we can edit them to be clearer. On Wikipedia, we edit not only the articles, but also all the instructions for writing the articles. --Teratornis (talk) 20:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

Does the reference info automatically show up in a Reference section? It doen't in the Sandbox. If not why does anything have to be entered between the ^[1] ? All that is needed is the footnote number inserted in the proper place in the text.Myszkowiak (talk) 14:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The references will automatically show up in the reference section if the ref is tagged correctly and the references template is in the ref section. In the ref section you should see something like {{reflist}}. For more on this, see WP:REF. Dismas|^(talk) 14:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved image to Commons, now what?

I moved one of my own images to the Wikimedia Commons. Now what tag do I put on the copy here at WP to have it deleted in preference for the WM copy? Dismas|^(talk) 14:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tag the image on Wikipedia with {{subst:ncd}} or {{subst:ncd|Image:Filename.png}} if the filename on commons is different. They're then automatically added to the speedy deletion queue. Nanonic (talk) 15:28, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Dismas|^(talk) 20:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

help with life

i need help with a porn aditon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.223.90.33 (talk) 15:44, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not offer medical advice. -- Kesh (talk) 15:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See: Wikipedia:Medical disclaimer. Interestingly, it seems Pornography addiction is not a recognized disorder yet. --Teratornis (talk) 20:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's easy; stop looking at porn. Paragon12321 (talk) 21:33, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The user said 'adition', surely a misspelling of addition, not addiction. If you want to add to the pornography article (or the life article), feel free to edit it. In what way do you need help? Is it with general editing, guidelines or other (please state)? George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 22:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, try the computing or science Reference Desks. Mac Davis (talk) 22:33, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merging Infoboxes

Is there any way that two or more infoboxes can be merged into one without totally redoing the entire formatting of both? For example: The Wikipedia entry on Bing Crosby, who was a highly successful recording artist as well as a highly successful film actor. How would I merge "Infobox Musical Artist" with "Infobox Actor"? One contains perameters that the other one lacks, and vice versa. However, if these infoboxes are kept separate then there is a repeat of information (such as his birth and death dates). Please help me if you can. Jimknut (talk) 16:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just add the extra parameters, I created the box on Stephano (Shakespeare) from scratch so adding params should work. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 17:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. However, the way both "Infobox musical artist" and "Infobox actor" are currently set up you can not add any extra perameters to them. If you try to they won't show up.Jimknut (talk) 00:37, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3 things

How can you introduce a new barnstar and get the page to look like this? The image is here [1] and could be used for people from the UK who contribute to wikipedia. How would I get the page to look like other barnstar pages?

Also, could someone tell me if this image is licensed alright or whether I need to add anything. [2]

Also, is there anyway to change your user name without making a new account. I'd like a better name and would still like to keep my edits.

Thanks Osama bin dipesh (talk) 18:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For username change, see WP:RENAME. --grawity ^{talk / PGP} 17:10, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dippy 247,

1) Do you mean the general look/formatting of typical barnstars (like the background color with a border)? There might be a better method in doing this, but you might want to look at the source for The Original Barnstar. To see the formatting, click "Edit this page" (just use this method to look at the formatting; don't actually save any edits). Copy the formatting of that template and insert your image into the second line of that template, and preview it to see what it looks like. You can always test to see what it looks like in the sandbox. If that's not what you exactly meant, post back. --JamieS93 17:13, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it's what I meant! Osama bin dipesh (talk) 18:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a world wide cooperation and editors are judged by their edits, not their background. I think it would be against the spirit of Wikipedia to limit a barnstar to editors from a specific region, and a barnstar could easily be deleted on that basis. Editors can add themselves to Category:Wikipedians in the United Kingdom but many editors don't say where they are from and it's usually unverifiable. A barnstar for good edits about UK would be fine, but {{UK Barnstar}} is already on Wikipedia:Barnstars/Barnstar of National Merit. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying you should judge editors on where they're from, you should just thank editors, and it would be good to just recognize where they're from. BTW, you could just check their userpages to see where they are from. Sorry if I sound rude but I'm not trying to!

Also could someone add this to the list of barnstars. Template:The UK Barnstar

Thanks Osama bin dipesh (talk) 18:07, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely don't think it should be added to the list of barnstars without prior discussion. You can suggest it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Awards but there may be opposition. Thanking or awarding editors for being from a specific country sounds very controversial to me. Wikipedia has problems with nationalistic/ethnic/religious/... feuds between editors, and thanking editors for their background instead of their edits sounds like a bad idea to me. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks, I'll suggest it at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Awards#The_UK_Barnstar~The UK Barnstar and see if it's a good barnstar. Also, could someone tell me if [3] is licensed alright Osama bin dipesh (talk) 19:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get it deleted

How would you get the template page deleted, because I've had some bad responses? Osama bin dipesh (talk) 21:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are the only contributor so you can request deletion with {{db-author}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

kkk

Speedy Deletion HELP

My page indicates that "it is an article about a club or group that does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject." What do I need to do to provent this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiphop4life2003 (talk • contribs) 18:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indicate why the subject is important. Even if it's short. Merely stating that it exists, when and how it was founded etc..etc.. is not sufficient. Bear in mind that articles that do not meet the criteria for speedy deletion may still be deleted per WP:PROD and WP:AFD. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 18:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Read this page about Wikipedia's notability standards, and then edit the page you created, adding information that shows how the subject meets those standards. --Tkynerd (talk) 18:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page is Hip Hop 4 Life about an organization so Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) is especially relevant. Your username sounds like you may have a conflict of interest. If that is the case then Wikipedia:Conflict of interest says you are strongly discouraged from creating such an article. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just added a few independent articles (secondary) to the site. Will this prevent deletion? Primehunter, my organization utilizes hip hop artists (who are influential to teens) to promote health and prosperity. I do not understand where the conflict stands. Please explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiphop4life2003 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're writing about an organization that you represent, then you're not writing from a neutral point of view. WP:NPOV is one of Wikipedia's key policies. Marasmusine (talk) 19:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bear in mind that it's not a forbidden practice, but it's definitely discouraged to write an article that you yourself endorse or have ties to. However, if you do decide to write the article it must be neutral (as pointed out above), and it should not read like an advertisement. Also, it must be written from the third person. Wisdom89 _{(_T / ^C)} 19:15, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, this episode illustrates what I consider to be an ergonomic weakness of Wikipedia, namely, that somehow the presentation of Wikipedia encourages a substantial number of brand-new editors to start right off with the most difficult and failure-prone type of editing: trying to create new articles from scratch. See: Special:Contributions/Hiphop4life2003 and User talk:Hiphop4life2003. The user most likely meant well, but unwittingly waded into a virtual minefield of unobvious rules and policies that contradict his/her initial expectations. It would be nice if somehow we had a way to warn new users that creating new articles that stick can be very difficult, and it's best to accumulate several hundred edits to existing articles first. --Teratornis (talk) 21:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Help! need to change email address on account

How do I change my email address on my account? need step by step -- I'm lost! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simmscanada (talk • contribs) 19:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Preferences. Steps: click the "my preferences" link which should appear at the top of every page on Wikipedia after you log in. The "User profile" tab in your preferences has a field where you can edit your e-mail address. Also see Help:Email confirmation in case you have yet to confirm your e-mail address. --Teratornis (talk) 20:02, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quite easy. Here you go:

Make sure you're logged in (that is, your user name appears in the top right corner of the page)
Click here or at the "my preferences" link in the top right corner of the page.
In the screen that appears, look under "User profile"
The first box you can type stuff into should be labeled "Email (optional)." Type your new address in there.
Scroll to the bottom of that page and click Save.
Go to the Main page and follow these directions to clear your browser's cache to make sure your changes take effect.
Watch your email account for a few days for an email from "Wikipedia" or "Wikimedia". This will be your email confirmation to make sure you actually own the email address. Follow the directions in the email to confirm your email.
If you don't see the email after a couple days, check your spam folders - sometimes the email gets sent there. If it's not there, wait a little longer, then repeat these steps.

Hope this helps! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use of blogs as legitimate citations?

Hello, I recently edited an article to include information on a company's unethical self-editing. One of the included citations was to a blog which I thought provided a high quality of content. The entire section was automatically deleted until I removed that one citation. I understand why blogs aren't generally used, but do we make exceptions for blog pages that have high quality information (writing style/POV, legitimate citations, specific/detailed discussion)? Youngea (talk) 22:14, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What specific blog do you speak of? Blogs are not usually allowed but a respectable source might be. Please provide a link to the blog here so we can review it. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 22:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I included the link in my original message, above. It is a fully cited analysis (with links back to wikipedia) about how computers from the company network have been involved in multiple favorable POV controversial edits to articles about the company or its products. The content itself is not controversial (it's not really even up for dispute unless we want to debate the integrity of wikipedia data mining), so I see no reason for not including it?? Youngea (talk) 22:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that blogs have no editorial oversight. If it's a well-written blog, it should have citations, which means you can create your own content using those citations. -- Kesh (talk) 22:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately in this case that might count as "original research" -- see above. Youngea (talk) 22:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some blogs are, however, legitimately citable, such as RealClimate or ClimateAudit. Also, if you were writing an article about Dreamhost, the Dreamhost official status blog is citable. Mac Davis (talk) 22:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So is there a way to over-ride the auto-remove in the rare cases where something is appropriate? Youngea (talk) 22:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help so far, folks! Youngea (talk) 22:03, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

please REMOVE ALL PICTURES under Artical PROPHET MUHAMMAD

please please your are kindly requested to remove all pictures under artical prophet muhammad (P.B.U.H).Italic textthis is really hurting all the muslims arround the globe.to be exact i am talking about the picture which contains group of peoples.please please remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.215.92.218 (talk) 22:38, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How many times does this have to be brought up? No. Wikipedia is not censored! This gets mentioned all the time. The answer is no. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 22:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

George, please remember WP:CIVIL. —Travis ^talk 22:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm just getting fed up of this being brought up over and over again. I didn't mean to sound uncivil. Sorry, George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 22:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the person has requested or at least communicated first is a big step up from those who try to anonymously deface articles, and in my opinion, ultimately a lot more pleasant to deal with. Youngea (talk) 06:39, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Wikipedia is not censored.--Kerotan ^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 22:43, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This issue has been discussed many times and, as pointed out above, Wikipedia is not censored. Please see Wikipedia’s Muhammad FAQ for more details. Thank you. —Travis ^talk 22:48, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might also wish to read Wikipedia:Options to not see an image. —Travis ^talk 23:28, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, didn't we just get complimented for this the other day? Sheesh... Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:16, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. ---CWY2190^T^C 02:31, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I followed the above link to Muhammad FAQ. Since Muhammad FAQ is a Talk page, where is the appropriate place to discuss the content of that page? Wanderer57 (talk) 02:42, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The FAQ is a sub-page of Talk:Muhammad. That would be the best place to discuss it. -- Kesh (talk) 03:14, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am offering a non-bias opinion here, even know the wiki-police can quote WP, some users don't realize that policy is not black and white. These issues open wiki up to long legal battles. I know the muslim community will challenge wiki in court and this issue will be solved... WP will also change because of this.Thright (talk) 05:18, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fortunately, you are wrong. Even in Florida under the Bush regime, the United States is a free country, and censors will not triumph in a case like this. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yes indeed, such a case would be tossed out on it's ass. --Fredrick day 01:08, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should have been clearer, wiki is not only subject to us law, but any nations law that a user can access wiki from. Please see the cases in France and Europe. It is too easy to say, "in the US', because in todays world you are accountable to the whole world. Nations have been know, and contiune to block sites that they find do not match national policy. Thank you Yale!Thright (talk) 02:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How Do I Add An Article?

How do we add an Article on Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.77.171 (talk) 22:53, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To add an article, create an account and then follow the instructions at WP:Your first article. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 22:55, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

^ and the

[1] the

[1]