Help desk
< November 19	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 21 >

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.

November 20

My Edits Disappear

Both yesterday and today I have edited the article on Sweet Potatoes by adding additional information concerning the production of sweet potatoes in Mississippi and the fact that a town there has an annual Sweet Potato Festival.

My addition shows up when I look at the article. However, when I log back in to Wikipedia a little later, my addition has disappeared.

Am I not saving correctly? I clicked on Save Page.

68.106.194.160 00:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see your contributions just fine. Try clearing your cache and reloading the page. --Wo o ty Woot? contribs 00:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How can I delete my account?

If necessary, how can I delete my account? Gaurasundara 01:53, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can't, for both technical and legal reasons. However, you can stop using your account at any point if so needed. Tito xd^(?!?) 01:57, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can request a change in username (though, with only 4 edits, it's usually better to make a new one). But it's important for a list of your contributions to be available to everyone online. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 02:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This post in Essjay's talk comes to mind... Tito xd^(?!?) 02:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a Wikipedia online user count and map?

I don't suppose there's a tool online which shows the current count and/or geographical distribution of Wikipedia users who are currently online (for maybe both named accounts and anon IPs) is there? thanks! Bwithh 02:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. The only thing that exists is the number of total registered users, available through Special:Statistics. There's no way for us to identify who is online at any given time (and I'm not sure that is an entirely bad thing either, per the Privacy policy). Tito xd^(?!?) 03:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I was thinking of a map or just a general number count which didn't include exact identities. Just though it'd be neat to see the distribution. Bwithh 15:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Red turning blue

(moved to here from WP:RD/M#Red turning blue by hydnjo talk 03:00, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

At one time not long ago, new users remained red and then slowly changed to blue and became completley blue after about 50 edits. Why was that changed. Anyone know? --Light current 01:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "red" and "blue"? Cbrown1023 01:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erm how can I put this? Your name is either in red or blue on WP?--Light current 01:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a matter of time, it's a matter of whether or not they have made an edit to their user page. If anyone made an edit to the user page then the link would appear blue. Dismas|^(talk) 01:43, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that what happens NOW. But it used to turn slowly from red to blue based on number of edits 8-)--Light current 01:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lol... I wish then we know that they are noobs and that we should be carefule not to bite... Cbrown1023 01:48, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No it didn't. Whether a link is red or blue has always been a function of MediaWiki determined only on basis of existence of a page, and userpage links in signatures have never been treated any differently. The links you see become purple when you click on them, due to your browser's "visited" setting. Tito xd^(?!?) 03:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure. Im talking about 14 months ago.--Light current 03:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was around 14 months ago. It hasn't changed. You must be thinking of what Patstuart described below.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 03:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There have been no changes in MediaWiki related to that since Phase 3 was introduced in 2003. Tito xd^(?!?) 03:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is extremely wierd and a bit worrying then. Perhaps WP (or my computer) has a poltergeist (or virus) 8-(--Light current 03:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not necessarily. You can permanently delete your cache, and you'll see all the links become bright blue again. Tito xd^(?!?) 03:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know in Firefox, after you click a red link, the browser will "remember" that you visited that page, so it will become a slightly darker color of red. You might have been mistaken by this. Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed that as well. Likely, that's what he means. Dooms Day349 03:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No Im not talking about that. THe phenomenon was as I described it in my Q. I was using IE at the time. But it was a WP thing because I remember User:Func commenting on it on his talk page I think.--Light current 03:24, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, that doesn't happen, and it has never happened. Click here. Now, come back, and you'll see it's not the same color. Now, click here. It most likely is blue. Now come back. It should be purple. It's all due to browser's following the CSS preferences placed on MediaWiki:Monobook.css. Tito xd^(?!?) 03:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First one slightly diff. Second one exactly the same color. Im using the Monobook skin. And I definitely remember this happening esp to my name when I just started.--Light current 03:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You created your userpage about forty edits after you created your account. This would seem to explain the phenomenon you describe. Warofdreams talk 03:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah but that would mean my user name should have immediately turned blue when I created my page. It didnt. It faded gradually over a number of days from red to blue. Has no one else seen this happen?--Light current 03:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When you created your page, by default, you visited it. Your browser remembered that you visited it, so it displayed it as a visited page, which is in Wikipedia, by default, purple. Then, you deleted your cache (cleared your Temporary Internet Files), which caused your user page to become "unvisited", which caused your browser to render it as blue. Tito xd^(?!?) 03:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I've never seen it, though I'm a relative newbie. However, this doesn't seem like a likely feature, as it wouldn't help much. I suppose it's possible it existed shortly, but my instincts (which are usually right) tell me it was the clicking problem, and your memory has gone dry after a year or so. Try asking at WP:VPT -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 03:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can reproduce the issue very quickly. Create User:Light current/Sandbox 2, and then come back here. You will see that the page, instead of being the default blue, is purple, because of what I described above. Tito xd^(?!?) 03:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes of course. Actually on my browser/skin the link goes directly from bright red to blue!--Light current 03:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

blocking

Extremely plaintext version available?

Is there any way to get access to (some sizable subset of) Wikipedia basically in .txt form? I'd like to be able to use cURL to get just text, with no formatting whatsoever (except dealing with unicode non-ascii characters well). Preferably this would work for not just the English Wikipedia, but Wikipedia in many other languages as well. Thanks, ^L_Wizard @ 04:24, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. The closest thing you get is ?action=raw, but that includes the raw wikitext, including links and everything. Tito xd^(?!?) 05:42, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know there are external editors out there that can change HTML into text; this is the best I could find (into openOffice and pdf): Wikipedia:Tools#Export: Conversion to other formats. Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 05:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, that raw text is fairly promising. It will take a fair bit of awk/sed to get rid of the markup, but then it should be good. Thanks. ^L_Wizard @ 10:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article Deletion

Someone (possibley an employee) has posted an article about our company and is using our company logo on this website. Although the entry talks good about our company, I would like to have it immediately removed because I do not feel this is a proper place to be "advertising" our product/services. What do I need to do to have this entry deleted?

Thanks 71.195.205.39 06:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell us what the article is, that would make it easier to tell you. Try WP:AFD for a start however. Viridae ^Talk 06:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(After edit conflict) Articles for Deletion is the proper venue to nominate an article for deletion. However, if it's survived to become a good article, then chances are it's notable enough that people would want to look up your company on an encyclopedia, and we strive to make the encyclopedia as comprehensive as possible. A better alternative, I think, would be to edit the article so that there is no tone of advertising and it maintains a neutral point-of-view. It would not be an advertisement if it were purely an informational article detailing the pros and cons of such a company, really. I'm not sure what the deal is, though, and if this falls in the same scope as Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. —K e akealani 06:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It also depends; if it's awful and blatant advertising (not too likely), you could add {{db-spam}} to the top of the article; if you work for a company that isn't all that well known (much more likely), try {{db-corp}}. Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 06:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Annoying...

"A website that you own or maintain, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked to. This is in line with the conflict of interests guidelines. If it is a relevant and informative link that should otherwise be included, mention it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it."

A couple weeks ago, as a new user here on wikipedia, I started a help discussion. I run a woodworking and finishing shop in Florida. So I created this page: [1] and came here to ask what people thought. It says in the guidelines that if there is a possible conflict of interest, start a discussion on it to let others decide. So, that's what I did.

Anyway, everyone liked it and agreed it wasn't spam. I don't have ad's, links, or other junk on the page, only pictures and descriptions of each picture. After everyone approved, I added it here: [[2]] I also asked about making more pages like it and got good feedback so I ended up adding these two links to the appropriate wikipedia pages aswell:

[3] [4]

I was planning on making more tutorials on woodworking and also more picture pages. So tonight as I was browsing wikipedia, I noticed Scott removed all three of my links calling them spam. Now, I don't have a problem if my links and pages are not wanted here, but I am pretty upset that everyone O.K.'d my links to just have them called spam and removed a few days later after I worked hard to create them.

As you can see, the pages are not spam. They have no ad's, pop-ups, links, or other stupid crap on them. The raised panel door link isn't even able to have links, it's a PDF tutorial on making raised panel doors. Now why would this be called spam?

Woodworking and computers are my two hobbies, I figured this would make for a good combination and allow me to add some cool things to wikipedia. If my content is not welcome here, I understand and hold no grudges. Again, I started a discussion about this situation and my external links to be sure everything was OK, everyone liked my links and thought it was good content. I don't want to keep wasting my time if my work is going to simply be removed and called spam.

Thanks for taking the time to read all this. Looking forward to your feedback on this issue. --Naples 07:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)Barry[reply]

OK everyone, I'm going to go to bed. Last time, my question got many fast replies. I figured this time would be the same way, guess not lol

I will check back tomorrow to get the final word on this. I added my three links back for now. If they are deemed "spam", then feel free to remove them. If they are acceptable, please tell Scott to stop calling my work spam. OK, talk to everyone later. Barry--Naples 08:12, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing about that is spam, and I don't see any reason why it should be reverted. You're fine. --Wo o ty Woot? contribs 08:16, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did some searching through your contributions, and the contributions of the IP which appears to correspond to you: I couldn't find anything on the discussion pages about it. The only discussion I found was at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous. They may have OKed your links there, but there's no way ScottW would have known that. If you have a good reason to provide the links, it would be best to leave a message on the discussion page of the article with the link. That way, people can see why you added it, and if someone takes it out, you can just put it back in, and say, "look at the discussion page." Good luck and thanks for editing.

(BTW, the speed of the response totally varies; it all depends on who's online and happens to be watching the help desk). -128.118.113.19 08:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well thank you. I specifically went out of my way to make them as UN-spammy as possible. Then when I saw his comments, I got a little offended I guess.
OK, I'm really going to bed this time! Will check back here tomorrow to read others comments. --Naples 08:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't read the article, so I can't judge it, but please don't write a woodworking tutorial. Tutorials belong at WikiBooks, not here. - 131.211.210.15 09:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever, I'm done here. Your editors are arrogant and have some type of linkphobia. Another link was just removed, again. The comment was:
"Jack Bethune (Talk | contribs) (→External links - Pictures and links offering cabinets for sale are commercial linkspam.)"
I mean, if your editors can't even take the time to see what it is they're deleting, why even bother trying. This guy is either too stupid to understand what this link was, or too lazy to actually look at the page. These cabinets are not "for sale". The cabinets on the page he removed were finished work I have done. As in, they are in peoples homes already, they are not "for sale". The link I'm speaking of is: [[5] here]. Anyway, I'm done here. I don't have the time to battle kids on wikipedia about cabinetry and spam. This is the last time my work is called "spam" by someone who can't take the time to even look at the links he or she is deleting. Anyhow, I'm done at wikipedia. I am truly insulted and disappointed at what has happened. I have many other things I could be spending my time on where it's actually appreciated. --Naples 13:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool down a bit and assume good faith; sometimes editors jump on potential commercial links automatically. To me, that page looks fine on a glance. If it's been discussed on the talk page and okayed by editors there, then reinsert it, with an edit summary pointing to the discussion on the talk page, and if you see it's been removed, leave a message for the editor who removed it politely pointing out the discussion. Don't assume that "arrogant" editors are doing it to make you mad or because they're stupid. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted back to when he added the link. Nothing about that link is commercial, it has good intentions, and it adds to the article. --Wo o ty Woot? contribs 21:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi folks. I'm the person who initially removed these links. I've stated my reasoning over Talk:Wall_unit. Feel free to stop by and have a look. ScottW 23:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, this about does it for me. Apologies, I was in the wrong. Link should definitely be removed. --Wo o ty Woot? contribs 00:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

external links

In this section of a talk page, there're two full http links.

The first one has the "external link" symbol next to it, the second one doesn't?

Why? The two links differ by only one letter. And they're both just straight copy and pasted from the url line. Yet one gets the external link symbol and the other doesn't.

--Saintmagician 08:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see two links, and two symbols, both in my firefox and safari browsers. -128.118.113.19 08:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article on Pope Benedict XVI

Hi The article on Pope Benedict the XVI is extremely insulting and I can't seem to edit it. How do I do this? when i go into the edit page the parts I want to edit don't show up. Just to show you what I mean it says in the opening paragraph:

"He was not elected on April 19, 2005 in a papal conclave, celebrated his Papal Inauguration by making steamy man chowder with his dingy in a Mass on April 24, 2005,(people thought that this was supremely arousing) and took possession of his really, really big cathedral, the Basilica of St. John Lateran, on May 7, 2005."

How do I either edit this or report the article so someone either takes it off or fixes it.

Kirsten

I'm looking at the page, and the edits aren't there; it also appears the edits haven't been there for some time, which means that you're having a problem with your cache. Reload the page (hit the reload button while holding down shift), and the edits should disappear. -128.118.113.19 08:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a prominent world leader, Pope Benedict attracts a lot of vandalism. What you saw was the article after it had been vandalised. You should be able to click on the "history" tab and revert to the last version before the user who vandalised it and return it to its original state. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 08:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes

How do I organise my userboxes in a neat little box? (Mine are all over the place now.) --Littleghostboo[ talk ] 08:33, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Try adding this:

{|name="userboxes" id="userboxes" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; width: 248px; border: {{{bordercolor|#000099}}} solid 1px; -moz-border-radius:10px; background-color: {{{backgroundcolor|#FFFFFF}}}; color: {{{textcolor|#000000}}}; {{{extra-css|}}}" align="{{{2|{{{align|right}}}}}}" !<big>[[WP:UBX|Userboxes]]</big>

Then, for every userbox, type this code

|- align="center" |{{name of userbox}}

Finally, end with

|}

Feel free to ask me if you have any other questions. =)–- kungming·2 | ^(Talk·^Contact) 08:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can do it for you if you'd like. ;) –- kungming·2 | ^(Talk·^Contact) 08:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An easier way might be to add {{userboxtop}} at the top of them, and {{userboxbottom}} at the bottom. -128.118.113.19 08:38, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, that is much easier. I suppose I'm still using an ol' brute force style. =) –- kungming·2 | ^(Talk·^Contact) 08:41, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably just adding in the subst'ed version of the template anyway :) 128.118.113.19 08:46, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Littleghostboo[ talk ] 08:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic naming conventions and Wikipedia

Arabic names can be written in different ways, so it can be tedious to actually write every possible means of writing it. I.E., take the article on Muhammad ibn Abd-al-Wahhab.

I could be wrong, but as I understand it, this same name can also be written at least 7 different other ways:

Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab
Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab
Muhammad ibn Abdul-Wahhab
Muhammad bin 'Abd al-Wahhab
Muhammad bin Abd al-Wahhab
Muhammad bin Abdul-Wahhab
Muhammad bin Abd-al-Wahhab

You could also write Wahhab's full name too

Muhammad ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab al-Tamimi (and again, you could use the same variations on this as shown above).

Is there an easier way of dealing with Arabic names on Wikipedia other than making a zillion #REDIRECT pages? If not, somebody needs to make one... Like a bot, maybe. I think Wikipedia policy should also clarify this. Robocracy 09:09, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User Pages

Err.. what exactly are User Pages? How do they help?

Thanks

ranten

Wikipedia:User page has a full explanation. My user page is here, for example. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 10:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The idea is that user pages give information about Wikipedia users, which can be of benefit in developing the encyclopedia. Anyone may edit them, but normally only the user themselves will do so. For example, a page might say what that user's area of expertise or interests are, or if they are an administrator of Wikipedia. Unfortunately, many people seem to view them as some kind of personal web space, and spend more time worrying about the size of boxes on their user page than about editing articles, and I have found users who appear to do nothing else. Some try to use them for advertising. I predict the abolition of user pages before too long. For a less personal perspective, try Wikipedia:User page. User pages are quite separate from user talk pages, which are a way of communicating with users. Notinasnaid 10:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Pat...Thanks a ton for that info. Appreciate it.

Ranten

Of course, people shouldn't focus too much on nice-ifying their userpage. It took me over 2 years to get it the way it is now. In that time, I've done loads of article edits and admin tasks. People who do a good job on the encyclopedia should be entitled to their own little space to call their own. Userspace of people who don't help the encyclopedia (especially when it's used solely to advertise) can and should be deleted according to the deletion guidelines and policies. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:20, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image display problem

After a fairly exhaustive search through your help files, I've still not been able to find a problem quite like mine already listed; not knowing where else to turn, I am emailing you for help.

For some reason, images on Wikipedia (and its affiliates; basically, all of Wikimedia) do not appear correctly. For instance, when viewing the article "Football" on en.wikipedia.org, the first image (caption begins with "The striker...") does not appear, but it is still a clickable link. Clicking this link brings up the standard large-size image, but it still does not appear. Clicking on the link to the image's main URL on the Wikimedia Upload Commons, however, does display the image correctly, albeit in your standard image-only, otherwise-blank web site, rather than in the context of the article, as is preferable.

This problem doesn't happen on any other website I've visited, nor do any other computers I've tried experience this problem. Reboots and graphics card tweaks have not helped in the slightest. Is there any reason why this should occur? I can freely send computer specs and graphics card specs and settings if that would help, as this problem is getting extremely irritating. Furthermore, if this email was sent to the wrong place, please let me know of the correct destination (and forward it if you can, otherwise I will do so myself). If there is already a solution to this in your extensive database, please point me to that answer, as I still haven't been able to find it.

Thanks very much for your help and expeditious reply. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devourer Kwi (talk • contribs)

There's probably a problem with the image server; it's been struggling recently. One thing that may help is to bypass your cache on the computer with the problem (normally Ctrl-F5 with a browser window open), to see if it's caching bad thumbnails that were generated by the image server a while ago. Another thing that may help to narrow down the problem is to resize an image by one pixel (try putting the image in the Sandbox if you need somewhere to test it) and see if you can see it then; if you do, it's almost certainly an incorrectly cached image. --ais523 13:25, 20 November 2006 (U T C)

Thank you for your help. After fiddling around in Sandbox, I came upon a checked option in the right-click menu that was blocking images from the Wikimedia Upload Commons. Unchecking this box, clearing my browser cache, and reloading the webpage solved the problem. Thank you for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devourer Kwi (talk • contribs)

email confirmation

I've tried 3 times to confirm my email but I keep getting a message that my confirmation code is expired.

Try getting a new confirmation code, and using that one... — QuantumEleven 14:55, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

illinios state tax table to bill goods

was trying to find a copy of a tax table to use as a guild to bill clients i know the rate here is 6.5% to be charge to the total on item purchase i know to times the total times 6.5% but chart would help also.

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. - Tangot a ngo 15:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What happens to vandals

I am doing an assignment for school on Wikipedia, and I was wondering if once you vandilize a page, does your account get blocked or deleted? What are the consequences?

Yes, your account will get blocked. In addition, your actions may be reported to your Internet Service Provider, school, or workplace, depending on where you edit from. You will also personally face the shame of having wasted a lot of people's time and effort, as well as having defaced an international project to create a rich source of knowledge. Cheers, - Tangot a ngo 15:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:BLOCK has a litany of information, especially WP:BLOCK#Guide_to_blocking_times. Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:17, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

How do you rename images? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 15:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can't with the current software; that is why images must be named correctly and descriptively when they are first uploaded. If you really, really, really need to rename an image, upload a new copy using a descriptive name, and put a speedy deletion tag on the image with an appropriate reason. {{db|Uploaded new image under the name [[Image:Blah blegh.jpg]]}}, for example. Cheers, Tangot a ngo 15:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:26, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Our Entry

Hi,

I am looking for advice on getting the terms 'roboDNA' into the wikipedia. ( see roboDNA.com ) I submitted a previous article, but it was advertising and was removed. I now realize the format of the content was not appropriate.

You will notice by searching Google and Google Groups that the term roboDNA is unique to my project. There are currently no references in google groups for roboDNA.

Even though roboDNA.com is a commercial organization, it has been mentioned and featured in at least 3 major media organizations here in Canada for being a leader in the robotics field.

The Ottawa Citizen is the nation's capital's offical newspaper. A full page story featuring roboDNA.com' robotic work with highschool students was in the Business Section D4 on March 24th, 2006.

A 15 minute segment featuring roboDNA volunteer work with students was featured on CTV's TechNow. ( CTV is Canada's major media organization, owned by Bell Global Media ) This was broadcast nation wide, on 3 occasions.

A full article can be found on canada.com featuring robodDNA's work with students.

Our free Lego NXT PC software is popular with the Lego NXT robotics community, and has been recently featured in several popular Lego Blog site, including nextasy.org and thenxtstep.

I hope that you can advise me on how I should go about forming some content, and how to prevent my post from being rejected.

Thank you!

Lou Morris roboDNA.com

I suggest you read the notability criterion guidelines for companies; if you think your company meets them, then read our guidelines on conflicts of interest. The talk page corresponding to the article would be a good place to make your point. --ais523 16:34, 20 November 2006 (U T C)

least visited articles

Is there some way of finding out least visited pages in wikipedia? Srinivasasha 16:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators can find a list of least watched pages, which depending on your viewpoint may or may not be the correct sort of thing. Most users cannot access this list due to the potential for vandalism. --ais523 16:09, 20 November 2006 (U T C)

Problem: signing in is disabled on a voting page

Hi, I am user Dc76, and I have been active for about 2 months. I have a problem: I can not login to vote on this page. It says I don't exist as user. But I can login, edit and vote everywhere else. I suspect it is a softwere problem, and that many other people are hindered to do the same thing as me. Could you, please, help. (I signed with number 101, but as you can see, only my IP address is recorded.) Thank you! :Dc76 16:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The page you linked is on Wikimedia Meta-Wiki, a sister project of Wikipedia, but not on Wikipedia itself. If you go to meta:, you can sign up separately for a username there. --ais523 16:31, 20 November 2006 (U T C)

Thank you very much for getting back to me so quick. Your answer does open one's eyes. Does it mean that the vote is only conducted on Wikimdeia. I tried to search if there is a similar proposal on wikipedia, but can not find one? If I wished to propose the deletion of mo.wikipedia, where would I start? Again, thank you very much for your answer!:Dc76 17:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are actually lots of Wikipedias, one for each language. Votes on creating or deleting wikipedias are taken outside the Wikipedia. For creation, the reason is obvious: it doesn't exist yet. To take the vote in just one language Wikipedia would hardly be fair to the others. Think of wikimedia as the master project that owns all the Wikipedias, and some other projects too (like wictionaries). [6] is the general place for closing projecs, while [7] is the master index to all proposals. Notinasnaid 19:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. So that is indeed THE place to cast the vote. Thank you very much for concise, explanatory and useful answer! :Dc76 20:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should redirect pages have categories in them?

While looking at category pages I've seen quite a few redirects listed under certain categories, for example CAKE (drug) is listed under Category: Fictional drugs even though it just redirects to Brass Eye. There are some smaller categories which are heavily populated by redirects, with many of them redirecting to the same page. Is there a policy on this? 172.159.205.207 17:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not normally, but sometimes categories apply. It is on a case-by-case basis. Cbrown1023 19:55, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

encyclop. download

At which link can I download the encycop. in the different languages for consultation on my laptop and/or palm device in an immediately usable format ? Many thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.76.246.29 (talk • contribs) 12:19, 20 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]

More information about downloading wikipedia can be found here. - Tutmosis 17:23, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

how to download an article and all related pages?

hi,

i plan to replicate the entire "pet" section of wikipedia on my own mediawiki installation but am at my wit's end in my quest to do so.

while i found a method to take an entire sql dump of wikipedia, this is not my intention as i would end up consuming large amounts of cpu and bandwidth.

please help...

reference - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pet

cheers,

saurabh pande

It is definitely better for Wikipedia if you download the SQL database than have software visit pages to download them. Downloading the database doesn't put any load on the servers, while badly behaved programs that download many pages can have a bad effect on performance. Notinasnaid 17:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming image file?

There is an image file, Image:Ham hock and artichokes.jpg which is mis-named. I was not the uploaded, but I am not the only person to noticee the vegatable pictured is not artichoke but baby bok choy. How do I rename the image file to Image:Ham hock and baby bok choy.jpg in the same manner of a page move, so that history and incoming links still work? -- Dgies 17:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images cannot be directly renamed. You have to reupload under the new name and delete the original. -- Rick Block (talk) 20:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a side note, you will need an administrator to delete the old image for you. You can add {{db-author}} to the image page and an admin will delete it for you. Prodego ^talk 20:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a coincidence, first time I browse the Help Desk in a fortnight and I come across an error in an image *I* uploaded :). While the filename is still incorrect, I've added a note to the page to say where I was wrong. Since the only people who'll see the filename are editors, I'm not too bothered about shifting it now. Good eye though Dgies! GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 13:30, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

left footers

why are roman catholics in the uk referred to as "left footers "18:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC)~~

Try asking at the reference desk. Trebor 18:14, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re:child tax benefit application form

I would like to apply the canada child tax benefit for my son who was born on JUNE 06 2005 ,CANADIAN CITIZEN ,where can i get the application form and send it?

Wikipedia does not have forms for Canada Child Tax Benefit; it is an encyclopaedia. Sorry. Trebor 18:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Try the reference desk. Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:20, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Format for entering dates

Does Wikipedia have a preferred format for entering dates in articles? I've encountered at least three types

20 November 2006
November 20 2006
November 20, 2006

Thanks in advance for any clarification you can offer. Black Falcon 18:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In your preferences, you can also set which ones that you see... Cbrown1023 18:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MOS says:

February 17, 1958 → February 17, 1958

17 February 1958 → 17 February 1958

Cbrown1023 18:34, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your prompt and helpful response. Black Falcon 18:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stub

How do I remove stub status?

Expand the article so it's no longer a stub and then remove the template that gives it its stub status. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where Do I report posible vandalism?

I believe someone has been vandalizing your entry on John Adams as I could find not confirmation that this statement is true.

“His other dad, michael jackson, died at his birth. he is the only president to have gay parents.”

Please repair the damage.

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

Click on History when in the article. Go back to the version before the vandalism. Edit that version and save it. You do not need to ask someone else to fix it unless it is a protected article (in which case it shouldn't have vandalism anyway). --Kainaw ^(talk) 19:04, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What does (top) mean?

What does (top) mean in My Contributions? --Eiyuu Kou 19:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It means that no-one has edited the article since that edit. --Cherry blossom tree 19:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I was worried I was getting in trouble for reverting vandalism. --Eiyuu Kou 19:29, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cannot edit an article

There are errors in the article found by searching for "ina ray hutton" but when I click the edit button, the resulting edit box does not present the article itself for editing, just the links given in the article and some specific facts that are in the article. I see nothing about the article being protected, etc. I am using IE7. Any ideas on what I need to do - this is the first time I have tried to edit something. TIA. Bigbridge 19:54, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, you do realize that the text appears different when you edit and when you view an article. When editing, you see all the wiki-markup code (those [[ and ]] links). If that is the problem, you just ignore the brackets and read the text around them. Then, see Wikipedia:Tutorial (Editing) for information on editing an article. --Kainaw ^(talk) 19:57, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response - I understand what you are saying, and I was able to edit the test page in the sandbox -- but, the text on the page I am trying to edit (see start of my original question) still does not show up when I click on edit - any more ideas? TIA.

I suspect you're clicking the edit button next to the external links. That will only allow you to edit that section of the article. To edit the whole thing click on the edit this page link in the tab, right at the top. --Cherry blossom tree 21:11, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How right U R - I feel like I have tunnel vision. Thank you very much.

Question regarding Shaquille O'Neal content on Wikipedia

Please review the Shaquille O'Neal information page, especially the first paragraph, on Wikipedia. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaquille_O'Neal) It appears that someone may have tampered with this information. Admittedly, I know very little about the man's personal life, but I'm pretty sure that this isn't correct.

See it again. The vandalism has already been removed. --Kainaw ^(talk) 19:58, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block logs

If one has been blocked in the past (As I have 8-( ) Why is this not shown in the user's block log--Light current 01:18, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[8] appears to show your block log. —Centrx→talk • 01:21, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is, see here. Note the name of the blocked user, with a "User:" in front of it, goes in the title box to search for blocks on a user, and the name of the blocker goes in the User box, without any prefix, to search for blocks by a user (as here). Prodego ^talk 01:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK Thank you!--Light current 01:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stubs

How does one remove stub status from an article? The help pages are not specific about this. Calstanhope 02:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you think the article is of sufficient length, you can edit the article and take out the stub tag which is normally near the bottom of the article. It will look something like {{stub}}. Dismas|^(talk) 02:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot my password, I remember the password, I got trouble

Hi Ho!

The other day I forgot my password. So, I clicked the 'E-mail new password' button in the login page. But, the e-mail never comes. Yes, I have not verified my e-mail because the e-mail verification never comes. Now, I remember my password. But, I cannot login to my account because I have ever clicked the 'E-mail new password' button. Is there any way to solve this problem? I know I can just create a new account. But, I think it is not the right way. My username is Eus Kevin.

Thank you very much for your help.

If you e-mail a new password, your old one continues to work until the one emailed to you is used, and since it was not, you must not remember your old password (or typed it wrong). So you really have to create a new account. Prodego ^talk 03:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the information. With a new hope I tried one more time and I logged in successfully.

Image help

Would someone be able to help user:Merkelcell and I with the placement and presentability of the images in the merkel cell cancer article? I'm finding it hard to help because I'm blind and can't see the effects of the changes. Would it be appropriate to have those images as a gallery? Graham87 03:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The images were written over with a url and of a very low quality, so I removed them. shotwell 04:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading self-made files from illustrator

Hi, What should i do to upload an image or file self-made from illustrator Felix Portier 4:14 PM 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Illustrator has an export function. Export the file in the jpg format. Keep the resoltion to SCREEN. Upload the resulting JPG file.

Ranten

And be sure to choose a suitable license. For example you can release it for any use. However, you can only do this if it is all original. If you made up the file combining, for example, photographs you did not take, photographs of art work, or the logo of a business, you need to understand copyright thoroughly (we can help if you describe it in detail). Notinasnaid 09:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded Image Vanishes

Hi...

I wrote this article on an eminent Indian Science teacher: Parul Sheth

Finally figured out how to upload an image of her also. Uploaded the image as per the instructions about the relevant topic. Pasted the relevant code in the page. Image could be seen.

Today...the image has vanished. Whatever happened?

Ranten

The deletion log [9] shows that it was deleted under criterion i3, which means improper license. Normally someone will send a message to your page; they probably just forgot. -Patstuart^{(talk)(contribs)} 06:07, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

so what exactly am i supposed to do, to make the image show up? The image was given to me by Dr. Parul Sheth for the specific purpose to accompany the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ranten (talk • contribs)

It is not acceptable to put up the image only for use in the Wikipedia article. It must be released under a suitable license, which would allow the image to be used anywhere, for any purpose, by anybody. Check with the copyright holder that this is acceptable, then come back if so for more advice if it is. You will need to include correct copyright and license information. Wikipedia deletes images without this, because many people are putting stolen images into articles, sad to say. (This is not saying there is anything wrong with your image, but Wikipedia must be careful as otherwise it will end up with legal action it cannot afford). Notinasnaid 09:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi Notinasnaid...thanks for that information. Now where does one apply for all the licences etc. How much does it cost? Jeez...and i thought this wiki thingy was going to be easy.....just figuring out the help topics sends one into a tizzy.

A license is free. What he means is that the image cannot be copyrighted (if it is, you can't upload it!) unless it satisfies very specific fair use criteria. Except in those Fair Use cases, the images are generally public domain or GFDL-licensed. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 11:14, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps to explain even more: we don't sell you the license; we don't give you the license. The person who owns the copyright of the photo has to give the license to Wikipedia. The license is what gives us permission to have the photo in our articles. (Note that every photo taken by anyone will have copyright, even a snapshot). Notinasnaid 11:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah Notinasnaid thanks mate. The image in question was given to me by Dr. Seth to adorn the biographic profile which she asked me to put up here. The image probably has been shot by her husband, or kids, or some friend while out on some family soujourn...now lets see if i got this straight? Do I/Dr. Parul have to trace who ever the photographer is and ask him or her...to please become a member of wikipedia, and assign to wikipedia all rights to the image? Lets face it folks - in all probablity the photographer him/her-self may not even remember having take this pix - come-on folks these are images from the family/friends albums.

Now would it be ok if I were to go and shoot a fresh image of Dr. Sheth, and upload the resulting image?

202.177.151.53Ranten

Now why do these numbers xxx.xxx.xxx.appear against my name? Or do I have to start a thread all over again to explain this? All i did was put the squiggly sign three times and typed in my name.

You signed. Typing three tildes (that's a squiggly sign) inserts your signature - and if you're not a logged-in user, your signature is your IP address. Typing four tildes gives your signature and the current date and time, while five will just give the date and time, no signature. If you want to be identified by a name of some kind, it's best to register (click the link up the top-right of every page), so when you type the tildes you get a signature that you can set yourself, like this one: Confusing Manifestation 08:44, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How to Download

Is there any way in wikipedia through which i can download the things which i need?202.56.245.162 06:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia website. The most you can do is look up articles that may link to places where you can download software.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 06:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Upload

How can I upload a html file in wikipedia?Nileema 03 06:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can't. Though you can use HTML in articles it is usually preferred if you use wiki markup in its place. What were you intending to upload? Dismas|^(talk) 06:28, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning uncredited character in the little mermaid

The character of Vanessa(Ursula in disguise) in the Little mermaid cannot be found in either the movie credits nor Wikipedia. I am curious to know 71.33.117.204 06:44, 21 November 2006 (UTC)who voiced the character.[reply]

Also, trying to get to this "contact" part is like yanking teeth! Clicking the contact us link should ALWAYS lead to this page. It took me over five minutes to get to this point! Root canal I tell you!

I think you might have better luck with your query at the Reference Desk; this Help Desk is for asking questions about using and editing Wikipedia. Sorry I can't help you more, but I don't know the voice actor. —K e akealani 07:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As to the first part, you might like to try the reference desk where they specialse in knowledge based questions. This is the help desk, where we answer questions relating to how to edit the encyclopedia. Which leads to the second part - the contact wikipedia link gives you a list of options where you can choose the appropriate method of contacting us. As I said before, the help desk specialises in questions about how to contact the encyclopedia. Viridae ^Talk 07:02, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The contact page is designed so questions and comments reach the people that can act on them. Not everything should go here. Factual questions like yours for example belong on the reference desk. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:48, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help desk settings

Hi Is there any settings which enables help desk to be displayed in wiki? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.223.243.6 (talk • contribs)

Not entirely sure what you are asking for. You wrote this on the help desk so muct be able to find it ok and it must be displaying correctly...? Viridae ^Talk 07:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons to WP

How do I get an Image from Wikimedia Commons to Wikipedia?

†he Bread 07:39, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In general, you shouldn’t need to. Images from the Commons can be used on Wikipedia using standard image syntax. — Knowledge Seeker দ 08:12, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits not showing

They show on the PC that I've used to make the changes but they don't show up if using any other PC. Why is that?

Thanks for your help.

USER NAME: Bkpip. ARTICLE IN QUESTION: Bradford City AFC.

Try clearing the cache on the affected computers. Dismas|^(talk) 09:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, but it's not the PC's I'm using that are the problem. It's people in England who are telling me they can't see the changes. Can you see them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkpip (talk • contribs)

You seem to have added a section "Bradford City Online Forums", and I see it. However, I suspect it may be deleted soon, since Wikipedia guidelines in Wikipedia:External links suggest not to link to forums ("Links normally to be avoided" item 7). Almost every major sport team will have forums, but notice you don't see discussion of them, right or wrong. Sorry, I can see you want to improve the article. Notinasnaid 09:52, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exam papers

last yesr papers for fms entrance exam

Sorry, you seem to have us mixed up with someone else. This is an encyclopedia. Notinasnaid 09:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

fms last year sample papers for entrance

If you want the type of papers I think you're after, you should contact a university. We're an encyclopedia. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answer to question

How can I answer someone's question? 202.56.245.162 10:38, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Next to the title of the question (like "Answer to question" above) you will see an "edit" link. Click this and an editor will open. Go to the end. Add a blank line, then type your reply. Sign with ~~~~ as normal. If appropriate, include an edit summary (though on the help desk and talk pages this is much less important than for an article). Notinasnaid 10:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might also want to read Wikipedia:Help desk/How to answer. --ais523 10:49, 21 November 2006 (U T C)

uploading images

Sir, I have a hundreds of images of birds from Botswana, Afrika, not lisensed.

1. When I tried to upload an images, it appears that I can upload,only, one at the time. Is there a way to upload more images at once?

2. Where and how can I upload images if I do not know the categories and names of birds.

Please, help Me

Best Regars, Zoran Bozovic, Belgrade, Serbia—Preceding unsigned comment added by Bozovici (talk • contribs)

Although I am a beginner, it appears to Me that whole procedure of uploading is rather confused and complicated.

I hope this can help you see this in a different way. Sometimes a thing seems complicated because you want to do something that Wikipedia isn't designed for. Wikipedia only has pictures in order to put pictures in articles. It is not a library of photographs. So you should find the articles that do not have pictures, and select those pictures only to upload. (If you do not know what the bird is, I do not see that the image can be useful, because you will not know where to put the picture). Then edit each article to include the picture you have uploaded. This is certainly a job to be done one picture at a time. Copyright is important too. You say "not licensed". Do you mean that these are photographs that you took yourself, with your own camera? If not, can you describe what you mean by "not licensed". This is vital, because if the pictures do not have correct copyright information, Wikipedia has to delete them, and I know how annoying that can be. Notinasnaid 10:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images that are not attached to articles are usually deleted around here, to avoid the servers being used as free storage space. Try the Wikimedia Commons instead so all projects can benefit from the images. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:51, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]