Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance)

The assistance section of the village pump is used to make requests for assistance with Wikipedia.

Please sign and date your post (by typing ~~~~ or clicking the signature icon in the edit toolbar). Add new topics at the bottom of the page.

If you wish to report vandalism, please go to Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress or Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism instead.

If you have a specific question to ask, you may go to Wikipedia:Ask a question instead.

« Archives, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

Assistance archive

Discussions older than 7 days (date of last made comment) are moved here. These dicussions will be kept archived for 7 more days. During this period the discussion can be moved to a relevant talk page if appropriate. After 7 days the discussion will be permanently removed.

Flutoride

I ran across this via Special:Randompage, and I wanted to put a category tag on it, but I have no idea what it falls under. Physics? Joyous | Talk 17:27, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a description of a subatomic particle, but given there aren't any google hits I'd suggest {{disputed}}} with a note on the talk page. -- Rick Block (talk) 17:44, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It smells cranky to me, but might just be one of the weird subfields that crop up. I'll poke a cosmologist. Shimgray | talk | 18:35, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This article is of course complete BS. There is no such thing in the research literature (search arXiv or Google.) Admin, please speedily delete this. ---CH 00:33, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted it; I suspect this was pushing the definition of "complete nonsense" a little, but hey, physics is a language too, and it was illiterate in that :-) Shimgray | talk | 00:46, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

merge watchlists

Is there a way to merge watchlists in English and German Wikipedia? The ammount of separation between the different language Wikipedias - starting with the necessity to create two accounts - is distressing.
Or is this question/suggestion/whatever supposed to be a feature-request or even a bug? Or am I just to tired/stupid to figure things out? greetings --Space-Marine 01:31, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to know that too :-) Peter S. 01:38, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's been proposed and asked many times: why can't user accounts be closer between Wikimedia projects. At the moment there are many technical obstacles: each wikipedia is a separate system installation and separate database. Wikipedia wasn't originally designed to be so many related project, and relics of this original idea now make for limitations. So the answer is, sorry: no, not yet. jnothman ^talk 05:30, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks :-) Peter S. 12:07, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lightbulb just gone off above my head. While the server guys can't do it, it should be theoretically easy enough to write a greasemonkey/trixie script that (assuming you are logged into de at the same time through persistant cookies) retrieves the watchlist, parses it, and then inserts the entries into your en watchlist. Hmmm let me have a think about this and I will see what I can do. – MrWeeble Talk Brit tv 20:27, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

David B. Steinman

Hi! I'd like some comments on the subject article if folks have some time. This article represents the most extensive article edit I've ever done here. (I didn't start it, others had some content when I got there, as you can see from diffs, but I went to town on it today). I've been a fan of Steinman since I was a boy and it just seemed the thing to do. I'm not really sure it's up to the standards of peer review yet. For one thing it still has a lot of internal comments I left in it about things that still need doing etc, and for another I don't know if it's "finished" enough. Some of my other questions are:

Is there too much? Compared to Joseph Strauss or Gustav Lindenthal it goes on forever...
Do the pictures help? I could not find a noncopyvio pic of Steinman himself so I just went through bridge articles picking out bridges he had a significant impact on or that had a significant impact on him... not sure if the sky ride is a good example or not.

Hence my request that a few kind souls take a look at it and comment, either on its talk page or mine. Thanks in advance!!! ++Lar 00:50, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Since I posted this I haven't gotten any comments, which is OK, no worries... but some firstedit editors have been inserting text that reads like it is an entire term paper into the article. (2 or 3 different papers on various early life topics) I have been leaving them welcome messages on their talk pages, and reverting the changes. I am not sure that's the right thing to do because the content appears to be actually about the subject and even has references to the sources I used (Ratigan and Petrofsky) but it's in my view way too voluminous for the article. I could use some advice. I don't think it's vandalism per se so didn't post at the administrator area, but is it? Thanks! It's not "my"(WP:OWN) article but I just put a lot of work into it to clean it up and don't want to see it crufted up. Is that wrong? (contrast this version with the reverted one just after it to see the difference the added text has) It should be noted that when I came upon the article, one of the texts recently inserted was there already, and I used some of it as a basis for some of what I did, but I think my editing it down and adding more material made a better article. The other two texts seem at least partly about justifying engineering as a career choice rather than about Steinman directly. ++Lar 21:25, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Card suit symbol appearances

Having dealt with several Category:Bridge articles recently, I noticed inconsistency in denoting suit symbols. I encountered three general styles:

using HTML codes such as &hearts; (most pages, some of which I fixed).
1. same, but colored for red suits <font color="red">&hearts;</font> (e.g. Blackwood convention). As far as i see, this style is most frequently used among Category:Card games.
using HTML hex codes such as ♦
1. same, but colored for red suits <font color=red>♦</font>(e.g. Polish club) (also with increased symbol)
2. same, but using hollow red suits symbols (d'oh, can't find one at a moment, but I know I saw it)
Using plain text H, S, D, C (Acol).

In addition, the default Arial symbols, e.g. ♥ are too small and appear ugly. (Some articles use increased font size for them).

I suggest fixing the stuff by

creating 4 templates, named either
- {{Hs}}, {{Ss}}, {{Ds}} and {{Cs}} or
- {{hsuit}}, {{ssuit}}, {{dsuit}} and {{csuit}}
Writing a bot to replace all occurrences of before-used stuff with appropriate template-links. (I don't know how to write one, but I could do a research and see what stuff should be replaced)
- the bot would hardly deal with plain text H, S, D, C, but odds are that sole H or H(number) or (number)H, KH, QH and JH represent heart suit if in one of "Card games" (sub)categories.
Should templates contain &hearts; or a SVG image? I've been reported at Talk:Blue club that Opera does not render card symbols correctly.

Duja 11:26, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't use templates for this - any of the HTML code, hex code, or (now that the English wikipedia is using UTF-8) inline character is far less overall load on the (single) database behind wikipedia. An article with no templates can be regenerated with a single database fetch. An article using one template requires 2, an article with 4 templates requires 5. From a database perspective the size of the article (or template) isn't really that important, so replacing any of the other methods with templates (assuming no other templates used in these articles) would increase the "DB cost" of generating these articles by a factor of 5. In addition, if done this way various editors will no doubt change the template to suit (no pun intended) their tastes and each time the template is changed it will affect hundreds (if not thousands) of articles. BTW - the Opera problem is almost certainly a font issue rather than an issue with Opera. -- Rick Block (talk) 16:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- OK then; I'll hold my hands off of it and merely fix the appearances where appropriate; I can live with small symbols. Duja 16:39, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- - The Opera I use renders the symbols fine. jnothman ^talk 03:02, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is it or isn't it a personal attack?

This is related to the AfD for which I solicited help above. The user who vandalized my user page has been engaging in a mild harassment campaign against me. I don't care so much about that, but this I do care about: Two accusations that I am harassing him/her, one here on his/her talk page and one on the talk page for the AfD. I placed a short response on the AfD talk page just to have an actual denial on the record. Should I do anything else? I don't like having the claim that I'm harassing anyone out there. Thanks, everyone's been a great help on this AfD so far. | Klaw ¡digame! 19:24, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, but I wouldn't worry about it. What a perversely amusing AFD! "• Keep - We—uh they—are really, really notable. We're famous. Really. -- Brand New Account 00:00, 19 December 2005 (UTC) ". Over and over. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:20, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

April 2004

April 2004 is a mess - It appears to have lost most of its content but had new stuff added. I may get round to analysing all the history and work out what should come from what old version later. If anyone else feels they want to do it first, feel free. -- SGBailey 23:33, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pcb21 changed it to using a template system on November 19. SimonP then edited the individual day articles, eg April 4, 2004, replacing the heading with a navigator bar linking to next and previous days, and then putting only a summary of each day on the April 2004 page, grouping by category. This is good in one way as it makes for a shorter page. If we don't mind a longer page but want individual day articles to be useful as well, we need the heading there when included and the navigation bar there when not included: good uses of <includeonly> and <noinclude>. jnothman ^talk 03:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cross Referencing

Not too sure where this one lives. But how do you find a list of articles that cross reference to the article thatyou are reviewing? User:Zogin

Do you mean "what links here", in the toolbox frame on the left? -- Rick Block (talk) 00:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - thanks

Help!!!!

I am korean. english is poor... I have question...hmmm...What image license tags is only for enwiki, not for commons? make a tag list only for enwiki not for commons!! -- WonYong 07:52, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you are looking for tags to use here on the English Wikipedia (I assume that's what you mean by "enwiki"), then you'll want to visit the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags page. If that's not what you are looking for, please let me know. Hope that helps. --nihon 08:08, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing the issue is which tags mean that you couldn't copy the image to commons? On Wikipedia:Image copyright tags, the Public domain and Free licenses tags should all be OK for commons; none of the others should be. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:06, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wiliam Bemister, Emmy winning investigative film maker

I contributed a very short autobiographical piece and it is now in User Talk, see below.

Wikipedia advises that "technically it should have been at User:Bemister instead of on the Talk page. Your article has been what we call 'userfied', meaning an author's autobiography has been moved to their own User space. It would have been polite if the person who did this had told you, and explained why, but unfortunately they didn't, and I can't determine who did it.

In general, autobiographies are frowned on. However, you seem to meet our criteria at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:BIO. May I suggest posting a question at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28assistance%29 to see if you can garner support for recreating your article?"

So here I am, and here's the piece:

William Bemister (born June 28, 1948) is an award-winning Anglo-Australian documentary filmmaker. After a career in newspaper journalism with the 'Sunday Mail' in pre-independence Rhodesia, 'NZ Truth' in New Zealand, and in Australia with 'Melbourne Truth', the Sydney 'Sunday telegraph', and the national daily, 'The Australian', Bemister devised the documentary about fugitive British train robber Ronald Biggs, then living in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 'The Confessions of Ronald Biggs', for the Australian 10 network.

Bemister’s co-produced 90-minute film 'The Hunter and the Hunted', about Nazi war criminals, their whereabouts, and the Nazi hunters who sought their arrest and prosecution, was commissioned by the Australian Seven Network and filmed on location in South America, France, Germany, Israel and the UK. A 58-minute version of the film was produced with PBS and telecast in the United States, for which Bemister won the 1981 U.S. National Emmy for Outstanding Investigative Journalism. Included in the film were scenes identifying the then whereabouts of two of the most wanted Nazi criminals, Klaus Barbie and Walter Rauff, and the only interview with Rauff. Adolf Eichmann’s son Horst also controversially discusses the case against his father..

Bemister's other credits include a two-hour feature documentary, 'Spy Trap: The True Story of Vladimir Petrov and Kim Philby' for the Australian Broadcasting Commission, 'Moscow's Man' for Thames Television in Britain, Sveriges Television, and WDR Germany, and the Discovery Channel worldwide, and the Home Box Office documentary special 'America Undercover: The Search for Dr Josef Mengele' for which he worked as producer-correspondent.

Sources: http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/nazi/mengele/mengele_report.html (find word Bemister) http://ustlib.ust.hk/search/a?SEARCH=Bemister&searchscope=4 http://www.guardian.co.uk/germany/article/0,2763,1075394,00.html (find word Bemister) Confirmation of United States National Emmy for Outstanding Investigative Journalism 1981, The Hunter and the Hunted, email newsemmy@natasonline.com

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bemister" --Bemister 18:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article is well written and asserts sufficient notability for an article. I wouldn't know how to verify most of the facts, though. Yes, I guess I would approve this being put in an article, although it will then need to be cleaned up to conform to Wikipedia's style guidelines. jnothman ^talk 14:39, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A note that Mr. Bemister is quoting my response to his question about his article on the Help Desk mailing list. Zoe (216.234.130.130 00:11, 22 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

I forgot to include this reference: http://ustlib.ust.hk/search/a?SEARCH=Bemister&searchscope=4

The only way I can prove the above is to submit the films in question and a scan of my Emmy, which I am happy to do.

I've put it up at William Bemister. Only time will tell its fate, though. jnothman ^talk 14:09, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Some clues for how to validate notability are always good, IMHO. William doesn't seem to be in IMDB. But the Guardian cite helps a lot, perhaps it should be included too? I will watchlist this, maybe a few other people could too so if it gets put up on AfD it could be spoken about. ++Lar 14:54, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: William doesn't seem to be in IMDB. This is a good point. IMBD relies on producers filing their own biog. To date I haven't bothered. If you look at www.cassini-films.com (my company) you will see my business partner is Nigel Wooll. He was filed numerous credits with IMDB. I never bothered but maybe I should?

I added a link, I now understand against convention, to the Australian Defence Forces Academy Library concerning the film SPY TRAP. The link appears, however, to be time sensitive. Lar kindly pointed this out to be. If you go to the link anyway, and do a new search under Bemister, select FULL RECORD, you will see the library holding of my film. I only referred to this as a credential. The library record states Bill instead of William Bemister as the producer and director. I leave it up to my peers, especially jnothman and Lar, to make the appropriate correction or deletion of the link.

May I suggest a possible syntax correction and a couple of edits for accuracy? The entry presently says:

William Bemister (born June 28, 1948) is an award-winning Anglo-Australian documentary filmmaker. After a career in newspaper journalism with the Sunday Mail in pre-independence Rhodesia, NZ Truth in New Zealand, and in Australia with Melbourne Truth, the Sydney Sunday Telegraph, and the national daily, The Australian. Bemister devised a documentary about fugitive British train robber Ronald Biggs, The Confessions of Ronald Biggs, while living in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, for the Australian Ten Network.

I suggest the following revision:

William Bemister (born June 28, 1948) is an Emmy award-winning documentary filmmaker and journalist. He started his career in newspaper journalism with the Sunday Mail in pre-independence Rhodesia. He then worked on NZ Truth in New Zealand, and in Australia with Melbourne Truth, the Sydney Sunday Telegraph, and the national daily, The Australian, before joining the Australian Ten Television Network as Special Investigative Reporter.

As an independent, Bemister's first film was The Confessions of Ronald Biggs, documentary about the British train robber Ronald Biggs, who was then living in Brazil. Bemister's co-produced 90-minute film The Hunter and the Hunted, ....... the rest of the text is precise and accurate.

I make these suggestions for the following reasons: I have dual nationality and maybe it's not necessary. There was a small syntax error in the first paragraph (probably mine) between the second and third sentences.

offensive edit summaries

Could a developer please remove the offensive edit summaries from Jimmy Wales? The same thing may also need to be done on the George W. Bush article. --Ixfd64 02:38, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Weißensee Cemetery

Weißensee Cemetery would it be possible to redirect Weissensee Cemetery here (the Anglisised spelling without ß) Yellowmellow45 12:23, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Done.Chelman 13:14, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yellowmellow45, in the future this is really really really easy to do yourself. See Wikipedia:Redirect. Simply go to Weissensee Cemetery and enter:

#redirect [[Weißensee Cemetery]]

and save! jnothman ^talk 14:25, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok!!Yellowmellow45 15:38, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Picture help

I submitted a picture, but am having trouble getting it licensed. How do I do that? —the preceding unsigned comment is by WikiPlayer (talk • contribs)

It depends what you mean by the image getting licensed. Take a look at the Wikipedia:Image use policy and get back to us if you still have problems. jnothman ^talk 14:27, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AfD closing?

The AfD (Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/GH_avisualagency™) about which I posted earlier is now eight days old, and we haven't had a new vote in over 24 hours. Ignoring all the meat/sock puppets (I used "fewer than ten edits before voting" as the standard; we've had 30, 22 of whom voted "keep"), we have 18 votes to Delete, 1 to keep, and 2 abstentions. If someone could come close this out, I'd appreciate it. Any questions, just ask. Thanks. | Klaw ¡digame! 03:48, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Now done by DocGlasgow - Merry Xmas all Brookie :) - a collector of little round things! ^(Talk!) 20:54, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted info admitted on site indexed in Google News

This site admitted [1] to deleting information from Wikipedia, but I don't know what article. Can anyone find this out, and revert the edit? -- user:zanimum

It's very unclear what exactly was deleted: it seems to indicate that the only evidence that the author was wrong was on Wikipedia, and has since been deleted. Seeing as said author does not have an article here, I have no idea what it could be. jnothman ^talk 22:40, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looks to me that the author was just making a joke. I wouldn't waste any time worrying that it might be real. DreamGuy 22:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Right, my sense of humour's clearly not up to scratch. =) jnothman ^talk 13:41, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation Pages

I'm new here and to be quite honest, I'm afraid to get my toes wet. So I'd like to request some assistance or advice. Two pages, Margaret Ray and MAR, seem to be in need of disambiguation pages. Another entry, C&C Music Factory, seem to have circular links, where clicking on the link just brings you back to the same entry. How would one go about resolving this?--Silverhand 16:01, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re C&C -- You can do what I just did: click on the "What links here" and look for redirect pages in the list that are pointed to by the same article. Thanks for the heads-up!--SarekOfVulcan 20:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Citing pornographic sources

What is Wikipedia's guideline on linking to pornography (text)? I can't cite my sources for parts of the article on intercrural sex without doing so. Njál 20:36, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing wrong with it, provided it's a reputable source of whatever you're trying to cite. WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not censored for the protection of minors. -- SCZenz 21:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's usually helpful if you put a warning on the link so as to let people know what they're about to go to. User:Zoe|^(talk) 01:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Password Changed

I tried to log in using IE and got an incorrect password message and I don't know why. Unable to log in I pressed email new password. Is there anyway to get back the password of my choice because the one they sent in email is not one I would choose.--Dakota ^? ^e 21:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You change your password after you log in via Special:Preferences. — Ambush Commander^(Talk) 21:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks that worked and happy hoildays.--Dakota ^? ^e 21:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

translation

Is it possible that I translate some of the articles not available in Turkish to Turkish in order to enable more people to understand them? My intent is not to plagiarize in any way, I will be stating clearly that the article is a translation and offer links to the original one.

Yes, this would be very good, if you put your translated articles on the Turkish Wikipedia. There will probably be a group of people there already doing this and you might like to co-ordinate your efforts with them. I can't read Turkish, but tr:Vikipedi:Köy_çeşmesi would probably be a good place to ask about such projects.-gadfium 19:12, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Quelling a persistent vandal

I'm seeking some guidance on what to do about a persistent vandal that's been targeting my user/talk pages, along with the articles I've created, for almost 5 months now. To sum up my addition to the long term vandal alerts page, this particular vandal is on a personal crusade against me ever since I reverted vandalism done by him almost 5 months ago. He has evaded countless blocks, which must total to at least 50 by now; the primary IP ranges he uses are 138.89.xxx.xxx and 141.1xx.xxx, but as of late he has used some anonymous proxies. (A list of IPs he has used to vandalize my talk page can be found on the first heading of my deleted content subpage.)

A whois of the 141.1xx.xxx and 138.89.xxx.xxx IPs all point to a Verizon ISP in Newark, New Jersey. I was contemplating a range block today, but since the range of IPs used is so big, I'm afraid of the collateral damage that it will probably cause to legitimate users. His disruption hasn't stopped at Wikipedia, as he sees to fit to do things like creating a "nufy8" Wikiquote entry and inserting profanity into it, to repeatedly trying to contact/harass me through AIM.

Basically what I'm looking for are some suggestions. Should I try a range block? Should I e-mail Verizon? Is there a solution that I'm not seeing? Nufy8 02:05, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would advise against trying a range block. Either contacting Verizon yourself or getting someone else to is technicaly the correct option however past experence suggests it may not help much. In the short term your best bet may be to make as many people as posible aware of the pages that are likely to be hit.Geni 01:54, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Improper Merger

Someone has improperly merged the article entitled, "Gang Stalking" with the article "Gang Stalk Persecution Complex." The result is that, when you attempt to comment on the need to delete the "Persecution" article as being very unprofessional, you are immediately switched over to the "Gang Stalking" article, where your comments in fact are registered.

Please unmerge these two articles. I am not a software expert and am only now beginning to barely grasp your diverse instructions, so, your assistance in this matter will be very greatly appreciated. Thank you.

Julianne McKinney --70.236.161.247 20:43, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken the liberty of wikifying the article names in your comments so people can easily find these. They don't appear to me to be merged, nor do their talk pages. If there was a problem, it seems already to be fixed. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:54, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Improper merger

Thank you for checking; however, the problem still exists.

When you open the article entitled, "Gang Stalk Persecution Complex," and then, in the box that begins, "This article is being considered for deletion...," click on the "this article's entry" link (which opens up the comments section), you will note that the title of the article that you have opened is "Gang Stalking," NOT "Gang Stalk Persecution Complex." So any comments you post are directed at the article entitled "Gang Stalking," NOT "Gang Stalk Persecution Complex."

I took the precaution of stating that the article on "Gang Stalking" should be kept, while the one entitled, "Gang Stalk Persecution Complex," should be deleted, but, I can't comment further on this latter because I'm on the "Gang Stalking" comments page.

Thanks again.

Julianne McKinney --70.236.161.247 21:17, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The link to the AFD page was incorrectly created. I fixed this and both pages now have their own listings. -- Rick Block (talk) 22:47, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with the two George Bissell s

I've gone every where [FAQs, etc] that I could think of trying to find an answer to this question. I did not want to bug the chosen few who have already helped me out so many times before, so . . . . . . . .... figured that I'd try here and see what happens.

I have been working on:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Lincoln#Legacy_and_memorials

and just entered a link for George Bissell, expecting red ink and planning to start a stub for the sculptor, but instead discovered some other George Bissell. I don't know how to do discombobulations - or whatever - but if you do, here is a stub to begin the sculptor's page with.

Thanks,

stub:

George Bissell, American sculptor, born New Preston CT on February 16, 1839 and died in Mt. Vernon , NY on August 30, 1920. Bissell began working in his father's marble business in Poughkeepsie , NY before going to Europe where he studied in Paris, Rome and Florence. His works include the statue of Abraham Lincoln located in Edinburgh, Scotland and another Lincoln in Clermont, IA.

Does the link George Bissell (sculptor) help? -- Rick Block (talk) 23:39, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone one step further, making George Bissell a disabiguation page, linking to George Bissell (sculptor) and George Bissell (industrialist). Working on fixing the double redirs now. xaosflux ^Talk/_CVU 21:09, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

References

Opitz, Glenn, B.,editor, Mantle Fielding's Dictionary of American Painters, Sculptors & Engravers, Apollo Books, Poughkeepsie, NY 1986

Moon conspiracy and religion

Searching new page additions on Wikipedia: A few days ago I added a new page addition on Wikipedia, Moon conspiracy and religion, however when I try to search from the Wikipedia search box on say, moon, moon conspiracy, moon landing, moon hoax; the new page addition does not get listed.

Could you tell me please if there is some time lag in the process between a new page addition on Wikipedia and the Wikipedia search listings?

Thanks

--Wikiencyc 12:43, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has put the new page addition into the fringe category and they say that it lacks references and they want to merge it with another item - Apollo moon landing hoax accusations where in October 2005 all of my contributions got booted out by the tyrants there. I have added a section on References and cited them and would not like the new page addition to be sidelined, excluded from search results or merged where tyrants can delete the content. --Wikiencyc 15:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, there is a lag between adding pages (or content to pages) and the Wikipedia search results. The index used for search is rebuilt only occasionally. Whether the new page should be merged or not should be discussed on the relevant talk pages, not here. -- Rick Block (talk) 21:16, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Swing time etc

I need some help with a long-standing battle which I hope isn't yet to conflict resolution but may end up there.

Basically, swing time and swing rhythm now (again) both redirect to an article swung note which is really only accessible, or of interest, to serious musicologists. In addition, these redirects imply a post-bebop POV that not all of us share.

All I want is a good article on swing/shuffle that is accessible to the layperson (although I have some interest in musicology myself and more than 20 years jazz drumming experience and I'd never heard of a swung note before... but then I don't really like post-bebop rhythms anyway, I like to make people want to dance...), and a logical place to put it, and maybe some see also links from swing time and similar obvious titles where laypeople will look for this information.

See swing rhythm history and Talk:Swing rhythm for some background. Andrewa 16:57, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a compromising answer would be to change the redirects to go to a disambugation page, where the other articles could be linked from. xaosflux ^Talk/_CVU 21:02, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good suggestion IMO. I welcome the esoteric contributions of these musicologists, and don't want them to be rejected. I just want some balance. Andrewa 23:21, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... but the problem is, we still need to put the article somewhere!

What I'm talking about is what Nat Gonella and Glenn Miller just called swing, and which has been played by every jazz band (with the possible exception of any that played only Latin jazz), and which is essential for many dances, notably foxtrot, quickstep and jive, and it was part of early rock and roll but not post-Beatles. It's a metre, a rhythm and also a convention of notation, but most of all a feel... but it's not just a swung note!

The most obvious place to put it is swing time. Swing rhythm, shuffle time and shuffle rhythm are second choices. I gave up swing time early in the battle as an attempt at compromise but in hindsight perhaps that was a mistake.

Where else should the article go? Andrewa 04:33, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Improper Merger

Dear Rick Block,

Whatever corrections you may have made on the link between the articles and "Gang Stalking" and "Gang Stalk Persecution Complex" did not take.

When you open "Gang Stalk Persecution Complex" and then enter the "Comments" section to that article, you are ONCE AGAIN immediately switched to the "Comments" section to the article entitled "Gang Stalking."

Hence, if you say "Delete this Article," you are saying "Delete the article entitled 'Gang Stalking,'" when in fact you are TRYING to say, "Delete the article entitled 'Gang Stalk Persecution Complex.'"

We are trying to get the "Persecution Complex" article deleted, and we want the "Gang Stalking" article kept, but, because of this improper merger or link between the two articles, we are getting nowhere with this.

Are these pages being hacked? Can you fix it permanently?

Thank you.

Julianne McKinney --68.251.198.41 18:23, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It was changed back. I'll look into it. -- Rick Block (talk) 20:33, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The intent seems to be for the single AFD discussion about Gang stalking also to pertain to Gang Stalk Persecution Complex. If the consensus is delete, then both articles will be deleted (I've clarified this at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gang stalking). If the consensus for Gang stalking is to keep the article then a separate AFD should be opened for Gang Stalk Persecution Complex. I'd suggest simply waiting a week or two to see how the first AFD plays out. -- Rick Block (talk) 21:07, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The intention now seems to be that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gang stalking proposes deletion also of Brighting. It's a bit of a mess that will be up to the admin who closes the discussion to figure out. The problem with adding recreations into a current discussion is that it's a lot of work to figure out which comments apply to all of the articles proposed for deletion and which apply only to the first, etc.. Far better to let the vote proceed on the one article, and then see if the others qualify as candidates for speedy deletion, most will. Andrewa 21:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox on Erich Honecker

Hello there! Me and another Wikipedist are having a small argument about the appropiated infobox that should be displayed in this article. Thus, and avoiding a Rv War, request any person who is willing to give us a hand to solve this problem, to take a look at both Infoboxes (the other fellow wikipedist being Rd232 ) and select wich one is more appropiated, Thanks! Messhermit 00:42, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, the issue is whether the long version of the infobox is better (eg here) or the shorter version (eg here), noting that the shorter version is supposed to be complemented by succession boxes at the bottom of the article. NB these infoboxes apply to a number of political leaders, not just Honecker. Rd232 ^talk 00:51, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed! I was trying to reorganize most of the East German politicians, and that is why I believe that the infobox that I selected is the most accurate. I currently stop doing it until a consensus is reached. Messhermit 00:52, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My only opinion is this: To make it easy on readers, try to standardize the info box that you are using across all of the articles in the category, assuming it's not in the 1000's, that you feel relates these bio's; it will make it easier to compare and contrast them if they are in the same location, with the same information. xaosflux ^Talk/_CVU 04:58, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]