Hello my name is Candyce Frichtel
My e-mail address is <removed>
I`am a first year med student and my instructor is saying that HoH and H2o are the same meaning (or component) is this a true statement or not: the reason for my question and curiosity are : i looked up the definition of both and they dont seem to fall in the same category ; although they both have water as a basis for their chemical make-up. i would like a response to my question so that i can be clear about whether HoH and H2o are the same chemical make-up or do they differ.
Websters collegiate dictionary The concise columbia encyclopedia HoH and H2o web pages
It's HOH and H2O with a capital O (oh, not zero). What I remember is that you write two H's if you have to separate hydrogen atoms but H2 if they have combined with a molecular bond. — JIP | Talk07:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The H2 notation simply says the total number in the molecule, or the proportion, in the case of an ionic crystal. The H-0-H form shows the actual structure (except that they are not in a straight line - if they were, the world would be a less interesting place, probably with no liquid water). All of them are, of course, to some extent, simplifications. --David Woolley13:37, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Link a page from a picture
Normally when you click a picture, it takes you to the picture. How do you link a page to it so that when you click the picture it takes you to that page instead of the picture?
I'm not sure, but I think it's important that it go to the image page in every case. That's because people need an easy way to check the copyright status or other information about the picture. Also, consistent behaviour seems a good thing. Notinasnaid08:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What about on a user page? I would like an image to go to another page so that I can remove the frame and caption, is it possible? --Ballchef11:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I wish to use the image in a forthcoming book but would like to get access to the best quality original possible. Do you know where or how this can be obtained?
Thanking you in anticipation.
George English
This image apparently is taken from the "albums de croÿ" (note spelling) of Charles de Croÿ. No idea where to get a better scan. There seems to be (or have been) an exposition on these albums at the Chateau de Flers in Villeneuve-d'Ascq in France [1]. Lupo09:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, it is often the case that you have to buy or license a high quality image. Just because something is in the public domain doesn't mean it is freely available. What you do obtain, you may use in any way (unless you obtained it under a license). 17:07, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
A side note, high quality images of PD work may not be copyrightable in the US because of their lack of originality. See [2]. Of course that doesn't mean you will succeed in demanding the museum send you an 8000x6000 TIFF file of their painting. Tempshill21:10, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How to handle potential vandalism?
On the Tekken (2006 film) article we have a user (User:81.218.200.189, he seems to change IP's every day he comes to edit FWIW) consistantly adding unverifiable (WP:V) information (specifically a non-existant cast list). He then goes to each of the individual actor's pages and adds "Tekken" to the actors filmography. I've done the test/test2/test3/test4 template bit, hoping this might at least get the guy to talk (since this could be a content dispute), but so far no response. There's discussion on Talk:Tekken (2006 film), but this user hasn't participated or is unwilling to participate. What's worse, the incorrect info on this page is being used as source on other sites, so I'd really like it if this guy would knock it off. So my question is: is this vandalism? A content dispute? How can I resolve it given that the individual won't respond? -Locke Cole11:50, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If it can't be verified and the user is not prepared to listen to reason, then -yes- I would consider it vandalism. Since he regularly changes IPs, I'd suggest you ask for protection of the Tekken article, rather than a block, because they are likely going to try and evade it. - Mgm|(talk)13:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
dear sir, please i would like to know how much castor seed can be collected per hectar? thanx. mekonnen gebabaw. my e mail address, <deleted - see instructions> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mekonnen (talk • contribs)
A Complete Article on Backplane Buses
Dear Concerned!
I'm a student of electrical engineering and wants to ask some information on;
1) Backplane buses (ISA, EISA, AGP, PCI).(Complete article)
2) Advantages and Limitations
3) Which one is faster?What is the data transfer rate?
Please email me these things on this email address:
<deleted - see instructions>
Regards,
Tehseen Aslam
(A student at University of Engg. & Tech., Lahore, Pakistan.)
As the instructions at the head of the page indicate, this is not a page for factual questions. You need the Wikipedia:Reference desk, specifically the science part. This page is to ask questions about the use of the Wikipedia itself. --bodnotbod18:35, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone please look at and remove the stupid comments from the Bruce Lee page. I love this site and use it all the time, but don't know how to do something like this myself and the help pages are too complex. Thank you.
When uploading a screenshot, the option bar notes that one screenshot per article can be used, but I can't seem to find any other times when this restriction is stated in the usage policy files. I'd just like confirmation that there is a one screenshot per article restriction.
Whilst there is no explicit restriction (there's cases where several can be justified), we try to encourage keeping the use of fair use images to a minimum - the legal validity of having multiple images is often pretty shaky. A one-fair-use-image maximum is, if possible, a good rule of thumb to stick to. (Free images are even better, but understandably hard to get for films!) Shimgray | talk | 02:30, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If I'm writing an article of an item with multiple parts (the First Tsurugi article), and would like to include screenshots of each part to supplement my probably insufficient written descriptions, then might taking shots of each part and posting them be excessive? KLSymph02:41, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Mmmmuuh... I dunno, frankly. I'd encourage you to only use one, but I can see how you could argue for half a dozen (and, god knows, enough articles on films do) - you're using them alongside an explicit discussion of the thing portrayed, some critical and informed commentary, &c. Hrm. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fair use is a good place to leave this sort of query. Shimgray | talk | 03:29, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Usher article
Someone stated that the song "Caught Up" by Usher is about masturbation, however the song is clearly about a women that the man is "caught up" with. Can wikipedia change this, because it is highly insufficient, and I am hoping that the author of that page was not doing it out of spite.
Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs changing, please feel free to make whatever changes you feel are needed. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit any article by simply following the Edit this page link. You don't even need to log in! (Although there are some reasons why you might like to...) The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use out the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. Shimgray | talk | 03:19, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the rules on the non-use of original research before doing so, as "clearly about" sounds like your opinion, rather than a statement that there are other documents that you can reference to support that view. Conversely, if no source is given for the current view, that may be original research and should be challenged on the article's talk page, or with the original author, and, if necessary, and after searching to confirm no supporting material, removed. --David Woolley07:57, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
What links here
Is there a way to find out recent changes in the articles that are linked to one particular article. For example, I want to see changes in pages that are linked to India. Please advise -- Ganeshk07:27, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That is recent changes in links present in the India article (outbound links). What I am looking for is recent changes in all the articles that link to the India article (inbound links). Hope that clarifies. - Ganeshk09:37, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know there is no automated way to do precisely what you're asking for. You might be interested in List of India-related topics (there are fairly many "list of x-related topics" pages), which exists at least partly to allow the "related changes" operation. You could also create a subpage of your user page containing links to whatever set of articles you're interested in, and view recent changes for that specific set of articles using "related changes". Note the "list of" articles (or your user subpage) are manually updated and many have not been kept up to date since categories were introduced a little more than a year ago. "Related changes" does not seem to work for categories. -- Rick Block (talk) 18:21, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Argentinian National Anthem's mp3 Link
When I click the link to Argentinian national anthem mp3 (the second link in the page), instead of a download page, it "warps" into a Spanish-Argentinian site about education in Buenos Aires(educacion=education, right?) with tons of another links. I have no idea what to do, since I have no knowledge about Spanish language at all. So, could you make a more-specific link that can lead straight to the mp3 file, please? Thank you.
Ooooh.... Then please, someone, make it "back to live" ! Thank you.
The problem is that it's an external link - we have no control over whether it's dead or not. I'm afraid to get it back you'd have to contact that site specifically. I'll remove the link from the page for now, though, since it's of no use. Shimgray | talk | 12:42, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Noooo....! To anyone understands Spanish and accidentally sets his eyes onto this section, please, do so!
Can you please disable the IP 198.96.86.4
Hi,
Please block this IP 198.96.86.4, he has been causing much pain.
Please check the history of this IP.
I once again request you to block this IP.
There seems to be an edit war about the transliteration of an arabic word. It's certainly not vandalism, but I would have thought that the transliterations were somewhat arbitrary, and therefore it was unreasonable to claim a mistransliteration. It looks to me that the requests for comment process is needed here, not a blocking. --David Woolley12:50, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting articles without checking the authenticity
A quick question, to ask why splash (AN ADMINISTRATOR) had the power to delete an updated page on "Damn Skippy". I updated the page to display information on my band of the same name. All information was correct and could have easily been verified by going to the specified websites. I am wondering why the update was denoted as "Nonsense/Loser", this is unfair.
An appology would be kindly accepted.
Many thanks.
Wikipedia is not the place for self promotion. I've just listed the article you re-created as an article to be considered for deletion. This isn't to say that your band isn't great, or that you will not be notable enough for inclusion someday in the future. However, Wikipedia cannot be a promotional site for non-notable bands, non-notable people, etc., etc. Imagine what Wikipedia would be like if every Joe Schmoe had an article?. It would be unruley, unencyclopedic, unmanagable... in short, chaos. As for the admin calling you a "loser" -- that's not fair, I agree. However, due to the quirky song names of your band, he or she probably thought you were being a vandal playing a hoax on wikipedia. --Quasipalm15:03, 9 November 2005 (UTC) p.s. I've added your other albums, along with Damn Skippy to the AfD, including Live From The Haunted Candle Shop, Hip To The Javabean, Clown Circus.[reply]
Creating a new page with the same title as an existing page
How do I create a new page whose title is identical to that of an existing page? Specifically, I would like to create a page for a person whose name already exists in Wikipedia. Will this involve creating disambiguation and redirects? Does the existing page need to be edited in any way?
I'm sure there are many ways to approach this. Would appreciate your input.
The general process involves disambiguation by adding a parenthetical distinguisher after the main article name, e.g. "suit (cards)" if you want to write a "suit" article and want to distinguish it from clothing. — Extreme Unction19:22, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I see some folks on this page and others have their signatures in different colors, superscript, subscript, and so forth. I know how to use HTML, so my questions are basically:
1. Are these signatures saved somewhere, and accessed via some combination of keystrokes similar to ~~~~? Or are they just saved locally on the poster's computer and cut-and-pasted as necessary?
The modified signatures are set up in Preferences. Basically to change your signature, put something in the box marked "Nickname" and check the box marked "Raw Signatures". This will prevent the Wiki from automaticaly linking your name to your user page. You can make your own wiki links in the Nickname box (try testing it in the Sandbox first). Enter ~~~~ in talk pages to display the signature you created, with timestamp. ~~~ displays your signature but no timestamp, or ~~~~~ for timestamp alone.
Mine looks like this -=# [[User:AmosWolfe|Amos E Wolfe]] <sup>[[User talk:AmosWolfe|talk]]</sup> #=-
Note that an overly ornate signature can be perceived as attention-seeking or annoying; such signatures also eat more bandwidth than they deserve. Feel free to add a splash of uniqueness, but don't go overboard. If someone suggests that your signature might be a bit too dramatic, take heed. To produce a signature, use three tildes: ~~~. For a signature and timestamp, use four tildes (~~~~) and for a timestamp alone, use five: ~~~~~. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:01, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I've just added a babel box on my user page. I noticed however there are various "user templates" for additional languages like C programming language, HTML and such.
Is it "really right" to put those languages in babel boxes? After all, they're not "real world" languages. Maybe I've not got the point in babel boxes?
Thank you, MaxDZ820:17, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
People do it also because they think it's neat and cute or whatever. They're having a little fun with their user page. Where's the harm? Dismas|(talk)21:34, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed they are not "real world" languages, but listing them is still useful. The Babel box was made to encourage user classification by the languages they have mastered. Whether they are spoken in the real world is irrelevant in that case. - Mgm|(talk)22:50, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll think about it. I see above there's a question about generic div boxes. I believe I'll play a little with them. Thank you for your feedback. MaxDZ811:27, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merging, when's a discussion a dispute...
Earlier today I added merge tags to Scottish term days and Quarter days, these were reverted by User:Mais oui! without discussion. I readded them and added an entry to the articles talk page. Mais oui since has changed them to mergedisputed tags and we've had a good bit of to-and-fro on reverts about it.
In my opinion the merge is not disputed. I added the tags because I thought the articles would be better if merged. I added the tags to see if anyone else thought so too, or if they thought it was a bad idea. The tags are there to point folk toward a discussion on the subject, if most people don't think a merge is a good idea then of course i'll not merge the articles. A disputed merge is one where i just go in and do a merge and someone thinks "whoa, that's a bad idea". Or if at the end of the merge discussion I do a merge regardless - that is a disputed merge. Am I completely off the ball here? I have discussed on the user's talk page without much success...
I'd rather discuss the merge, rather have someone play silly beggers with the politics of it - going on about 3RR and "no personal attacks" when I'm the one trying to be constructive, discuss things and have made no personal attacks at all...
It is a bit votish, but a discussion seems to be ongoing on Talk:Quarter days right now. I think was Mais Oui tried to say is that it would've been a good idea if you had explained why you wanted them merged on the talk page in the first place, but I do agree with you that that's not really mandatory. - Mgm|(talk)22:46, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, don't know where that layout came from, but it was there when I added my comments so... Anyway, that's my point - it is a discussion, so why the need for the dispute tags etc? Thanks/wangi22:56, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Why can't we not having a traditional Chinese character pages? It will serve likely more than those only familiar with the simplified characters. Thanks and I appreciate some response.
Is that the simplified Chinese Wikipedia? Or the traditional Chinese Wikipedia? Maybe there is only one, which would lead to the question. Notinasnaid10:00, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Howdy. I'm new at this and I'm not sure I understand an issue about the sandbox. Going through the tutorial Wikipedia:Tutorial (Wikipedia links), and at the bottom, it says "Try it! Here's the sandbox for this page." But when I click on the link, it just goes to the regular sandbox (Welcome to the Wikipedia Sandbox! This page allows you to carry out experiments. To edit,...). Same thing happens for Wikipedia:Tutorial (Related site links). Am I supposed to cut and paste everything into the sandbox and then play? I looked through the editing FAQs but maybe I need a little bit more on how the sandbox works. Hope this isn't too stoopid a question.
Not a stupid question at all! What you're seeing when you hit the link for the tutorial sandbox is actually a template, which is basically a chunk of wiki markup that is included (transcluded, as they say) into another page. The main sandbox just so happens to use the same template as this other sandbox, but the pages themselves are actually stored separately. So do go ahead and just edit the sandbox linked from the tutorial; it won't affect the main sandbox, though you're certainly welcome to experiment there, too. Hope that wasn't too confusing. Good luck, welcome to Wikipedia, and let me know if you need any further help! —HorsePunchKid→龜06:46, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Legality issue
I'm wondering, does it constitute as fair use to use small sound clips directly out of an anime series or film? We're talking about 2-3 second clips, for name pronounciation. -- Ynhockey || Talk11:59, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Fair use is tricky. As noted above, we like to avoid it. The important thing here, is to remember that fair use depends on the context. If you write about an anime series, you can illustrate the article with a poster as fair use, since it's directly and closely related to the subject. Pronunciation of names of anime figures is not central or essensial illustration of the article, and may not be valid fair use, depending on standpoint. On the far end, if you cut sounds from an anime episode, to illustrate something completely different (like pronunciation of a name, in an article about, say Mao), fair use doesn't apply because you are just ripping off someone's value without association. — Sverdrup13:02, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia
What is wikipedia?
Yesterday when I came here everything was stupid! Someone had changed Wikipedia to Wikipaedia with an e. Is this vandalism or official? Wikip(a)edia rocks!
If you are talking about the template, perhaps you can point me to the template you are working on, so I can have a go at fixing it. - Mgm|(talk)16:30, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to list it for AfD, but the "Link to this article's deletion page" or whatever takes me to a pre-existing archive from the last time it was up for a vote. (There apparently was no consensus.) So I removed the AfD and came here.
1. Is there an official or acceptable length of time to wait before re-nominating a page for deletion? The previous AfD vote was 2 months ago.
2. Assuming that it's kosher to re-nominate the page, how do I link to a new deletion page? The current deletion page offers up DIRE WARNINGS against altering the discussion archive, so I want to avoid doing that, if possible.
To renominate you use the tag {{subst:afdx|2nd}}. Read through the original AFD debate first and decide if it is likely that a renomination won't just lead to the same result. See WP:GD for further details. Sjakkalle(Check!)13:21, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How do I get rid of this?
Apologies for my noobness in advance.
At the Dopethrone page, I'm editing track listings, and this happens every time I want to put the three parts of a song on a different line:
1. Song
2. Song
3. Song
I. Part One II. Part Two III. Part Three
Is there any way I can not have the text in the box? I've tried fiddling around with it, but it seems to go automatically. I presume it's something to do with having a Roman numerals list?
It's because you're putting a space at the beginning of the line:
I'm pretty sure it's a mis-spelling even in British English - phosphorus is the element, phosphorous is an adjective meaning containing phosphorus Nicola7910:31, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
deleting my account
how can i delete my account?
.....ummm..... hello? anyone? anyone at all?
Accounts cannot be deleted. This is in order to comply with the GFDL license, which requires keeping track of individual contributions. If you no longer plan to use your account, then you can just leave it there and never log in again. Johntex\talk22:19, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Editing the "1995 births" Category page
How do I add a new link to the 1995 births Category page? Clicking the "edit" tab doesn't display the content that is actually shown on the page.
Categories are generated automatically from article text. To add an article to a category, add the text [[Category:1995 births|Smith, John]] (or whatever is appropriate) to the article. The text after the bar is used to put the name in order; the text displayed is always the name of the aricle. Susvolans⇔17:27, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The heading for the article on the America's cup incorrectly identifies the final matches of the America's Cup as the Louis Vuitton Cup. The Louis Vuitton Cup is the cup awarded to the winner of the challenger series. The winner of the Louis Vuitton Cup is the boat that sails against the defender of the America's Cup in the 9-series race for the America's Cup. This is a common misconception, but I couldn't find it misstated anywhere in the editable portions of the article. If the header is assembled by Wikipedia editors, I'd like to request that they update their information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.64.195.30 (talk • contribs)
I'm using MSWin MSIE6; would someone who knows such things check whether the scripts in my monobook.js should work with it, please? —msh210 15:48, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Fonts
For some reason which escapes me, the font with which I see wikipedia has changed(to a font that is downright horrendous). I cannot find the setting in my preferences, if there is one. And no one else seems to have commented on it, so I'm assuming it wasn't a wikipedia-wide change (that is, it's only affecting me, so far as I can tell). I don't beleive it's something in my browser because all other pages outside of wikipedia look the same. Can someone point me to the setting? Thanks. --2tothe421:39, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have not seen any change in my fonts. There are various settings in your browser that can change default fonts, as well as problems that can occur in your operating system's settings. If you're sure neither of these is the problem, try checking out your CSS file, User:2tothe4/monobook.css. You can force Wikipedia to use a specific font with that; I can provide more details if necessary. Hope that helps!
On a marginally related note, did anyone else notice that for about five minutes a day or two ago, the default justification of paragraphs was set to "justified" (instead of "left justified", which it has always been)? Was someone fiddling with the main monobook.css? —HorsePunchKid→龜07:20, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
With most editors having tens/hundreds/ or even thousands of pages on their watchlist, this would be a very rarely used feature. Probably, I'm guessing, not enough to justify having it. Dismas|(talk)01:09, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Making That Red Link Blue
On the wikipedia page for Joey Waronker, all links are cross-referenced BLUE, except for the link to Walt Mink, which is RED. The reason for this, if I understand correctly, is that there is no wikipedia entry for Walt Mink.
However, there is a wikipedia entry for Walt Mink. The FAQ tells me I can link the two by authoring a Walt Mink entry -- but I already have.
What I can't seem to figure out (since I'm apparently dense) is how to--how do I put this--hip the Joey W. page to the existence of the Walt Mink page without recreating my entry on Walt Mink.
Why is it that any random person can come and edit your pages? Some random person can come around and make all correct things wrong, therefore messing up other's work. I have been doing research papers for school, finding out only recently that you can edit pages. I am worried that anyone looking for correct information could be picking up false information, therefore getting the wrong idea about something. This is just my opinion on this subject, but i would feel much more comfortable if you could maybe prevent anyone from editing the pages. Thankyou very much for listening. unsigned question by anon 24.211.103.120
As anyone can edit any article, it is of course possible for biased, out of date, or incorrect information to be posted. However, because there are so many other people reading the articles and monitoring contributions using the Recent Changes page, incorrect information is usually corrected quickly. Thus, the overall accuracy of the encyclopedia is improving all the time as it attracts more and more contributors. You are encouraged to help by correcting articles and passing on your own point of view.
But on the other hand, where do you think Wikipedia came from? There wasn't a huge accurate encyclopedia, suddenly opened up for vandalism; there was nothing at all, and all of these million articles and more exist because anyone can edit. And the job isn't finished yet. Notinasnaid16:59, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Who adds the links to newlt added content?
I added some content to an existant page. I see that all the Wikipedia pages have links embedded in thgeir content but all I did was add to content, I did not create any links. Does a human editor come along at some point and annotate content added by users?
I think he may be asking how you actually create links. The way it is done is to put the name of the article in double square brackets, like [[Wikipedia]] (Wikipedia). There are some subtleties which are explained in Wikipedia:How to edit a page. The most important are that the first letter may be either upper or lower case, but all others must be exactly as in the article title. The second is that you can put a vertical bar after the article title, and follow it with what you want to appear in blue, for the link, e.g. [[Wikipedia|this encyclopedia]] (this encyclopedia). There are various short cuts and special cases which can speed the process, but, for most articles, the above rules will get you started.
In many cases, you will need do no more than add the double square brackets to the text you have written, but you should always test each link, by previewing the edit and, for example, using right-click open in new window to make sure that it is what you expected. If it is not, you will have to find the right article and put its title and a vertical bar ("|") before your text (or change your text to match).
I'm familiar with RfC (for user disputes), AfD (for content deletion), but where exactly would one make a proposal to, in this case, ban all anonymous contributions from AOL IP addresses? --Locke Cole02:05, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'd figured it'd been discussed before, that's why I didn't want to try reinventing the wheel first. Thanks for the pointer to the older discussion! --Locke Cole16:41, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
munierz pipe organ
What is the location(address) of this organ builder? The date? The historic sinificance? [email removed] thank you linda shearin
Please read the instructions at the top of this page. Sharing your email address is likely going to leave you with a lot of spam and questions like yours should be directed at the reference desk. Good luck. - 131.211.210.1108:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Subst in signature templates
I've seen some discussion regarding templates in signatures (e.g. at Wikipedia:Template substitution). I assumed templates in signatures were not allowed, but now I suspect otherwise. So first I'd like to know for sure that they are allowed. Secondly, assuming they are allowed, I would like to subst mine (seems friendlier to the servers), but this seems to be forbidden (at least according to my tests in my sandbox). Is this actually the case? (See also Wikipedia:Help desk#Time in signature.) Thanks for any help! —HorsePunchKid→龜07:12, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In geernal templtes in signatatures are strongly discouraged, but there is no actual policy against them (although some people have sugested one from time to time), substituted templates avoid many of the problems and are IMO better than trascluded templates. But I think it is better yet to have a signature simple enough that no tempaltes are needed. DES(talk)16:37, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comments, though I am still confused. First, I'm certainly not a fan of excessively large signatures, but anything but the most trivial signature is impossible to edit effectively in the preferences. Second, my main point here, which I did not make clear, is that subst in signatures fails; the wiki markup for the template remains unprocessed. Is this a bug or a feature? —HorsePunchKid→龜19:14, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Broken global stylesheet, or where to report minor bugs?
There are two problems with the global stylesheet that should be fixed ASAP. First, the filter statement on line 225 should simply be removed: It is nonstandard and produces errors messages in Firefox. Secondly, the line-height property on line 208 has no units (should be 1.5em, I'm sure), which is invalid and also causes error messages.
These are trivially fixed, but I'm not sure this is the sort of thing a bug report should be filed for. If so, I'm happy to do so, but in that case, what sort of timeframe might I expect on the fix? (Not that I'm that worried about it getting fixed quickly; I'm just trying to debug some custom monobook stuff, and it's a tad annoying.) Much thanks! —HorsePunchKid→龜07:47, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Error messages in Firefox? I have no such problems. Are you sure the problem wasn't temporary? Anyway, it would help if you shared the error it produces. - 131.211.210.1108:28, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No need, really. The errors are pretty blatant and fixable, as I described. Look at the link I supplied and the line numbers, and you'll see them. I should clarify, though, that I'm not getting popup errors or anything; it's just dumping stuff into my Javascript console, which is rather annoying when one is trying to debug one's own code. :)—HorsePunchKid→龜19:01, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Funny Language Page
I found a page on Andrzej Maksymilian Fredro while surfing through Wikipedia recently, and I'm wondering if it wouldn't be better of in the Polish language area. The reason being that the article is pretty incomprehensible to any non-Polish speaking readers. In general, how do you nominate a page for review? (besides deletion)
Wahming08:38, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
{{cleanup}} or {{expansion}} usually works, as the article would then be placed into their corresponding category (Cleanup by month or Articles needing expansion) and someone who sees it could help expand it with info. NSLE(讨论) \<extra>09:18, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
If a page on the en wikipedia is actually writen in a langauge other than english, you cn put the {{notenglish}} tag on it, and follow the directiosn that appear to list it as a page in need of translation. DES(talk)16:33, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Finding Wikipedia: (wikipedia colon) pages
There seem to be a lot of pages about wikipedia that have titles wikipedia:something_else
For example, there is wikipedia:relative size, here is wikipedia:help desk there is wikipedia:long articles
How can I get a list of all of the wikipedia colon subpages?
What I am curious about is just a dump of all of the subpages for the category wikipedia and if it is possible to find one for other categories with subcategories I would like to figure that out too.
Wikipedia:community portal has several links to different subpages, but not all of the subpages.
Apparently you've got your terminology mixed up. Categories are the links at the bottom of an article. "Wikipedia:" is what is called a namespace, so what you are really asking for is a list of pages in that namespace. Subpages are writting using "/" not ":". See Wikipedia:Glossary. - Mgm|(talk)11:56, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Templates that bestow category membership
I'm sure I have seen a template that puts the containing article into a category, without showing up in that category itself. How is this done? — PhilHibbs | talk11:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think you actually want to use <includeonly> for what you are trying to do. <noiclude> will put the template in the category, but not any articles you add the template to. <includeonly> will not add the template to the category, but will add any articles the template is added to into the category. --GraemeL(talk)13:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Some intermediate questions
1. Is there an easy way to find out how many contributions a particular user has made? (Me, for example?)
2. Likewise, is there a way to find out a given user's IP address, in order to identify sock puppets?
3. I see folks voting on AfD with stuff like "Strong Delete" or "Strong Keep". What is the purpose of these extra emphatic votes for purposes of whether or not the article is kept or deleted? Do "Strong" votes count twice or something? Or maybe it's an inside reference to Demi Moore's "strenuous" objection in A Few Good Men? Or is it just meaningless internet posturing? Or what? Inquiring minds wanna know.
Yes, but not available to anyone other than a very restricted set of users for privacy reasons
Not really. AFD is not a vote; it's an attempt to gain consensus. One thing that helps in gaining consensus is some idea how strongly people feel about it, so often people will vote "weak delete" ("delete as is, but could change with improvement" or "I don't feel too strongly about this") or the like; "strong delete" ("please god, kill it now!") is the obvious corrolary. Shimgray | talk | 13:19, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Translation
I want to translate some articles from English to Greek.How can i do this?
A dictionary and a grammer might help.
More seriously, you may translate any article you wish, as all articles are available under the GFDL. If you wish to put them onto the greek wikipedia, you should ask them about their prococedures, but usually the translator posts the translated article, with a note on its talk page that it was translated from a particular article on the en wikipedia, and the date. It is probably a good idea to register a user name on the greek wikipedia and log in when posting the traslation. DES(talk)16:26, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Need help de-hosing one of my AFD entries.
I have done this once before, and the last time someone fixed it for me without explaining what they did. So here I've gone and done it again, and have no clue how to fix it myself.
The issue: I tried to add a page for AfD nomination in reverse, sorta. The entry is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octodecillion. I first tried to add the {{subst:afd3|pg=}} entry to the AfD log, and then I was going to go back and edit the specific entry page.
Additionally, the entry for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octodecillion shows up in the editable list of pages when you use the "add entry to AfD" link, but does not show up on the table of contents.
So I'd like all of this fixed. But, more importantly, I'd like to know how to fix it myself. (I know that following proper procedures will avoid all of this, but that doesn't help me now.)
I have fixed this. What I did was edit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octodecillion and add the missing section header. Using {{afd2}} inserts that header automatically, but you can always do it manually. the code is ===[[Octodecillion]]=== on the first line of the afd page.
Then i edited the AfD log for today, to make sure that the line {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octodecillion}} was properly in place. (it was, if it hadn't been I would have added it. This is what {{afd3}} does, but when i do an afd nomination i fand it easier to do this part manually.) Then i purged the cache on that page, so that the edit to the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octodecillion page was proeprly reflectd on the combined page. I hope tht helps. DES(talk)16:21, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Documentation on how to rewrite material to avoid copyvio
I'm leaving a note on a user's talk page about some copyrighted material he submitted to Wikipedia. I'm clear on what most of the contents should say (from Template:Nothanks-sd). But I was hoping to link to a page that explained how you rewrite material to avoid copyright problems. Is there a page like this anywhere in the Wikipedia: namespace? I'm basically looking for an explanation of how much you have to change before you're allowed to use the material, written from a user's perspective. It seems like an obvious piece of documentation, but I had trouble finding links to anything about it. -- Creidieki17:10, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Briefly, you might want to shy away from looking at it as 'changing' the original to a non-copyvio—really the process is one of writing from scratch. You can transfer facts across, but not phrases. Sometimes it's a good idea to start by taking notes on the topic–sketch out a point-form version of what you want to write on a temporary page. It helps if you have more than one source to work from, too. Give it a day or two before you come back to write the final version; this will tend to cut down on any subconscious copying. Cite sources for any facts, and include relevant source pages in the external link list. Direct quotes can be used sparingly where appropriate, as long as they are marked as such and properly sourced. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:32, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
After edit conflict)
I'm not aware of any specifc page on this subject, but you could try reading Copyright and Wikipedia:copyright for soem guidance. If the page is basically factual, a rtewrite that simply states the same facts, or an appropriate subset of them, in significantly differnet words, and removes any rhetorical florishes will probably do. this is the usual method I adopt for dealing with cut&paste biography articles, for eaxmple. Be sure that the origianl version is cited as a source. Often such a re-write can be combined with changes to make the text neutral and encyclopedic in tone, and to follow the MoS in format. A link to teh MoS might be a good idea in your msg. If multiple sources can be found, and some content used from each, and each appropriately cited, that would probably be better.
Such a page as you suggest would probably be a good idea. Feel free to write it, adn then link to it. there is no specifiv standard for "how much" change to introduce, but it is better IMO if few if any sentnces are exactly copied.
Hey, has anyone seen a complete spidered version of Wikipedia for download (probably using BitTorrent)? I think it'd be handy to have a local copy (text only) of Wikipedia since the servers are buckling under the pressure of being popular. I was thinking about doing it myself, but I won't if someone else already has. I figure after a spidered copy is more or less complete, people could download it via BitTorrent since it'd be such a large file. This would have the added benefit that if something ever happened and knocked Wikipedia offline -- there would be lots and lots of redundant copies of it around the world. Does anything like this exist out there? I didn't see anything on Google. --Quasipalm19:47, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am an expert in an area of technology for which there is already a very short (a few sentences)description in Wikipedia. I would like to contribute a more adequate article (~ 2 pages) but I do not understand how this can be done. Am I supposed to delete the original page or just add to it? If I just add to it, there would be a redundancy in the introduction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NedRasor (talk • contribs)
The biggest problem for an expert is citing sources. You need to write the article so that someone without detailed knowledge in the specific field can verify its contents without asking you. --David Woolley22:35, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
After many failed attempts, I finally uploaded a corrected RembrandtNightwatch.jpg. It showed up right away in the file history. Since the lighting was still awful (I thought), I uploaded another, lighter one. I didn't realize that the image would take so long to show up. Well the first one (20:59, Nov 2005) was the right one. Would someone delete 23:00, Nov 2005? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NancyS (talk • contribs)
Whilst that image does have two, apparently identical, older versions, and a larger, newer, version, none were uploaded in 2005 and none match the time of day (minutes even) quoted. NancyS has never uploaded any images. --David Woolley22:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
So this gets to another area of Wiki that I don't get. Isn't Wikimedia supposed to have pictures linked to all the different wikis? The image came from Wikimedia Commons: Images for cleanup [[3]]. NancyS00:55, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Why does someone keep erasing my edits? I don't think I violated any copyrights and I didn't shout nor used offensive language. I checked my sources and they were correct, so I don't see any reason for anybody to erase my editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.105.14.168 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You need to ask this question on the talk page (see Discussion choice on the article page). The person who erased it will see your question and if courteous will respond and you can make your case for including your points. alteripse23:21, 11 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the History tab at the top of the article will show all of the changes, including your own, and the ones which removed them. Look for the comments (and be sure to fill in accurate comments when you make your own changes). You do seem to have done some strange things (if it was you). For example, the article "Sonic the hedgehog" which used to be a redirect to Sonic The Hedgehog (upper case), was turned into a separate article. Notinasnaid09:09, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I was just curious about how much storage space is required to store all of Wikipedia, is there any place I can find this info? Thanks - Akamad00:08, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
His user name "seems" okay because he has it set up to display the way he wants it via his preferences. If you click on his user name you'll see that it's actually "dannyyee". Dismas|(talk)02:23, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The ability to change usernames, given only to bureaucrats is currently disabled, and there are no plans on turning it back on again in the foreseeable future, so sadly, no. Titoxd(?!?)02:14, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a template for marking articles which are hard to understand/too technical? (the specific article I have in mind is CD36) --Wulf02:22, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Appropriately, it's {{technical}}. If you do add it, though, please leave some notes on the talk page (or, at least, in the edit summary) explaining why you added it - it's often difficult for a specialist to realise what's confusing for someone else, since it's all obvious to them... Shimgray | talk | 02:26, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this subject was recently discussed on Wikipedia:Village pump (policy), in relation to a different article. Also note that the rules require that articles not be dumbed down, so what you should expect is a layman's overview, followed by the technical detail. It's unreasonable to expect every article to stand on its own, especially in a hyprtext medium. --David Woolley15:21, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Mmm. This article is pretty bad, though - I read it and would have been convinced it was something to do with malaria, were it not for the external link... Shimgray | talk | 15:25, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Image metadata
I had been wondering where to find out more on image metadata (specifically, the link to 'Canon' should point to the company, not the disambig), and a user at Talk:Metadata was also wondering about it. The only page I could find was a Wikimedia one on general metadata. Anyone know if there's a page on it? Deltabeignet04:45, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I was wondering if there is an escape character for Wikipedia. So for example, if i wanted to put two sets of square brackets (such as a wikilink) but didn't want the link turning up, instead actually wanted the square brackets to be on the page, is there any way to do that? Thanks Akamad09:25, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
You want to put "nowiki" tags. For example, put whatever it is like so: <nowiki>[text]</nowiki> (I had to use two to make that show up :) This will work for any code in wiki (brackets, templates, tables, etc.) Dmcdevit·t09:30, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In 720p and 1080p there is a external link in the middle of the article referencing to a windows shareware. They were added by 154.20.85.214 and 220.253.45.200. They both (he?) added more things to the articles, very relevant.
Although relevant, those links propably do not have place inside an encyclopedia. Should they be removed or added to external links with reference to other softwares? I don't know how to handle the matter exactly, could someone help?
--Pieleric14:48, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
A better idea would be to download the full sized image (from the image description page), resize if necessary, and upload it to your own webspace, making sure you comply with the terms of the licence. For example an image licenced under the Creative Commons "cc-by-sa" licence requires that the creator of the work be credited and any other uses (such as derivative works) use the same licence.
Why do people continue to use offensive language and shout at discussion pages?
Why do people continue to use offensive language and shout at discussion pages?
Sorry about that; I apologise on behalf of my fellow humans.
The answer has been debated by philosophers for millennia. Basically, people have difficulty seeing other points of view, especially if they were raised in an intolerant family. We have strict rules against personal attacks and incivility, but we can't promise anything.
In addition, there are people who do not use offensive language or shout, but who are skilled at annoying other people, by very politely implying that they are an idiot or worse. Many people aren't wise to this, and get upset, and sadly get offensive with it. This makes the original (polite but annoying) person happy, because it makes them look better by comparison. Don't give in to baiting! Notinasnaid10:43, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I am just curious if everyone makes/has a user page, or if it's a thing that only people that have been on for a long time and are well known on wikipedia that do so?
-Demosthenes-21:28, 12 November 2005 (UTC) --thank you[reply]
When you create an account (or even make an edit anonymously), a link to your (uncreated) user page is automatically made. You can edit more or less however you want (no ethnic slurs, no advertising). So everyone has one, and anyone can make one. Deltabeignet21:32, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Just click on Create account/log in (upper right) and follow the instructions by entering your User name (Demosthenes if you like) and a password. After you are logged in you can sign your comments by typing four tildes like this ~~~~. That's what I'm going to do right now. Good luck, hydnjotalk01:19, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
November 13
The Free Encyclopedia
Edit- Yes, I am fluent in polish, and It means free as in liberty. I meant post bondage as in after jail, no sexual meaning, but it certainly does not mean cost wise.
To whom it may concern:
Please note that in English, it says Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. In Russian, Japanese, and Polish, probably other languages but I cannot understand them, it says The Free Encylopedia, in the sense that free means liberty. In Polish it says Wolna encykolpedia. That means: Post bondage Encyclopedia.
Just thought I would let you guys know.
-Surge
The problem is that free means different things in different languages so when "the free encyclopedia" was translated when the other language wikipedias were created some translations varied from the original intention. The French Wikipedia however, includes both meanings of the word. Are you sure wolna means "post bondage" and is not just a bad babelfish translation? - Mgm|(talk)12:43, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Noting that the original comment was off topic, it certainly sounds like a machine back translation to me. I suspect, also, that the complainer didn't understand that the sexual use of the word is a modern hijacking of the term and the definition given at the head of the bondage disambiguation page is probably what is meant here.
It's not supposed to mean cost free. It's supposed to mean free as defined here as libre. I'm not clear whether you are saying there is a third meaning in Polish, or that you thought the intended meaning was gratis. --David Woolley
this is the first time that i am useing this web site.
please tell me about editing.
i can see that i am able to go and edit any thing article but what does that mean?
does it mean that ater that i have edited it every one will see it like that?
if so what if sick people just come in and edit every thing and make stupid enteries?
please some one answer me and clearfy me about editing.
thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.141.167.86 (talk • contribs)
Yes, everyone else will see it the way you save it. But... Anyone who is watching that article will see that it has been changed and may revert it back to the way it was. So if you put something that is clearly false or nonsense it will be changed back, often in a matter of minutes for more popular articles. For instance, I edited the article on Nicole Richie a while back and it's on my watchlist. I saw just now that it had been edited by an anonymous user. Vandals usually don't have accounts so I checked what the change was. It was vandalism and I reverted the article back to the way it was. The vandalism was present for 2 minutes before I saw it and removed it. For more info please see Wikipedia:Replies to common objections and Wikipedia:FAQ. Dismas|(talk)07:57, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is all true, but it does mean that at any moment, something you read might be nonsense. This is of course true of anything you find on the internet. The most important thing to learn is never to take anything for granted. Or, if you believe everything you read, you will not only take away incorrect information from the internet, you will soon be the victim of tricksters or criminals. Notinasnaid10:40, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I actually have two questions. How can I create a new category so I can add categories to them? and Is there a way I can search solely the Wikipedia help/community portal sections? Thanks. --GfloresTalk07:55, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
For the second question, type what you want to search for in the search box and hit "Search". When the results page comes up it will have check boxes at the bottom. Click or unclick those that would refine your search and hit "search" again this time using the search button at the bottom of the page near the check boxes. As for the first question, the page Wikipedia:Categories should help. Dismas|(talk)08:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
For the first question: Simply edit the category page (example Category:some_name, add a quick intro about what's in the cateogory and start adding articles to it by adding the category to the bottom of relevant articles. Just make sure you're not duplicating an existing cateogry with another name and that you are following naming conventions for categories. - Mgm|(talk)12:51, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
pronunciation of Wikipedia
How do the founders of Wikipedia pronounce its first syllable--as "Wee-" or "Wai-"?
Thanks,
Simone Schede
Freising/Bavaria/Germany
According to the entry for Wikipedia, there are two possible pronunications of the first syllable. The first is with a short, pure /i/, which does not occur in its short form in standard British English. The alternative is with the /ɪ/, typical of standard British English is and in. The w is /w/, not the German sound for this character.
I am new to wikipedia and i use it on a local server. When i edited the main starting page and i put a image (.jpg) on it, everything worked. But the image is too big so i added |150px. That worked partly. The image was not shown (red cross upper left corner), but it seemed as it was scaled to 150 pixels. Does anyone know what happened? I changed localsettings.php by turning the rescaling line to "true".
TIA Martin
It's a common problem at the moment. Basically when you create a "thumbnail" image it is resized and saved as a new file by the Wiki software. This new file is cached on one of the many servers so it doesn't have to be re-sized every time the image is viewed as a thumbnail. When this is done for the first time there can be a delay before it appears, because Wikipedia is growing at a very fast rate and the servers become overloaded. The solution is to get more servers but this takes time and costs money.
Secondly, when adding an image, it is preferred that |thumb| only be used instead of a pixel size. This means that the thumb is displayed according to each individual user's preferences (set in Special:Preferences).
Also, check that when you added the |150px| you didn't accidentally delete one of the characters in the filename, or something "silly" like that. It's often a small mistake which gets overlooked.
I am one of your new users and I'm interested in the opportunity you provided here extremely. In fact I benefit Wikipedia and appriciate you a lot.
I found that the articles and context of the site are editable. I would be grateful if you explain me how editions are controled and how much the information are reliable?
If you are reading an article and see a red link simply click on it. This will take you to a page which states that no such article exists, and gives you the option to create it.
No red links? Create a link with the title you wish it to have, either in an existing article or the sandbox. It is preferable to use an existing article, as the new one will have at least one link to it.
You can also edit the URL in your browser which will take you to the page described above. for example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New Article Title Here
Molecules weren't invented. They existed since the universe was created. Our article on molecules states: Although the concept of molecule was first introduced in 1811 by Avogadro, the existence of molecules was still an open debate in the chemistry community until the work of Perrin (1911). Please refer further factual questions to the reference desk. - Mgm|(talk)16:10, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Some have pages in the Mediawiki namespace which alter text at the top. Generally, it would probably be best to put a comment on the relevant talk page (of the Mediawiki page) and then a link from the Village Pump to there. If you feel the change would be uncontroversial, leave the message on an administrator's talk page and they will probably make the change for you. [[Sam Korn]]16:07, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
But how do you tell which is the relevant Mediawiki page, or whether the change needs to be done by a programmer? I was looking for advice to give to users that would make feedback easier. I've also posted on the WikiEn mailing list, asking whether a "Talk" or "Feedback" tab can be added to the top of Special Pages in the default skin, so we'll see how things go. -- Creidieki16:25, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In MDH, anon users keep inserting commercial links to the article. To avoid a external link farm (i.e., a list of external links), I wrote a redlink farm. Unfortunately, at the moment, through quick inspection, none of these companies/websites are notable as per WP:WEB. So anything that turns blue, like Million Pixel Music, anyone can send off to AfD.
I have a similar situation in Freecycle. See Sharing is Giving, which has an 4,500,000 Alexa rating. In Freecycle's case, I removed the "Freecycle alternatives" link farm. But User:Rhobite restored it, saying, "In the interest of NPOV we should recognize that some people oppose Freecycle and provide links to them..." (See its Talk for this discussion.)
I'm about to look at Cyberbegging, but I expect to find a similar situation.
I've read your question three times and I still don't know for sure what you're asking. If it's: Is it Wikipedia's job to "promote" alternatives, even if non-notable? then the answer is no. --hydnjotalk19:09, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I think for good or for bad we only provide articles on notable players. If there is actual opposition to an entity (ie if they are controversial), then that should be discussed in the article, and external links about opposition should be given. If we are simply talking about competition, I don't think that belongs on its page. But there should probably be an article on that type of entity or their activity and external links may be appropriate there. Not a really good answer. =) jnothmantalk01:34, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have made changes to one or more articles both before and after establishing a user account.
While I posted a reminder to myself regarding my user name, I did not store the password as well.
Would you be able to convey my password, or establish a new one, once I verify my user name to you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.208.227.30 (talk • contribs)
As I recall, I did, indeed, include an e-mail address; so how do I have the password sent?
Again hello Mgm,
The last question is now moot: I got daring and pressed the 'E-mail new password' button after entering my username. Once more, my thanks.
Copyright
I have to make a works citied page for this website for school
But i can't find the copyright of this website
can you please help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.247.169.150 (talk • contribs)
I uploaded a corrected image to Wikimedia Commons: Images for cleanup [[4]]. It showed up right away in the file history, but the lighting was still awful (I thought), so I uploaded another, lighter one. I didn't realize that the image would take so long to show up. Well the first one (20:59, Nov 2005) was the right one. Would someone delete 23:00, Nov 2005?
I suspect the reason for not updating is that you didn't force a cache flush (some variation of control and shift with F5 for Windows IE). For performance reasons, the browser and ISP caches are allowed to store out of date images.
I'm not sure about reverting the image, but the obvous thing to try would be the rev against the image you want to return to.
The actual problem with the picture is a very specific technical one that is rather prevalent on web sites but which one would have hoped that the art museum people would have known about. The key is the number 2.2. The sensor in a camera or scanner measures the actual light intensity (energy), but CRT displays produce an output that is approximately the 2.2th power of signal fed to them. To keep PC hardware cheap, images on the web compensate for that. It's called gamma correction. (Macs use a correction that needs more complex hardware, but better matches the human eye.) In this case, the image was uncorrected (gamma 1.0); in other cases of dark iamges, the Macintosh correction is applied.
I'm not familiar with Photoshop, but in Gimp, in Image | Colors | Levels, the middle slider controls gamma, and you will get the best colours, in this case, by setting the value to 2.2. For Macintosh images, around 1.6 tends to be the right value.
If you see sRGB in the metadata for an image, and assuming that an image processing program hasn't inserted the wrong value, that means tht it has been corrected for a gamma of 2.2, for PC and web use. Some sorts of image manipulation, are best done on a gamma = 1.0 image, and Macintosh corrected images, on a Macintosh, will show the least subjective colour banding.
"I suspect the reason for not updating is that you didn't force a cache flush..."
I reloaded. which Safari & Firefox at least don't get from the cache. When I still got the old picture I flushed the cache for good measure. No dice, so I quit for a couple of hours. RembrandtNightwatch was still really dark so I uploaded a lighter one - too light as it turns out, since I was still seeing the original picture. I had already checked it by uploading it to my own website.
I can't revert the image because the rev option is not selectable. Take a look: [[6]]. Ideally 23:00, 7 November 2005 should be deleted; it was just a newby mistake.
NancyS00:21, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have an account on Wikicommons, so, of course, those options won't be enabled for me; they're not enabled on Wikipedia (for an image with some back history) when I'm not logged in.
There are at least four levels of refreshing a page (If-Modified-Since to the immediate upstream cache, unqualified fetch from the immediate upstream server, If-Modified-Since to the origin server, and a forced end to end reload). Did you use the highest option available?
As well as the above, note that in non-specific cases, articles tend to be written in the style of whoever gets there first - so we have the odd effect that articles on various aspects of labor relations are alternately "labor" and "labour". Using specific terminology that causes confusion between the two is discouraged, though - the verb "to table" probably shouldn't be used, for example, since it means one thing in American English and exactly the opposite in British English. Shimgray | talk | 15:30, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Trouble editing Hitler article
I've discovered a very obvious mistake on the Adolf Hitler biography page. Under the "Legacy" section, the text that begins with "Adolf Hitler is the greatest..." has clearly been added as a prank. When I try to edit the article, the text does not appear in the code. It seems that editing this article is beyond my capabilities. If anyone knows how to remove the text, I encourage you to do so as soon as possible, as this kind of language has no place in a scholarly work.
Hi, When I just viewed my watchlist, it added 10 items which I had never seen before, much less watched. It seems that my watchlist seems to be adding pages to itself at random. Also, its adding them under incorect dates. When I do add a page, it's talk page goes on the list, and says it was added in 1970, and when I add a talk page it adds the article and says it was added in 1960. For each item I add, more random junk keeps poping up on the watchlist. What is going on? Tobyk77705:56, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I made a favicon for Wikipedia based on the globe (pictured at right). Because Wiktionary and Wikipedia currently have the same favicon, one or the other should change it. For the following reasons it makes sense to use a globe for Wikipedia's favicon: 1. Wikipedia seems to use the globe rather than the W as its main logo. 2. It makes sense for Wiktionary to have a letter for its logo because Wiktionary deals with words whose main components are of course letters. 3. A favicon based on Wiktionary's logo (which look likes a dictionary entry) might not be very recongizable at a smaller size. 4. W is a latin character and as such is culturally associated with Western civilizations. Thus using a symbol like a globe without any inborn cultural associations is more international-friendly.
I want to make a little correction on the term of office of 5 years (re election)mentioned in his biography. actually he is re elected for a term of 4 years
Thanks for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to change it. You can edit almost any article on Wikipedia by just following the Edit link at the top of the page. We encourage you to be bold in updating pages, because wikis like ours develop faster when everybody edits. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. You can always preview your edits before you publish them or test them out in the sandbox. If you need additional help, check out our getting started page or ask the friendly folks at the Teahouse. Dismas|(talk)10:00, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Mediation
There is a dispute between two parties concerning the article St Volodymyr's Cathedral. I proposed to apply for mediation. Two opponents agreed, but the third one does not answer my messages.
If they're inactive, wait for a week or so, but feel free to start mediation with the others. Solving disagreements quickly stops disputes from growing out of control. If the person is active but not responding, try contacting them again. If they don't get back to you assume they don't want to discuss your differences. - Mgm|(talk)13:45, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Any One Can Edit?
I am confused. How can we trust anything, if anyone can edit? I am new to this site. It was given as a source for a paper I was reading. Would someone please help me understand? Thanks so much.
anon.
See Wikipedia:Replies to common objections and Wikipedia:FAQ. It is never possible to automatically trust any source, and particuarlly any internet source, You always need to check the refernces cited, or chek the source agaisnt another. Any source may contain bias or error. In the case of wikipedia, there are many eyse watching changes and watching most articles, and usually bias or error is corected fairly promptly when it occurs. But you should examine the sources that our articles cite (and they should cite sources see our citation policy and possibly the disccsion on an article's talk page and the list of conttributiors on the history page to determins how much to trust any particualr article. Any source has the same problems, and most internet sources don't give you as many ways to look into the basis and support for their information. DES(talk)15:27, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It varies. The sesarch operates off a cached list of page titles, to improve performance. New pages are visible right away, but are not instantly returned as search targets. In any case the search feture is not wikipedia's strongest part. You might consider using google search of wikipedia instead. Even that will not find a new page instantly, of course, but only when google re-indexes the site. DES(talk)18:31, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This is a very good reason to link to and from the article in several related issues, so it's reachable even though it's not in the search system. - Mgm|(talk)22:02, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
How are "fair use" images compatible with the GDFL?
I don't think we are. We clearly state use "wikipedia at your own risk" and that some trademarks belong to other people. It would help though if we add a line or two to a disclaimer telling people to check image description pages before reusing them. Make sure you discuss this with as many people as possible before having it changed, though. - Mgm|(talk)20:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please help me. I can't find any infor on the "partie system" which envolved during the early 1900s and particularly under the influence of Escoffier, revolutionised the way in which kitchen staff (or bregades) were organised. The work in the kitchen was sub-divided into working groups or parties.
What is defenition of "partie system " Graphics anything will help
I need it for an assignment for better scores
Thnx
Bertie Viljoen
<email removed>
The limited info we have seems to be in Auguste Escoffier. You might ask on Talk:Auguste Escoffier, or at our Reference Desk (which is where this question should have gone), but yuou will probably do better going to the library to do resertach on thsi, or pershps findign info elsehere on the neet. if you do find reliable info, please come back and add it to Auguste Escoffier or soem other approprite article on wikipedia, please. That will help the next person with such a probelm. DES(talk)21:26, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Article removed
hi,
I created an article called 16th Amendment Intent and Purpose last week and now it has disappeared. Can someone delete it? I was never informed. Can you check to see what happen?
i want to know this because i want to edit so i can answer people questions on the question and answer page i`ve asked so many questions on this page and now i want to repay you by answering questions just you guys do.
It actually does just what it sounds like -- cleans up html. Sometimes people, especially in their signatures, may not use the correct html syntax and leave a tag hanging open, causing the problems you're seeing. The HTML tidy usually cleans this up but was causing some performance problems earlier and has been turned off until the problem can be located and resolved. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish00:07, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Last I heard the people who need to look at it won't be back around until sometime tomorrow and after that, they still have to figure out whats wrong and come up with a fix. P.S. Close the HTML tags in your sig ;) .:.Jareth.:. babelfish01:03, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is not that the HTML tags in your sig are hanging open but that some of the wiki-syntax characters inside your sig are being converted into text. If you look at the edit view above, you'll see, for example, that [ is being inserted as [. I've deleted my signature in the meantime. Rossami03:13, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The developers on IRC said it's an older HTML validator which runs when the HTML Tidy is disabled. It seems to not only close the table prematurely, but also escape all table markup outside a table. --cesarb00:42, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed templates used on Krakatoa by converting HTML table syntax to wiki table syntax. Looking now for related templates that may still need to be fixed. --Tabor01:25, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
No, images can still be uploaded. That isn't related to the HTML Tidy problems. Angela 03:08, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
I'm an admin and I don't know what happened...
Could someone look at my talk page? It's showing up as very small text towards the bottom and I have no clue why. I've tried going to older versions of my talk page and it does the same thing. It basically does it about halfway down the page no matter what. It's not a HTML issue. HELP! :) --Woohookitty(cat scratches)01:34, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it is an html issue, see virtually any thread for reference, or even see the brightly colored banner on recent changes if you're still confused--Hello fromSPACE01:37, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm a member of Wikipedia. Throughout the year, my bar (with the watchlist, contributions, etc.) have been working quite well. However, today, I switched my skin back to normal, but whenever I want to press "My Contributions", or any other button, the bar just automatically moves behind the Wikipedia logo. I can't still press the buttons, but my username is behind the logo. It moves every single time. What should I do? -Freddy Tsao
That happened to me back in September. It kept on doing it for about a week, then it stopped. I don't think there's anything you can do about it. Thelb408:11, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
External Links
Hello,
My name is Roberta. I am owner of CPAP Supplies Plus/Direct. We provide some very good articles on our site and illustrations of cpap masks etc. I was wondering how I can appear on External Links such as cpap.com and apnea therapy.com?
It is a general guideline not to link to your own site on Wikipedia. The thought goes, if your site is good enough, someone else will add it. However, this is just a guideline, not a rule. If your site isn't that good (I wasn't convinced it was all that after just checking it out myself) it will probably removed from any article it is added to as a spam link. As long as you do not keep adding it in once removed, you should be ok. --Quasipalm03:51, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
sir, i 'm an engineering student ihave apaper on this subject i need info as a foot notes for exam on the following sub topics
image enhancement:background,enhancement by point processing,histogram processing,spatial filtering and enhancement in frequency domain, image smoothening,image sharpening,colour image processing
image restoration:degradation models,inverse filtering,least mean square filtering,constrained least squares restoration-interactive restoration
image segmetaion:detection of discontinuities,edge linking and boundary detection,thresholding,region oriented segmentation
i need this info today very urgent.
my email address is (removed)
Factual questions go to the reference desk. Are you sure you need the information for today? Is your assignment due today? And I find it strange that an engineering student would have such sloppy spelling. — JIP | Talk07:41, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
D'oh, I didn't think of that. I'm not from an English speaking country either, so I tended to generalise my own spelling skills over others too. — JIP | Talk10:50, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Signature doesn't work
Today my signature stopped working for some reason. When I wrote my signature with ~~~~, it inserted the signature's wiki source code, instead of the signature's rendered form, into the article. I checked the source code and saw that all the HTML elements had been escaped, for example — (an ampersand followed by mdash;) had been turned into &mdash; (an ampersand followed by amp; then by mdash;). I tried to fix the signature source code in my preferences but it didn't work. I had to make it a raw signature and insert the wikilinks to my user and user talk page by hand. Is this a bug or a new "feature" in the MediaWiki software? — JIP | Talk07:40, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
It's definitely a bug; search for HTML Tidy elsewhere in this page. I think there's still a notice way up at the top that relates to it. Basically, the software is supposed to clean up various HTML errors and is now either not doing it at all or not doing correctly. The devs are very aware of the problem. :)—HorsePunchKid→龜07:43, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
And just now, above, at Toolbar Problems, my signature went to [[User:Thelb4|Thelb4]] instead of the extremely long <span class="user-sig user-Thelb4">[[User:Thelb4|<font color=00CD00>Thelb</font>]]<sup><font color=FF8247>[[User talk:Thelb4|4]]</font></sup></span> (produces Thelb4). Thelb408:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The messages regarding HTML tidy are gone, so why is my sig suddenly not working? It worked fine 2,5 hours ago. - Mgm|[[User talk:MacGyverMagic|<sup>(talk)</sup>]] 08:36, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Adding the automatic code at the beginning and end, and turning on raw signatures seems to fix it. Why, the code is still the same. Why did my faulty sig suddenly codes like
Just to add my comment, I noticed a similar problem this morning. I can enter the link to my profile page User:IainP without a problem, but linking to my talk page IainP just displays the text in bold. Note that both of those links were added by hand, not from my sig. However, if I link to someone else's talk, the link seems be added and functions fine even if that user doesn't exist! I'd put my sig on the end here, but I don't see the point ;)
Flipping heck. I've been trying to get it to work for an hour on my talk page and now it works on here! IainP [[User_talk:IainP|(talk)]] 11:12, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ORDINANCE 2002
Dear sir,
I am president of an NGO Namely "Friends of Bhittai Colony".Our jurisdiction is limited to Bhittai Colony, Korangi Crossing, Karachi, which is administered by the Cantonment Board Korangi Creek, PAF Korangi Creek. We sought a clarification regarding Assessment of Taxes by Cantonment Board, under the "Freedom of Information Ordinance 2002. The C.B.K.C. first of all refused flatlyto provide the information. When pressurised the department further they have opted the delaying tactics by varios method as they say that they dont have a copy of the Ordinance. Is it our fault and is this can be delayed due to this reason.
Please guide us in this matter.
[email removed]
This kind of question should be asked on the reference desk, I've copied it there, but please be aware that Wikipedia does not give legal opinions. As stated on the legal disclaimer: "legal information provided on Wikipedia is, at best, of a general nature and cannot substitute for the advice of a licensed professional." But either way, good luck :-) Akamad10:08, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Add the the {{subst:afd}} like usual and go back to edit the link that points to the debate and replace {{PAGENAME}} with the name of the subpage it has on AFD. - Mgm|(talk)08:47, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
To expand on what Mgm said: Add {{subst:afd}} to all the pages you plan to delete. Then pick one of them, and click on the "this article's entry" link. This should take you to the edit page for the AfD entry. Add {{subst:afd2|pg=Pagename|text=}} (where Pagename is the name of the page you were on when you clicked the "this article's entry" link) and submit. Then immediately edit the page and change the header section (==[[Pagename]]== in the previous example) and change it to be ==[[Pagename]], [[Pagename2]] and [[Pagename3]]== where Pagename2 and Pagename3 are the other two pages you want to put up for deletion together with Pagename (expand this as necessary, of course). Then add {{subst:afd3|pg=Pagename}} to the log as per usual. Finally, go back to all the other articles you marked for AfD and edit them as Mgm said (you should only need to edit the first instance of {{PAGENAME}} though; the one that creates the "this article's entry" link). --Locke Cole10:14, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
05:46, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
05:33, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
\(caint). I fixed it everywhere it showed up on your page. .:.Jareth.:. babelfish 01:47, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
![[3]](/wiki/Image:RembrandtNightwatch.jpg){kind=link}
