Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2011 July 9

Help desk
< July 8	<< Jun | July | Aug >>	July 10 >

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.

July 9

Template help

Resolved

I'm an editor on a Wiki called MicroWiki, and I'm trying to create a template for Coats of Arms (is that the correct plural form of Coat of Arms?). Anyway, could you post the wikitext version of the Template:Infobox coat of arms here for me so I can copy it onto MicroWiki? Thanks in advance! Hekewe (talk) 00:32, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

You can go here, https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/w/index.php?title=Template:Infobox_coat_of_arms&action=edit and copy the text of wikitext of the template. GB fan (talk) 00:42, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

And you need to give attribution on MicroWiki back to the template page here to comply with copyright rules. GB fan (talk) 00:43, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thanks so much for your help! I'll make sure to do that, Hekewe (talk) 15:03, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Porting templates to other wikis can become very complicated, due to Wikipedia's templates often using many other supporting templates, and other things such as MediaWiki extensions and CSS classes. Only rarely will copying just the one template you want allow it work completely on the destination wiki. Template documentation is sometimes harder to port than a template itself, as the template documentation pages often use a bewildering number of other templates to display examples and so on. I made some notes about this in Appropedia:User:Teratornis/Template porting: theory and practice. You may need help from an administrator on the destination wiki, for example the MediaWiki:Common.css page is by default only editable by administrators on a MediaWiki wiki. If you are editing on another wiki that does not already have a lot of templates ported from Wikipedia, you may have to port an incredible amount of supporting material just to build up a comfortable environment for porting the templates you really want. There is no good solution to this problem yet, not even within the various wikis of the Wikimedia Foundation (many similarly-named templates on the English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons, for example, are not consistent). See Wikipedia:WikiProject Transwiki for some (very) early steps toward a comprehensive solution. --Teratornis (talk) 20:46, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Number_1_Ladies_Detective_Agency

There is an upcoming book in the Number_1_Ladies_Detective_Agency by Alexander_McCall_Smith called Botswana 13. I found a source for the book right here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Botswana-13-Alexander-McCall-Smith/dp/1408702606 Can someone please add this information in the Number_1_Ladies_Detective_Agency and Alexander_McCall_Smith articles? Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 01:21, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I know nothing about this series but it might be best to hold off on adding the book to the article since it doesn't appear to have a title yet and the release date is about 8 months off yet. A lot can happen in 8 months to push it off. Also, is there a reason why you can't add this to the articles? --Dismas|^(talk) 01:29, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Fix Reference

I add the information on the Number_1_Ladies_Detective_Agency and Alexander_McCall_Smith pages. But could someone fix the references I added on those pages please? Thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 02:05, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

In order to make references work you should remember to have the "<" before "<ref>" otherwise it will not read it correctly. I ended up removing your revisions, though. I was reluctant to use Amazon as a source because it is a solely money making website. Once the book has been printed, or sources come out on his website you could add the information again. Ryan Vesey (talk) 03:38, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:SALT

Can anyone link me to the page for requesting salting, or is it just WP:RPP? — Fly by Night (talk) 02:21, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that's the link. A person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 03:48, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Looking for help

Resolved

 – by User:TEB728 -- John of Reading (talk) 06:45, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi. I left a "help me" template on my talk page and got no response. Earlier I was adding many sources to the Jill Gibson article and I don't know what went wrong? I can't see the different page numbers on the 5 books that I used for references. I also added sources from old print magazines. I'm not sure why the page numbers are not displaying. Caden ^cool 03:40, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Please direct me to exactly which sources they are, and when you placed the {{helpme}}. A person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 03:52, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

It's all of the sources I added today on the Jill Gibson article. I think I added the help me template on my talk page an hour ago. Caden ^cool 03:59, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Help on what is a reliable source

Hello

I am currently having difficulty in understanding how reliable a reliable source has to be in order to be used on Wikipedia. I recently made a contribution to the Like A Prayer article using this reference which came directly from this website. It was continually reverted (only by one editor) who gave reasons including it wasn't a reliable source and the website it came from was a fan site. I accept the fact that the article came from a fan site, but the actual article which I am quoting is a direct scan from a physical newspaper that has then been put online. The newspaper NME is very much a reliable source. It is fairly obvious the text has not been edited to be different from the original text. The original article comes from 1989, so it is not included on NME's current website. I fail to see the difference between referecning an online scanned copy of an article and using a full academic reference for the magazine (or any book) from my local library without any online link. Is it more reliable to use a reference for a book or magazine that no-one can actually verify without buying the said item or trawling through their local/national libraries?

I am more than happy to be proved wrong, I'm just confused as to where the line is drawn. Any thoughts are most welcome and appreciated! Paul75 (talk)

The source in this case should be NME, cached at the fan website. This puts the original source as NME, while still giving the working like to NME. Stuartyeates (talk) 10:09, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm... it appears to me that the reference at the fan website is likely a copyvio link. As such, it should not be used. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 12:33, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

My view would be the same, such sources can never be linked to (see WP:ELNEVER), reliability isn't really an issue. You'll have to reference the NME article directly and alone, but in order for it to be verifiable you'll need the precise issue/page number etc. Rehevkor ✉ 12:38, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Note also that in this era of Photoshop, we cannot assume that what appears to be a scan of a legitimate source is in fact anything of the sort. Fakery is easy. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:29, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Deleted articles

How do I view deleted articles as it seen before the moment it was deleted? 123.24.79.245 (talk) 03:44, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Only admins can do that. Dismas|^(talk) 03:45, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Google search results sometimes retain a cached copy of deleted Wikipedia pages for a period of time ranging from hours to a few days after they disappear from Wikipedia. Sometimes an archive site like the Wayback Machine has old copies of a Wikipedia article stored "permanently", but not likely the last revision before the article was deleted. From WP:AFTERDELETE:

• "If the article is deleted and you would like a copy of it to be restored to your userspace so that you may work on addressing the concerns about the page, you may contact one of the admins listed at Category:Wikipedia administrators who will provide copies of deleted articles. Or post your request at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion."

--Teratornis (talk) 19:00, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Downloading wikitext

I'm interested in downloading a few pages of Wikipedia content. I seem to remember a way of getting the wikitext rather than just screen-scraping; can anyone tell me what that is? Something like &format=raw I imagine.

I looked at m:Help:Downloading pages but, oddly, it doesn't address the issue. Wikipedia:Database download is not relevant here; I just want a page or three, not gigabytes of source.

CRGreathouse (t | c) 04:22, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

It's "action=raw"; see mw:Manual:Parameters to index.php at Mediawiki. Eg This example. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:50, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much. (It actually needs to use the w/index.php?title=Title_goes_here&action=raw format.) CRGreathouse (t | c) 02:56, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Is there an equivalent of BLP1E for articles about dead people?

The only notable thing about Kevin r winterbottom (sic) is his death, so I don't believe the article should exist. Roger (talk) 07:19, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Plenty of people are best known for the way the died.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:53, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

So what? That does not mean they rate a biography here. (If you're not going to even try addressing the issue please don't post a reply.)Roger (talk) 08:01, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) If you think that the article should not exist, start off by discussing this on the article's talk page. Give it a week, and see what people think. If the consensus is that it should be deleted (or there is no response), or you still feel strongly that it should be deleted, you can either propose it for deletion or take it to Articles for Deletion - of course, you can do either of those two right now if you wanted to, but I think it would be a good idea to try to discuss this first on the talk page - someone might come up with a compelling argument for why it should be kept that you agree with - and in this case, there is no compelling reason for a quick deletion, so the week's wait won't do any harm. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:03, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Actually, having looked at the article, I don't think that Winterbottom meets the criteria for inclusion, so I am going to propose it for deletion. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:07, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

(ec) I just find it strange that the "one event" rule applies only to living people. Does it somehow make someone inherently more notable if the "one event" happens to involve the person's death? Roger (talk) 08:14, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

• For non-living people, see WP:BIO1E. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 09:05, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks SmokeyJoe, that is exactly what I was looking for. The case of this article has however moved on. It appears the subject may possibly be notable due to being awarded the Honoris Crux medal. Roger (talk) 09:28, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Editing raw watch list

I have a few entries on my watch list that just will not go away, no matter how I edit them. I would expect editing the raw watch list would be pretty straightforward, but it is not. Is there a way to access the raw source code? There used to be, if I remember correctly. --TimL (talk) 12:12, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

At the top of your watchlist right under where it says "My watclist" it says, "For GB fan (Display watched changes | View and edit watchlist | Edit raw watchlist)" You should be able to click on the edit watchlist link. GB fan 12:18, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Well I guess I wasn't clear, no matter how I edit them. Including the link you referred to. --TimL (talk) 12:35, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Please tell us what happens when you click on Edit raw watchlist. Does it not bring you to your raw watchlist? Or are you saying that you were able to access it but didn't find the page titles in order to remove them? Or are you saying that the page titles were in there and you removed them and saved (by clicking on "update watchlist") but even after you did that the pages are still coming up in your watchlist? Something else?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:52, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Or are you saying that the page titles were in there and you removed them and saved (by clicking on "update watchlist") but even after you did that the pages are still coming up in your watchlist? That. Regardless of method. --TimL (talk) 17:16, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

If this were a page viewing issue, I'd think it was a cache issue on Wikipedia's end. I don't know if watchlists are cached like this, but they may be. How long ago did you clear the pages? Try clicking on the following purge link (which may do nothing but won't hurt) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Watchlist/raw&action=purge --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:29, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I tried the purge link but no dice. This looks like some sort of bug in the wiki software. I'm not sure what you mean by how long ago did I clear the pages. If you mean how long ago did I try to remove pages from my watch list? 5 minutes ago, Two hours ago, several times a day ago. It seems to be certain entries, for example, I just removed 'Edwin Drake' from my watch list with no problems. Definitely seem like a bug in the wiki database. --TimL (talk) 17:54, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Are you trying to remove page names that contain a question mark? There is a known bug in this area. A workaround is to use "Edit raw watchlist" as follows: copy your watchlist out to a text file, then delete the whole watchlist and save it, then paste the text file back in except for the unwanted entries, and save that as your new watchlist. Messy. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:30, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Sean Burch article

I submitted an article on an individual named Sean Burch and have not yet seen anything on him on Wikipedia. Does that mean I did something in error when submitting? Should I resubmit?

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 239Catapults (talk • contribs) 14:21, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Your contribution list shows only this posting to the Help desk, and I don't find Sean Burch in WP:Articles for Deletion, so my guess is that you did not manage to save your work (perhaps you pressed "review", or perhaps your article contained links which were rejected). Since you have not yet made ten edits, I would expect that your account is not yet WP:autoconfirmed, so you will not be able to create new pages anyway.

There is actually no such thing as "submitting" an article to Wikipedia: you edit articles, and when you save an article it is live. It does make a difference, however, whether you create the article in main space or in a subpage of your user page.

Have a look at WP:your first article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ColinFine (talk • contribs) 15:24, 9 July 2011

I believe that any registered editor can create pages. See WP:AUTOCONFIRM -- John of Reading (talk) 20:35, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Special:ListGroupRights says the "Users" group (i.e., all registered users) have the createpage right. --Teratornis (talk) 21:24, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Folks, it's at AFC, see Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sean Burch – ukexpat (talk) 12:49, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

X5 Winner

Hiya

I came on to this site on 9th July 2011. It said that i was the X5 winner for the day and gave me some prizes to choose from and the system was counting down. However, when i went to pick a prize, my computer wouldnt allow it and kept saying i am not authorised.

Is this a legite prize?? If so what happens now, can i still get the prize or have i missed out because of this??

Please reply to my email address: Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by LucyTwin86 (talk • contribs) 14:57, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

You are at Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia that anyone can edit. As far as I know, Wikipedia never gives prizes or offers to give prizes, so I don't think the site you came on to was Wikipedia, or anything to do with Wikipedia. If you were trying to go to Wikipedia, it is possible that your computer has been compromised by malware which is redirecting you do a suspect site, and you should get your computer disinfected as soon as possible. --ColinFine (talk) 15:28, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I've seen this before, both here and on other sites. You probably typed in "wikpedia" or some other misspelling. If you'd managed to give them your email address, you'd be deluged with spam. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 18:08, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation page please

Hi, caught up in editing Al Capone, Prince Buster and so on, I have created a redlink for The Trojans (group), London based ska and blues band, as this group was wrongly wikilinked to The Trojans, would someone be so kind as to do a disambig page for The Trojans? and then I might get around to creating a stub for the group some time soon. Cheers. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 16:13, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Normally we only create a dab page when there are three or more articles that are known by the same name. I only see one article right now and with yours there would be two. In this instance once you create the article you can just put a hat note on the top of The Trojans directing people to the new article. GB fan please tell me what you think of my editing 16:24, 9 July 2011 (UTC).

There is an existing disambiguation page for Trojan, which lists Les Troyens. I added a hatnote on Les Troyens with a link to Trojan, using: {{about|the opera||Trojan}}. Trojans is a redirect to Trojan. I see no need for another disambiguation page with the similar title "The Trojans", just use the page we have, to list The Trojans (group) when you have created the page and shepherded it past the deletionists. Also see Sports teams named Trojans, which does not directly apply to this question but lists many more articles with Trojans in their titles. --Teratornis (talk) 18:35, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

When searching for applicable disambiguation pages, one should search also for variants on a title, for example without the definite article "the". The Trojans is currently a redirect to Les Troyens (the opera) but might be better as a redirect to Trojan which lists many other articles that someone might search for under "The Trojans" (for example the many famous and obscure sports teams). --Teratornis (talk) 18:44, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

adding attribution

I started a page Oryctes Rhinoceros , and the content was from wiki.pestinfo.org, and that site was under creativecommons. How to add attribution to that page? -- Raghith 18:42, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Look through Category:Attribution templates to see if a specific attribution template is available. If not, then the procedure seems to be to use a generic template such as {{source-attribution}} or {{citation-attribution}}. --Teratornis (talk) 18:47, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Except that {{source-attribution}} refers to public domain, and you want a Creative Commons attribution template. {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} might work, although we normally use that template on file pages. You could also create a {{Pestinfo}} similar to the other attribution templates, which could be used in many articles that draw content from this source. --Teratornis (talk) 18:53, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I created one as you said, {{Pestinfo}}. I am not sure whether it is correct or not.-- Raghith 09:18, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

username

If usernames cannot be taken by someone else once they are taken, then won't there eventually be no usernames to choose from? A person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 19:11, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Strangely, WP:USERNAME does not seem to specify the maximum length of a username, but the length is probably high enough to allow for an astronomical number of possible usernames, making it unlikely that all usernames will be taken any time soon. However, increasingly more of the "good" usernames will probably be taken as time goes on, making it harder for new users to pick a name they like which is not already taken. Maybe in 100 years if Wikipedia still exists and virtually all of today's editors are dead, Wikipedians of the future may come up with a scheme to archive off some or all of the old names to alternative aliases, to free up the "good" names that future editors might want to usurp. Note that a similar issue arises with Web sites such as Tinyurl that provide shortened URL aliases for Web pages - thanks to the wonders of combinatorial mathematics, it only takes a relatively few characters to give enough combinations to equal all the Web addresses that exist. Of course the vast majority of character combinations will not have grammatical meaning. --Teratornis (talk) 19:26, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Also, WP:USERNAME excludes many possible usernames, such as those that are misleadingly similar to existing usernames. Thus a given username occupies a larger "footprint" in the possible space of usernames than just one place. Again, this would mostly create an issue of using up the "good" usernames that new users would be likely to try choosing. The number of possible usernames is so vast that we can afford to consume them wastefully by forbidding similar usernames. --Teratornis (talk) 19:30, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

It appears from mw:Manual:$wgMaxNameChars and http://noc.wikimedia.org/conf/highlight.php?file=InitialiseSettings.php that the current length limit for Wikipedia is 64 bytes. If we only allowed lower case letters, spaces and digits then this would still give around 37⁶⁴ or approximately a googol possibilities. This is more than the total estimated number of fundamental particles in the observable universe so we could give each of them a username, if we could just figure out where to store the username database. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:19, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

That's nothing that 37⁵² monkeys each a login screen couldn't handle.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:30, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

First, ForgetAboutIt/FuhGhettAboutIt, what does monkeys have to do with this?

Second, PrimeHunter, I really don't care how many username possibilities there are.

Third, Teratonis I have no clue what the !!! you are talking about, but I'm sure that it's not going to answer my question.

Thanks anyway, A person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 23:59, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Fuhghettaboutit made a joking reference to the infinite monkey theorem but it's not relevant to your question. If you don't care how many username possibilities there actually are then here is the short answer to your question: There will always be usernames left to choose from. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:28, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, he never showed us a link, so I thought it was spam. Also, thank you very much for your answer: “There will always be usernames left to choose from”, or even shorter:

“If usernames cannot be taken by someone else once they are taken, then won't there eventually be no usernames to choose from?”

“No.”

“Thanks.”

“Mm-hmm.”

“Yup.”

“Uh-huh.”

“Bye.”

“See ya.”

Anyway, thank you so much, now read this: READ IT: Thank you Now read this, a long, infinite essay about monkeys, which is not at all humerous nor entertaining and is TOTALLY not a link to your page, where I have left a plate of cookies :) Just to clear any understanding, the link in the previous sentence is actually to a plate of cookies. I was trying to make a joke, and please do not interpret it as anything else otherwise, nor think for a second that it is actually an infinite essay about monkeys that is not at all humerous nor entertaining. It is actually (REALLY) a plate of cookies. Verify it. Again, I was only trying to make a joke, and please do not interpret it as anything else otherwise, much less an insult leaned or preferred to anyone, thing, affiliate, or company. Thanks, A person who has been editing Wikipedia since October 28, 2010. (talk) 04:39, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

CLOSED CAPTIONED UNDER SPENCER FAMILY AS HENRY FONDA AND JAMES MACARTHUR

THE MOVIE IS REAL GOOD PLAY HENRY FONDA, JAMES MACARTHUR, MAUREEN OSULLIVAN AND TWO PEOPLE MORE ADDED I DID NOT NOTICE ENOUGH I KNEW THEM ONE WAS PLAYED EX WITH ANDY GRIFFITH SHOW WITH AUNT BEE (FRANCES BAVIER ) AND MALE WAS PLAYED WITH "I DREAM OF JEANNIE" WITH LARRY HAGAMAN THE SOLIDER WAS BOSS I DID NOT CATCH HIS NAME. I HOPE YOU WILL REALZIE THEM. THANK YOU BARBARA SMITH — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.84.25.180 (talk) 19:39, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Do you have a question? If you are trying to identify actors who appeared in a film, you can ask on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment. Stating the name of the film, if you know it, would make such questions easier to answer. --Teratornis (talk) 20:23, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Another way to approach this is to do a search in the Wikipedia search box: If you enter "Henry Fonda, James MacArthur", Spencer's Mountain appears as the first result; is that what you are looking for? (Maureen O'Hara appears in it; Maureen O'Sullivan does not.) —teb728 t c 23:43, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Searchable table number order

Hello. I'm using Wiki markup to create a searchable table on Wikia, and one column is intended to have any of the numbers from 0 to 10 and the ? symbol. The table is working fine, I'm very happy with it, but now that there are some 10s in this column, it sorts going 0, 1, 10, 2, 3, etc. Is there any way to fix the order to numerical without breaking the rest of the table? Thank you. Lady BlahDeBlah (talk) 20:21, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Do you mean "sortable" rather than "searchable"? All the text on a Web page is normally searchable in a Web browser, with Ctrl+F or ⌘+F. See Help:Sorting#Numeric sorting with hidden key for one possible solution to your question. --Teratornis (talk) 20:27, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, it's sortable. We generally called it searchable because the sorting makes it easier to find things...it's lateish here. XD Lady BlahDeBlah (talk) 20:30, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Am I correct perhaps in thinking that the ?s are making the column sort like this, and not numerically? Lady BlahDeBlah (talk) 20:35, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Help:Sorting#Sort modes explains how the sort function decides what to do. The presence of a non-numerical string in a column (such as "?") might cause the sorter to treat every element in the column as a string, in which case the string "10" would sort before "3" since the sorter would compare the the two strings character by character, starting with the first character. I'm not familiar with the details. You should be able to get the sorting behavior you want by specifying hidden sort keys. "Searchable" is not a good synonym for "sortable" as searching and sorting usually have very different meanings in computer science. Searching is like finding one item in your house, whereas sorting is like tidying up the entire house (something I have never actually done, although I have contemplated it on occasion). You are correct to note that a sorted list is usually easier to search, both for humans and for computers. --Teratornis (talk) 21:18, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

When creating sortable tables, there can be issues with how a column sorts. See Help:Sorting for a complete overview.

• Columns that mix alpha and numerical data will sort alphabetically— this can be resolved by using {{nts}}.
• When using general text with and without wikilinks, use {{sort}}.
• To sort dates, use {{dts}}.
• For sorting names in the format last, first use {{sortname}}. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 23:41, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

File:William Hearn umpire.jpg

Can someone crop File:William Hearn umpire.jpg to remove the whitespace? Thanks, Albacore (talk) 21:11, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Done.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:06, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Photo confusion

Can someone tell me how to upload a photo? And when I click on them some look like they're on the English wiki and others say "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons (icon) Information from its description page there (icon), is shown below." I don't get it. Thanks.PumpkinSky (talk) 22:46, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Free images should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. This is so that the image is available to all projects within the wikimedia foundation. The english wikipedia, here, allows some non-free content to be used in articles. Those images are uploaded here. GB fan please tell me what you think of my editing 22:58, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Okay, but how do you do the upload. Where's the button to click on? I'm very new.PumpkinSky (talk) 23:06, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

See Help:Files. To upload on Wikipedia your account needs to be 4 days old; so you will have to wait a couple of days here. There is no such restriction on Commons. —teb728 t c 23:13, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Ah okay, thanks to all. PumpkinSky (talk) 23:16, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

If you have a free file to upload here is the link, commons:Upload wizard. If the file is not free here is the link, Wikipedia:Upload, but you will have to wait as mentioned above. GB fan please tell me what you think of my editing 23:20, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

(e/c) The Wikimedia Commons is a sister site. All media hosted there can be used directly here. However, while we allow certain types of copyrighted images to be used here in certain circumstances, the Commons is only for public domain and freely licensed images. So if your image is going to be used under a claim of fair use it would have to be uploaded here. But if its PD or under a suitable free license, it should always be uploaded to the Commons. Since the Commons is a separate site, you would have to sign up there (or unify your accounts). The problem you are having uploading here is that your account is not yet autoconfirmed—a threshold that requires an account to be four days old and to have made at least ten edits before it can do certain things including uploading files. Since you account was created at 22:37 UTC on July 7, 2011, you would have to wait about two more days. There is no autoconfirmation threshold for uploading files to the Commons however. So the upload form here is at this link but you won't be able to use it yet. The upload link for the Commons is here which you could use immediately after signing up.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:23, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I have a Navy photo of the attack on the USS Bunker Hill from WWII. I've found the ship's category on Commons so I know now what type of info they're looking for. Thansks all. PumpkinSky (talk) 23:27, 9 July 2011 (UTC)