Jump to content

Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rajasekaran Deepak (talk | contribs) at 18:40, 13 May 2004 (fix redirect). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to the Help desk! This is a help desk mainly for newcomers and users who don't yet have an account. Feel free to ask questions about the way Wikipedia works, and remember to check this page again (how about a bookmark?) to see if there have been any replies.

If your question has already been covered in one of the help pages, you could get the answer you're looking for more quickly by checking the topical index.

If your question is not specifically about the Wikipedia, you'll probably find the Reference desk a better place to ask.

Post a question here!

Summarised questions


Can't view images

Hi all,

My IE can't seem to open the images contained in the articles. All there is just a gray box with the image's title. But when I view Wikipedia from school, the images show up just fine. Any ideas?

Thanx.

On my version of IE (6.0), the setting that turns images on and off is in Tools -> Internet Options -> Advanced Tab -> Multimedia -> Show Pictures. Make sure that is checked. If that doesn't work, can you not view any images on any page or just those in Wikipedia? Hope this helps, Jrdioko 19:36, Apr 11, 2004 (UTC)
Some people had privacy or ad-blocking software which can mistake some or all of wikipedia's images for ads, and so replaces them with nothing (or sometimes "AD" or something like that). Wikipedia doesn't display ads or webbugs, so if you're running such a program then it's safe to edit your preferences and allow "en.wikipedia.org"'s images to be displayed. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:28, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)~


Do you have any criteria for deciding when to create a link to articles that do not yet exist, or is it up to the whim of the writer?

It's pretty much up to the writer. If you feel that there should be an article on that topic, feel free to create the link. We encourage people to be bold in editing. If you'd like to learn more, you might want to try Wikipedia:Manual of style, which might help. But mainly, learn by doing, and from other articles. Yours, Meelar 22:55, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Hello and welcome! If you see a red link to an article that doesn't exist and feel you know enough about the subject to contribute something useful, go ahead and give it a shot. As Meelar said, don't be afraid to be bold in editing. Even if you only know a few details about a subject, you can still create a stub. As long as you have something to contribute, go ahead and do so! Hope this helps, Jrdioko 23:00, Apr 11, 2004 (UTC)
In general, I think that when an article could possibly created through a red link, it's better to link it than not. --Αλεξ Σ 23:03, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

A Daily Dose of Knowledge

Wikipedia rules! Is there any chance the site's creators/maintainers would implement a feature so that userse could sign up to recieve a daily (or weekly, or whatever) wikipedia entry (encyclopedia article) on a random subject (or, random within a user-selected set of categories)? It could be a daily dose of knoweldge. I would love something like that, and I'm betting others, would, too.

And, if not, is there anything like this in existence already (that is not limited to a certain subject)?

Hmm, click Special:Randompage once a day? It would be interesting to get something like that in the email though, perhaps a new mailing list that sends a copy of the featured article of the day to subscribers? -- Jrdioko 05:29, Apr 12, 2004 (UTC)
Anyone could set up a mailing list like that. Why not organise one? Martin 15:27, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)
How? Email me at lukeprog@hotpop.com
I believe there has been some discussion both about a mailing list, and about distributing the Wikipedia:featured article of the day via RSS syndication (the latter really is the more sensible option, if perhaps the less accessible one). In both cases it needs someone to write some code, someone to set up the necessary server things, and someone to figure out some needful policy (who does what, when, etc.). Our having a "featured article of the day" is itself a new (and I think excellent) innovation, so we've not yet gotten around to figuring out the details of publishing or syndicating it yet. But yes, it would be a great thing to have (much like those "word a day" emails people get). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:36, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Some people set their browser's home page to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Randompage which functions as a sort of Wikipedia Article of the Day idea. Just a suggestion. :-) Jwrosenzweig 18:00, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

What stops abuse of free editing?

If some idiot wanted to come into an article and delete information or change information so that it is inaccurate, what is to stop them from doing that?

See Wikipedia:replies to common objections. Kosebamse 09:14, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Peer review. Watch Special:Recentchanges, build up a watchlist, use "related changes" to watch for changes in your field of interest. If someone writes something that is incorrect, fix it or revert them. Simple vandalism, such as deletion of sections, is usually cleaned up within minutes. It's not perfect. For it to work, we need lots of people helping out. But wikis show that people are generally good. Good users always far outnumber malicious users. See also Wikipedia:Replies to common objections. (via EC) -- Tim Starling 09:22, Apr 12, 2004 (UTC)

Actually, IBM did a study, which found that the average time that vandalism persisted was less than 5 minutes. I can't remember the link, but someone could supply it if asked. Yours, Meelar 22:12, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

See history flow (PDF). Angela. 16:10, Apr 13, 2004 (UTC)

Index of the Wikipedia Namespace?

Is there a page that has links to all pages in the Wikipedia namespace? Hopefully organized by topic, with short explanations of the content? So far, I've found 3 or 4 of them, all listing a small section, but nothing complete. This includes the so called 'Community Portal.' --Voodoo 01:20, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Alphabetical index. It's not annotated, but the page titles are quite clear.  :) fabiform | talk 01:35, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Well, that's not bad, but it's alphabetical. I found two, or maybe even three more index type of pages, all of them very incomplete. The closest to complete seems to be Wikipedia:Utilities, and that's both incomplete and not very good.--Voodoo 03:46, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Of the index pages I've seen, Wikipedia:Utilities is the most comprehensive. It doesn't list all the pages, but you can probably get from there to any page in the Wikipedia namespace with only a jump or two. I'm afraid that if you don't like that page, you're probably out of luck, because I don't think we have anything better. People have done lots of indexing of those pages over time, but it's a big project. Isomorphic 05:36, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I could use a good answer to this question too; I often get lost in the Wikipedia namespace. We have so many organisations and policies! The Wikipedia namespace could use a bit more organisation (covering all the nodes), but I don't know where to start.. ✏ Sverdrup 18:41, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I'm working on it, people, but it's a HUGE project. The complete list, bot-generated, is Wikipedia:List of pages in the Wikipedia namespace. Wikipedia:Alphabetical index is more manageable because it doesn't fill your screen with all the archives and subpages. Wikipedia:Utilities will be renamed Wikipedia:Topical index, and it will eventually have a more complete (and hopefully better organized) index, but it takes a while to get there from where it is now. --Michael Snow 21:40, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I started working on this too. Do you want to create a page with what you have, or at least the proposed categories etc. so we can help you, or would you rather just do the whole thing yourself? --Voodoo 01:13, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
The alphabetical index is already complete - what I'm doing there is mostly looking for pages than can be merged with or redirected to other pages. But anybody who wants to help with the topical index (aka Utilities) is welcome to work on the existing page. I'm not planning to create a new page, just rename the old one when it gets complete enough to call it an index. --Michael Snow 02:16, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Inventor of the Long Playing Record

Question and response moved to Wikipedia:Reference desk#Inventor of the Long Playing Record

REGISTERED MAIL

Question moved to Wikipedia:Reference desk#REGISTERED MAIL

How to edit TOC in article w/no edit link for same?

I would like to edit an article by adding a section which would mean editing the TOC for same as well to add/change an entry in same but there is no edit link next to the TOC and the TOC is not included in the intro section or the one below. How can this be done?

The TOC is automatically generated from the section headings. To change it, change the section headings (i.e. ==Section Title==). Tuf-Kat 05:32, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)
Also, any new section headings you add will be automatically added to the TOC. Isomorphic 05:32, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
However, you need a certain number of section headings (four maybe?) until the TOC creates itself. That might be why you're not getting one. Αλεξ Σ 13:32, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I thought it was three... LUDRAMAN | T 21:01, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
In the new version of MediaWiki, you will be able to use __FORCETOC__ to include a TOC on pages with less than 4 headings. Angela. 17:45, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC)
Why not just add the TOC automatically whenever there is more than a screenful or two of text between the beginning of the page and the last heading? --Voodoo 00:28, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Probably because "a screenful or two" is different for different people on different computers, systems, settings, screen widths... moink 00:29, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
That's why I made the amount of text approximate. There is no benefit to using number of headings as a metric, it is just as dependant on those variable factors you mentioned. Also, you can have many headings in a message short enough to fit on a single screen, and in fact that is exactly what the TOC displays. The TOC is there so that you can jump to a heading without scrolling, and it's the amount of text between the beginning of the page and and the last heading that makes scrolling to that heading necessary, not the number of headings. --Voodoo 02:17, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Good grief. The TOC, as it stands, is intuitive and works wonderfully well. It's one of my favourite things. --bodnotbod 01:17, May 8, 2004 (UTC)

Whats wrong with using *.gif - images?

I just put out some illustrations wich are in the gif format... because of its rather flat-coloured style of content a gif provides an efficient compression. And I don't need a bunch of colours. So I can't se a bunch of technical reasons for using png in this case. MrMambo 01:24, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)~

Have a read of GIF#Unisys_and_LZW_patent_enforcement. Dysprosia 01:29, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Apart from the legal reasons, and the technical features you don't care about (colours, alpha, gamma) PNGs will generally compress to a smaller size (particularly if you use PNGcrush on them) and have 2-dimensional adam-7 interlacing (which means intermediate versions displayed to viewers with slow connections will be more useful). If you're doing diagrams or similar in some vector drawing program, please also upload the original vector file (in a zip file) and link to it from the PNG's description page - that way your diagram can be edited by others, or can be transformed into some newer format in the future, as the need arises. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:41, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)
PNG compresses based on flat colors the same as GIF does, so that's not an advantage to GIF. If you don't use the extra colors, they don't count against you in the file size. PNG's features are essentially a superset of GIF's, and PNG most always compresses better, so there's no reason to prefer GIF. Really the only advantage GIF has over PNG is that it allows animation, which we generally don't want for Wikipedia images anyway. DopefishJustin 00:15, May 12, 2004 (UTC)

Adding links?

I added links to the site but they got deleted? May I ask why? They were related to the topic I added them to. The links weren't spam because they have helped many other people.

Thanks, Phil

I'm guessing you are user:65.24.255.159 as your edit to this page was your first as a logged in user. If you are that user, then I think the reason you were reverted was because the links were not relevant to add to an encyclopedia. Software reviews might be useful, but they do not add any value to an article on what computer software is. Similarly, with the wiggyp link you added to web design; the link is related to the topic, but does not give information about web design - it is just one of hundreds of similar sites offering templates. These sort of links belong in a directory like Wikia or the ODP, not in an encyclopedia. You could also ask DJ Clayworth on his talk page as he was the one who reverted you. Perhaps he will be better able to explain it than I am. See also m:When should I link externally. Angela. 17:54, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not for an explanation of the general policy. Isomorphic 18:17, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Mirror

I HAD REQUESTED DELIVERY OF THE MIROR ABOUT 2 MONTHS AGO. I RECEIVED DELIVERY FOR ABOUT 3 WEEKS AND HAVE NOT RECEIVED IT FOR ABOUT A MONTH. PLEASE LOOK INTO THIS. 

                                  EMAIL: TUFF_FAN28@MSN.COM
Robert, this is an encyclopedia. We don't sell mirrors (or even encyclopedias, really). So I think you're asking at entirely the wrong website, I'm afraid. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:07, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Am I missing something here? LUDRAMAN | T 01:57, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Yes, the meaning of your comment has been changed, due to a context alteration [1]. -- Tim Starling 03:54, Apr 16, 2004 (UTC)
One must occasionally wonder about people like our friend here. Are they really serious? Do they think the internet is one giant organization, so if you buy something at one site, and ask about it somewhere else, it doesn't matter because it's all the same people? I'd think it was a joke, but I've seen more than one of these and it can't be that funny. Isomorphic 04:57, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)
A while (admittedly, a fairly long while) ago a friend of mine manned the helpdesk at Netscape. Much of her time was spent dealing with folks who'd bought (or more likely failed to buy) stuff online, couldn't figure out from whom the'd (not) bought it, and so complained to Netscape, citing them as being somehow responsible because their browser had been used. So yes, lots of people think it's all the same people (some of them are congressmen) -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:01, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
As a matter of fact, I am the head of a nonprofit organization whose name happens to be the same as that of a registration system for college enrollments. We get a bunch of request from prospective students complaining they have not received their ID number, even though it's fairly clear from reading our WWW pages that we are not in the least involved in registering college students.David.Monniaux 07:22, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Other language edits

I can manage English and, at a pinch, a couple of other languages. I could 'Talk' about the page in Latin script and someone would probably understand. But how could factual errors be alerted for other languages?

On each of the different language wikipedias there are of course people who will correct mistakes when they spot them. In the underpopulated wikipedias it might of course take significantly longer until a mistake is spotted than on the english one. Or do you mean what you should do in case you spot an error in an english article which is/might already be translated into one of the languages you cannot check? You can always leave an english message on the talk page of the (e.g.) greek article, there are good chances someone there will be able to understand your english and fit it into the article. You might also check for the Ambassador of the language and contact that one with your problem. andy 10:05, 16 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm off to the Embassies right now.

Renaming a page

What is the process for renaming a page? There was a discussion about a year ago on Talk:Woodworking about renaming the main Woodworking page to Woodwork. I think this was a good suggestion, but no-one followed up on it. I would like to start helping out in to this topic area...

Steve-o 16:25, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Use the move this page function on the sidebar. LUDRAMAN | T 17:00, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Figured that part out, but I was wondering if there are any conventions around gaining concensus, etc. It appeared from the Talk page that there was something more to it. It sounds like there isn't, so I'll just go ahead and do it. Steve-o

Basically, everything should be done by consensus, but most things here are done fairly informally - we debate an issue based on reasons for and against where necessary, but otherwise just let each other get on with things. In short, Be bold - someone will tell you if they disagree with what you've done! - IMSoP 19:19, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Remember, anything you can do here is reversible if it turns out someone disagrees. So don't worry about messing up - if it turns out there's disagreement, it can always be changed back.

I am a member of various affiliate schemes, e.g. Amazon, Tradedoubler etc, and would be interested in adding information to the Wikipedia in order to benefit commercially. For example, if there was discussion about a particular film, then I could post an external link from Wikipedia under my affiliate scheme to Amazon. I feel this could be mutually beneficial, but would like to know people's opinions about this before I start doing so.

For books, always post at least one ISBN if you can. Not only does it make it easier to track down the book, but the ISBN is automatically linked to a page that lets people shop for it at the site of their choice. So people can read the description, and buy it if they like from the seller they like. We're giving them choices, and not advertising any seller in particular. →Raul654 22:41, Apr 19, 2004 (UTC)
That's a big no no. If you want to make some money for yourself, set up your own website. Dori | Talk 00:49, Apr 18, 2004 (UTC)
(credit is due, btw, to the original poster - thanks for asking first) Dammit, we used to have a link to a policy answering this exact question (on the Village Pump, I think) so we should show it's not just Dori and I being petulant. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:52, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Number 18 on Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Dori | Talk 01:16, Apr 18, 2004 (UTC)
Besides being generally discouraged, I believe it would be ineffective. It's my understanding that the Wikimedia Foundation briefly tried the Amazon affiliate program to evaluate its fundraising potential, and that it was discontinued because virtually no revenue was generated. --Michael Snow 23:51, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
The isbn pages suggest the amazon affinity program is still in place - hit this: ISBN 0061075620 and then the first "find this book" link in the "Individual online booksellers" section. If it was discontinued, where is the (very little) money going? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:22, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
My understanding was based on this post by Jimbo to the mailing list. It's possible that the information at the page you mention was not updated. That's all I know. --Michael Snow 03:06, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)


I uploaded 2 images for the password article. I'd assumed they were covered by fair use, but now I'm not so sure. The images are "Password_game.jpg" and "Password gameshow.jpg". Are these kosher? What's a good rule of thumb? (Bear in mind that I'm new, good-hearted, and a little lazy. And there are probably lots of users that fit in this category.) Quadell 01:29, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The article is Password game, btw. I'm guessing that they are Fair use (assuming you're in the US). Wikipedia's policy is here: Wikipedia:Fair use -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:34, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
On reading that page (particularly the "no one person may decide" part) it looks like you should post both images there, in the context of the article in which they're used. Folks more knowledgeable than I can then consider what's appropriate. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:37, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Multilangual log in

Is it possible? I mean to have the same (account) username and password for the English, and say, the Arabic edition which I also use? Or are they in totally different realms?!

Ahmad

Short answer: No. Or, to be more precise, completely up to you - you can have the same username and password if you want, but you'll still have to log in seperately on each wiki, because they have completely seperate user databases. I believe there has been discussion of this inconvenience in the past, but I haven't time to find it at the moment I'm afraid. - IMSoP 16:12, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Article Series

I'd like to bundle the human [sense] together in an article series. Should I post messages on the talk pages of every individual article I wish to include? Or are there other procedures for this? - MGM 19:46, Apr 19, 2004 (UTC)

I think the general practice is to create a list with links to all of the related pages and put it on all the related pages. The best way to make the list is to create it in a MediaWiki namespace, something like MediaWiki:HumanSense and then all you have to put on the individual pages is {{msg:HumanSense}}. LUDRAMAN | T 13:51, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I meant should I do anything specific to notify contributors with possible objections? -- MGM 07:02, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
The best way of getting the attention of lots of people at the same time is to start a discussion on the Village pump - or better still, start it somewhere else and publicise it on the pump (keeps things tidy, saves needing to archive it later). Alternatively, start doing it, use well-chosen edit summaries, and see how many people who have the articles in their watchlists start sending you complaints... :-/ Up to you ;-) - IMSoP 22:11, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

How do I change my e-mail address?

I just opened a wikipedia account and unfortunately the e-mail address that I gave was wrong. Could you please let me know how to change my e-mail address? Thank you very much. - LightSeeker

Log in, and click "Preferences" in the upper-right corner of your browser. You can change your email address there. →Raul654 00:29, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I appreciate your help.

Author HELP!

I absolutly love wiki-pedia and i use d it all the time. This time i used it for a history class, i need to know the main person who made this website or at least whos idea it was to make this website, or how many people made it. i serously need the answer AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. THANK YOU! =)

It sounds like you need to cite it for a paper. Please see Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia. →Raul654 04:16, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)
And stuff about whose idea and things like that can be found at wikipedia's article on, err, Wikipedia! -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 22:59, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Downloading just part of the database...

I'm not positive about the best way to do this...but I am just wanting the "Biography" section of Wikipedia. Is there a way to get this without downloading all 8000+MB of the database?

Use Special:Export. Note that the current revisions of all articles only take 218 MB. You only need to download 8 GB if you want all previous revisions. -- Tim Starling 05:22, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)
That small!? Wow! Great stuff. --bodnotbod 01:20, May 8, 2004 (UTC)

Fonts

One of my PCs seems to have all the right fonts to be able to display funny characters on some Wikipedia pages, and one does not - it displays boxes for characters in some other languages. How can I get the right fonts for the one that does not? Nroose 08:05, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You don't say what operating system you have. In Windows 2000, go to Start → Settings → Control Panel → Regional Options; in the General tab, select all the check boxes in the list under "Language settings for the system"; select Apply (you may need your installation CD at this point). Gdr 18:23, 2004 May 5 (UTC)

Cross referring while editing

While editing an article I often need to refer to another to check (for example) its exact title. With most web pages I can hold the shift key while clicking on a link. This opens a new window which I can then close before returning to my editing window. Unfortunately, holding the shift key while clicking on GO does not open a new Wikipedia window. Instead I find I have to click the back button to return to my edits, which I then find I have lost! Okay, I suppose folk have to learn from their mistakes but I have done this several times now so I just thought I'd ask whether it's technically possible for such a feature to be added. Shantavira 08:51, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I don't know about the technical GO solution -- I agree it might be handy. The rest is a matter of personal habit. I usually open two or three separate browser windows when I'm doing research and editing -- one for the Edit page, one for searching Wikipedia (which I usually do via the Search Site button on my Google toolbar, rather than via the Wiki search -- saves a step), and a third for searching the web via Google, if necessary. I always start my edit by clicking "Show Preview" -- that way if I need to investigate any of the links within the article, I can do your Shift-Click trick on article links from there, open a new window to check the related article then close the window, then simply scroll back to the edit box to continue working.
When checking related pages, I often Shift-Click on "What Links Here" in the sidebar, opening a new window with the list of related links. This makes it very easy to use my Back button (or better yet, the drop-down list next to my IE Back button) to return straight to the list after investigating something on it.
For a really long edit, you can compose offline in Notepad or a word processor, then copy and paste the whole thing into the edit box -- saves headaches with lost edits. If the server begins behaving strangely, you can select and copy all your text with some quick keyboard shortcuts (click in edit box, CTRL-A, then CTRL-C) before clicking any Save/Preview/Go buttons -- that way you can easily paste your edits back in if you get a server error. (Check the page history first, though, since your edit might have gone through after all.)
Good luck, and happy editing! Catherine 19:03, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Another tip which you might find useful is to click "show preview" when you're part way through editing, you will then see a copy of the article with any changes you've made - red links are immediately obvious, and you can shift click on any of the links in the previewed text to open a new window if you find you need one. fabiform | talk 11:12, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Also, if you feel that being able to open search results in a new window would be useful, you can suggest this at Sourceforge or discuss it at Meta. Angela. 20:15, Apr 22, 2004 (UTC)
Not to be too much of an evangelist, but a complex editing task is often made much easier by using a browser that supports tab navigation. I personally use Mozilla, but folks also use Konqueror and Opera (browser) which have the same feature. I typically have five or six tabs (they're just windows, but they're easier to handle that full-on toplevel windows) open to wikipedia, with at least one for doing wikipedia searches and another for doing google searches. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:28, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Also worth evangelising about is that forms retain their state when you click back in Mozilla - i.e. you can start editing, follow a link, click the back button, and your edits will still be in the edit box. I don't know what other browsers do about this. - IMSoP 23:39, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Changing image formats

A little over a week ago I replaced a bunch of maps in JPEG format that were taken from the CIA World Factbook with the same maps in PNG format. As I did so, I built up quite a list of orphaned images, which will be a bit of a task for some admin to remove. A thought just flashed into my head—could I have gone to, say, Image:Barbados.jpg and used the "Move this page" feature to move it to Image:Bb-map.png (and then uploaded the PNG version), or would that have only changed the name of the page and left the image filename alone? —Bkell 10:33, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You did it the right way. You can't use "move this page" on image: pages at all, not even to correct a typo in the filename. Once you're finished, you can put a link to your list on Wikipedia:Images for deletion and an admin will delete them for you (don't worry about making work if you're improving wikipedia, deleting images doesn't take an admin long anyway).  :) fabiform | talk 11:06, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Problem editing wikipedia articles with Lynx browser

I'm having trouble editing pages in certain situations. My access is through a community freenet, using Lynx Version 2.7.1. My problem is that when I want to add material in between what is already present in an article, I cannot find a way to "insert another blank line" without deleting what is already there. Any suggestions? Andrew Sly 19:30, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Maybe the overwrite function is on, and you should turn it off? LUDRAMAN | T 19:42, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Ah, no, I know the problem you mean - Lynx uses a fixed number of independent lines to show the input box - Enter just moves you down a line. I've never worked out how to create a new one, either, although there must be a way. You could try looking through the Lynx User's Guide. ALternatively, Ctrl-X Ctrl-E (or, it seems, Ctrl-E Ctrl-E) will let you edit the textarea with your default editor - so on my system it popped up in Vim. As soon as you save and exit, Lynx will pop back up with the new version of the text. - IMSoP 23:56, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Why do many articles have links like [[As of 2004]] instead of As of [[2004]]? —Bkell 20:43, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Basically, these links allow people to use "what links here" to see if the information needs updating. See Wikipedia:As of for more information on it. Angela. 20:47, Apr 22, 2004 (UTC)
Ah, okay, that makes sense. —Bkell 20:52, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Is wikipedia going to be limited to just a knowledge base? a big networked reference tome?

I am a casual visitor to wikipedia, but somehow it seems there is something lacking in wikipedia. Ok, its an encyclopaedia, right? but is knowledge all we need? where is the room for creativity?

Wiki offers interactivity! rapid communication of ideas, collaboration at a reasonable speed...so whats my build up here?

How does one express his ideas in Wiki, ideas soon to become applications in science (can i get a random peer review, ofcourse at my own risk), in sociology, politics (wow can i campaign?), market survey (can i dare to start this venture?). Well yes, there is no ownership conferred by Wiki to the idea, but that is at the convenience of the person who is expressing it. The "ideas" can be anything. Well to be short, i want links where i just dont find existing knowledge base, but ideas leading to future.

Think, Share, Make and Evolve!


Yuvvaiva!

wikipedia is not original research - we only want generally accepted ideas. →Raul654 22:06, Apr 22, 2004 (UTC)
The slightly longer answer is simply to say that Wikipedia is only one of many sites using the wiki concept, and a Free Encyclopedia is the use we're putting it to here. Off the top of my head, I know that MeatBall is keen to generate knowledge about online communities, and the original wiki at the Portland Pattern Repository was set up to foster ideas in computer programming. You might also find some useful links by browsing through MeatBall:WikiCommunityList. - IMSoP 22:14, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

add talk page link

by using ~~~~ i sign my name with timestamp, is there an easy way to add a link to my talk page after it as i've noticed some users who do that, thanks calexico 23:48, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The nickname (set in your preferences) is subsituted into the wikitext like this: [[User:Joe|<nickname>]]. So a nickname of "Joe]] [[User talk:Joe|Talk" produces "[[User:Joe|Joe]] [[User talk:Joe|Talk]]". -- Tim Starling 01:29, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

Consensus on FA candidates

I'm looking for a page that explains why featured articles have their nomination mentioned on their talk pages.

To me it seems to be more logical to do this on top of the article in question, like with cleanup and deletion notices. I actually nominated an article which has already been featured because of this. But obviously a consensus has been reached. Can anyone point me to further reading about this and explain why this is the case? - MGM 07:08, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

This was discussed before, and I think that discussion took place on Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. Basically, it was obvious to everyone that marking a page as "featured" at the top was quite intrusive on the article, and so it was decided to tag the talk page only. →Raul654 07:13, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

Might I suggest a less obstrusive picture on top of the article to announce FA candidateship? Maybe a star labelled FAC or FA (once they've been featured. Make the Wikipedia a bit more colorful... - MGM 22:31, Apr 24, 2004 (UTC)

how do i get to

I can't get to page that explains the origin of the words? I got there through google, but dont know how to get there from the main page... can you help... thanks

Are you looking for etymology? Isomorphic 16:10, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

top news stories listed by year

I just stumbled onto this incredible site. I was onto a page that lists each year going way back...and has links to the top news stories for that year. Now I can't find it again. (With links to full story) Please help!

Linda Holmes Victoria, BC email: hucklin@shaw.ca

Linda, it's easier than you think. Just go to an article named for the year you care about (e.g. 1314) and you'll find out everything we currently have about that year. For some information that may be skipped, go to that page and then hit the "what links here" link (on the lefthand side) for a more complete (if rather hard to read) list. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:07, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

personal stats

How can I check easily the total number of edits I have made?calexico talk 19:50, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

the only way is to hit "my contributions", choose 100 or 500 or whatever, and count how many screensful you get. There is a statistics page (I forget where) but it isn't updated very often. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 19:56, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits, last updated April 10. (I'm #382!). - Lee (talk) 20:03, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Calexico let me know what you think! Calexico 22:06, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC) - Great thanks!

calexico 16:16, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC) I have had trouble in adding language links from, for example, my English User talk page en:User talk:Calexico to my French User talk page where instead of a nice little link right at the top, I get the link written out in the text, see User talk:Calexico to see what I mean. Am I doing something wrong?

According to Wikipedia:Interlanguage links, "Interlanguage links in talk pages and on Meta will appear inline in the text, like regular links, so you can cite other pages in discussion." So no, you're not doing anything wrong - this is just the way interlanguage links behave on talk pages. I may be wrong, but I don't think there's a way round this. --Camembert

Uploading images

I would like to upload an image that I believe is covered under fair use. As I understand it, I am supposed to upload it, write up a case describing why I think it is covered under fair use, and post the case and image to the fair use page.

However, I cannot upload a file unless "I affirm that the copyright holder of this file agrees to license it under the terms of the Wikipedia copyright."

Am I missing something here? -Rwv37 00:52, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

Can anyone answer this? -Rwv37 23:28, May 2, 2004 (UTC)
If you want to upload a fair use image, you need to lie when you check the box, and then explain on the image description page that it is fair use. This will change with the new version though, where you can specify the source on the upload form rather than having to falsely tick the box. Angela. 01:36, May 3, 2004 (UTC)

Claiming my anonymous articles?

I just accidentally wrote an article while not logged in. Checking the user log for my IP address, it turns out that I've made a few changes while not logged in - either accidentally, or before I had a username.

Is it possible to somehow "claim" these changes for my username, so that they show up in "My contributions", for example? If so, how? Thanks. -Rwv37 20:08, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit :) - Lee (talk) 20:14, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Thanks! -Rwv37 20:16, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

Images x Text art

I just made some PNG pictures to replace the text art on the Magic star page, for later find out someone took the last JPG pictures to add the text. The three new PNG files, together, are smaller than the first JPG of the last version, before the text, so the page is still quite light.

Anyway, I wanna know if the PNG pictures were a good idea, or if the text, in this case, is a better choice. If it's not, I'd like to know when the images would be better. Thanks - Kieff 23:44, Apr 25, 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, I think your PNGs are great. The ASCII art they replace really wasn't nice, but I don't see why the original JPGs (which also look fine) were removed. Perhaps you should ask User:Jacquerie27 who added the images and then the ASCII art why they did so (perhaps theres some reason of which I'm not aware). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:43, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

about acetaminophen

please i would like to inquire if there is any difference between paracetamol and acetaminophen?
Did you read the acetaminophen article? Gdr 17:28, 2004 Apr 29 (UTC)

Article Author / Originator

Hello,

Hopeless newbie here (but I have read at least SOME of the many FAQs and Help pages)...

What I was wondering was, how do I find out who began or authored a page?

I clicked on 'page history' but that did not tell me.

--bodnotbod 21:36, Apr 28, 2004 (UTC)

The thing to do would be click on "page history", then scroll (using the "next 50" button if necessary") until you get to the first version. The author of that is the original author. Meelar 21:39, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)
When the software is upgraded, the page creator will be shown in the meta data for a page. This example shows <dc:creator rdf:resource="http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Gwicke"> meaning Gwicke was the first person to edit that page. Angela. 18:01, Apr 29, 2004 (UTC)

Cannot make text into a link

I've successfully made a link in the sandbox using the square brackets.

I am attempting to turn the text:

"A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm,"

...into a link at this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996 -- at the July 8th point.

Why am I having trouble?

Is it to do with the fact that quotes and/or a colon are inbetween the brackets?

Thanks for the previous answer Meelar.

It's the quotes. Stick them (and the comma) on the outside of the link and it'll work. - Lee (talk) 22:44, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Change edit history, so creator is me

I (stupidly) posted a chemistry assignment (now Periodic table history) onto Wikipedia. Now, if the Panel (the people that are marking my assignment) look for plagerism and see this, they'll fail me/expel me from school... Whatever.

Anyway, my question is, is it possible to change the original authoer (202.173.189.49) to my username (Goog), so that I have a better chance of proving ownership if a problem arises?

Failing that, can the article be deleted?

Goog 11:04, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Sure, just follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Changing attribution for an edit. Angela. 13:29, Apr 29, 2004 (UTC)
May take some time, though ... Chris 73 | (New) Talk 03:38, 1 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Lost in space

Who runs the show? Who's top dog? Where do I find your reply in this mess?

Lost in Space was produced by Irwin Allen …
… Oh, you meant to ask who runs the Wikipedia? Gdr 13:17, 2004 Apr 29 (UTC)

Character coding in different Wikis

I run into a problem with character coding, moving names from Polish Wiki to English. They look ok at first, but next edit shows the letters like ą, ę, etc. have been corrupted into meaningless strings @#%#% and such. I wonder, y does it work on PL Wiki, not here? The letters should be visible in UTF...or what does Wiki use? Is there just no point in using non-standard letters in EnWiki? See names in tables on those pages: Hetman on enWiki plWiki Tnx in advance (umm, and major tnx if u can copy your reply to my talk page! --Piotrus 16:43, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The Polish Wikipedia transmits and receives data in UTF-8, so you can enter any Unicode character. The English Wikipedia uses ISO 8859-1, which includes only the characters needed for Western European languages. So if you want to put Polish letters in the English Wikipedia, you have to convert them to HTML character entity references. For example, you'll have to turn "ą" into &#261;.
Many people think that the English Wikipedia should use UTF-8. See the disccussion at Wikipedia:Unicode. Gdr 17:23, 2004 Apr 29 (UTC)

Praise and Other Comments

Is there a repository for one's thoughts on the Wikipedia?

You know, like you get on the back of a book, except open to all?

It's just that I would firstly like to say what a fantastic project this is (I'd used it as a reference a number of times in the past, but only yesterday started making my own contributions)...

And I quite like the idea of "It's the Crack Cocaine of Copy Editing!" appearing somewhere.

Sorry, I'm sure everyone's got more pressing matters...

--bodnotbod 20:52, Apr 29, 2004 (UTC)

Your user page (or a subpage thereof) is a good place to put that kind of stuff. →Raul654 20:59, Apr 29, 2004 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I appreciate that. Don't think I'll start any subpages just yet. I've added the stuff to my user page where, no doubt, at least 3 of the 60,000+ contributors will see it ;o)

How do I create a menu similar to the one one the Alias (television) characters pages displayed as

 ? SD6-Agent 12:12, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The contents of {{msg:alias}} reside at MediaWiki:Alias. To make a new one, you just have to create a page that similarly starts MediaWiki: (using whatever trick you do to start a new page). Then just use {{msg:<page_name>}} wherever you want to put it. - Lee (talk) 15:30, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Marked for deletion but not in deletion list?

I was looking under the Starcraft links and noted that most of the pages are marked for deletion, but none are listed on the deletion discussion page. Being a huge gamer myself and noting that SC is one of the best selling games of all time, I wonder why this is the case. Is it due to copyright information, duplication of material, etc?

Much thanks.


Hi, they are on votes for deletion, see here: Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion#Command_Center_(StarCraft)_et_al - if you want to have your say, you need to edit MediaWiki:VfD-Command - you should do it soon though as these pages have just about had their time and the discussion will soon end.  :) fabiform | talk 19:54, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Text in the MySQl database

When I download the database (I have the Spanish version of the database), the text shows up as a bunch of unreadable symbols. How do I get the actual text of the articles?

If you're simply looking at the file you got from the download, then it'll be meaningless to everyone - it's a dump of a MySQL database. To read it, you need to load it into a mySQL database. Then the wikitext (which is odd, but not meaningless) will be visible in the "cur" table. To read that as HTML, you either need to install mediawiki or build an offline version (see Wikipedia:Database_download#Static_HTML_tree_dumps_for_mirroring_or_CD_distribution). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 21:24, 30 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Help moving tabbed table from Word document

I apologize if this is covered elsewhere. I just rewrote the puberty article by writing it in Word and pasting it into the edit window. Near the end I had some 4 column tables of normal times of development that were simply tabbed columns (not actual Word tables). As you can see the numbers are run together and the tabs and CRs were not pasted. I have the original Word tables. Can you suggest a way to transfer the info without rewriting all of it? Thanks. (Slow learner) Alteripse 21:21, 1 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

OK I've done it for you, but if you put a space as the first character on each new line the wikisoftware will keep the original formatting. theresa knott 07:46, 2 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Got it, thanks. Alteripse 14:33, 2 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Archives

There was a main page a week or so ago that had links I wanted to see. I lost it and forgot what exactly the links are. I'm addicted to wikipedia and now I'm obsessing about finding a cache or archive of previous main pages. I was wondering if there is such a thing. Thank you.

Well, there isn't an archive per se. You've got a couple options. First, you can click the "page history" link on the Main Page, and go back to a version from a week ago. That'll give you a list of each version of the page, with times and dates. The down side to that there's a new version every time anyone tweaks anything on the page, so you'll probably have to scroll through a good number of edits to go back a whole week.
There are some other options. You can look at Wikipedia:Goings-on and its archives, which list the "featured article" for each day. You could also look at the archive for Mediawiki:dyk, which has a lot of neat stuff. If you remember the actual articles you're looking for, just type them into the search box. Wikipedia's internal search is disabled, but it'll let you access a premade google search. Isomorphic 04:29, 2 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Just thought I'd point out that previous versions of the main page probably aren't all in its history, as the majority of changes now take place on "transcluded" pages. So the "featured articles", "in the news", etc, are now actually their own pages, magically merged into the main page whenever you view it. You might want to look at Wikipedia:Editing the main page for details. - IMSoP 18:24, 2 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist Clarification

I'm slightly confused about my Watchlist and it's this phrase on theWikipedia:Watchlist page that's doing it:

The default cutoff for the watchlist is currently three days for users with less than 1000 pages in their watchlists and 12 hours for Wikipediholics with more than 1000.

I keep thinking that if nobody changes a page I am watching for a certain period of time, it is going to fall off the bottom - and I won't be notified when it is changed. I'm fairly sure that doesn't happen, but can someone reassure me on that point?

To make it explicit: If I choose to watch a page, I will be notified of a change on my Watchlist, provided I do not actively Stop Watching even if it's 5 years from now?

Secondly - Every time someone changes a page I am watching, that page shoots straight to the top of my Watchlist, regardless of how long ago the previous change happened?

--bodnotbod 12:54, May 2, 2004 (UTC)

Every time an article is changed, then it goes right back to the top of your watchlist, no matter how long you have been watching it. However, after (by default) 24 hours, it falls off the bottom again. So you have that much time to notice changes to an article. →Raul654 14:23, May 2, 2004 (UTC)
Great. That's exactly how I want it to be. Thank you. --bodnotbod 14:31, May 2, 2004 (UTC)

"You have new messages" malfunction

I've had two occasions where I'm informed I have new messages, but when I click on it, there's nothing new there.

Does this happen to everyone? Perhaps if someone starts to leave something but then 'cancels' instead? --bodnotbod 16:43, May 2, 2004 (UTC)

Strangely enough, it happened to me twice yesterday although it has never happened before. theresa knott 16:50, 2 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
If there's no apparent change to the talk page, someone may have inserted a comment in some obscure location, or a comment may have been removed. So it's best to check the history. I'm aware of a bug that can cause the new messages note to become "stuck on" when someone makes an edit, but I've never seen it come on spontaneously. -- Tim Starling 03:37, May 4, 2004 (UTC)

Hit counts?

I know I'm usually on the other end of questions here, but I haven't found it: is there a way to count the number of page views for each individual article? Thanks, Meelar 01:19, 3 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the server lists them by the month. Go to my user page and click on the link to "Current month's hits". By the way, that's an auto-updating link I never have to change it :) →Raul654 02:25, May 3, 2004 (UTC)
PS - that is a ***HUGE*** list. Make sure to stop it before it loads too much and crashes your browse.
That's weird, I wanted to ask exactly the same question. But, having said that, I don't want a huge list. You can't just do one page at a time? --bodnotbod 00:15, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
Each page used to have a counter at the bottom, but this feature had to be dropped in the interests of speed. theresa knott 15:05, 4 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

extra spaces in paragraph breaks

I noticed in the article on Thursday Island I wrote, there seems to be extra spaces between some paragraphs. I've had a read through the editing help but have drawn a blank for this but no doubt there is a simple explanation. Any help?

thanks

Roisterer

I have fixed the problem for you. They weren't seperated with a simple carriager return - there were some spaces there too that you couldn't see because they're, well, spaces. →Raul654 04:37, May 3, 2004 (UTC)

Watching Long Pages

On pages that have 'edit' links on the right hand side, if I edit a section - using that link - and have my 'Watch This Page' box ticked: Am I only then watching that section of the page for changes? Or is it still the entire page?

The reason I ask is that I appear to be missing edits here and there, most annoyingly it's sometimes people answering a question I've asked (I stumble on them later when looking at something else). I'm just wondering if this is me making an oversight or whether there's a good reason. --bodnotbod 08:40, May 4, 2004 (UTC)

You're watching the entire page, and its talk page as well. Your watchlist only shows the most recent change to a page you're watching, it's not like recent changes, or the page edit history, which shows all edits in order. So for example, you ask a question, someone answers it, then another person edits a different part of the page - all you see on your watchlist is the last person's edit and edit summary. I hope that helps. :) fabiform | talk 09:04, 4 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! I see! Right. I thought that if several changes happened it would be listed several times. OK. It's good to be aware of that. And I guess it's best that way, otherwise we'd just have a screen full of VfD summaries... --bodnotbod 09:16, May 4, 2004 (UTC)

Failed attempt to register

Hello

I appreciate Wikipedia, and have been able to get a lot of good information here. I have some things I could also contribute. I attempted to register using my email address as my username. After I filled in the fields I pushed the button to register, and got only a blank screen. Later I came and attempted to log in under my username and password, and again got a blank screen My email address is unfolding@smartchat.net.au

Please let me know what to do

Thanks

Richard Maguire

Sydney Australia

Using an email address as a username is probably not a good idea, as spam havisters get email's from web sites. Try logging in with unfolding as you username, and put your email in the email field of the log in screen theresa knott 09:24, 4 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, an @ symbol in a username seems to cause this problem (I just replicated the black screen Richard got). I'll check sourceforge and file a bug if one isn't outstanding. But Theresa's caution is correct, notwithstanding. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 13:38, 4 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
On a related topic. I do not currently have an account with MetaWiki or any of the other projects beyond the 'pedia. I was thinking of setting up an account. Is it a bad idea to use the same username/password for each project? That's what I'd like to do, but I wondered if it would cause a conflict of some sort. Thanks. --bodnotbod 15:02, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
Single sign-on is something that's on the development "todo" list (so you'd automatically register for every project in one go, and not have to worry about creating N new accounts). But that's not done, so you do indeed need to register on each individual wikiproject. I think almost everyone keeps the same username (and lets face it, the same password) on each wiki. There's someting to be said for preemptively registering on a bunch of the wikis (such as the other-language ones) so that no-one can go there and register your username (and use it to frame you somehow). It's quite sensible to be registered even for languages which you don't speak, as you can probably figure out interwikis anyway. For those ones I usually leave a message on my user page there saying "I don't speak lower silesian, and I rarely visit this wiki, so if you want to talk to me, do it on 'en'". -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 15:19, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Admin promotion

So I've accepted a request for adminship and I got 20 votes FOR voting me as an admin. The deadline has expired so when do I become an admin? SD6-Agent 18:42, 4 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

When a beaurocrat (sp?) promotes you. →Raul654 18:48, May 4, 2004 (UTC)
It's bureaucrat. Just think of them ruling a piece of furniture. Meelar 20:01, 4 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Sorry for the delay. Angela. 07:06, May 5, 2004 (UTC)

BC/AD vs. BCE/CE

Is there a Wikipedia standard regarding the usage of BC/AD or BCE/CE?

Yes, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). Gdr 18:06, 2004 May 5 (UTC)

On Wikipedia:Tutorial (External links), User:Bernhard.kaindl inserted the question " How can one link to a page which needs a pipe in it's URL?" onto the page. I think the answer is that a pipe won't bother the system at all, since it's internal links that use pipes. If anyone knows the answer to this question for sure, let him know on his talk page, please. Thanks, Isomorphic 05:32, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you're allowed pipes in URLs. If you try in article titles, you just get the "Bad title" error, and for external URLs, it says "Invalid URL", so there shouldn't be any cases where this is a problem, as such URLs should not exist. Angela. 07:28, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
He answered his own question with the following: "Note: Using the pipe('|') in the URL of the link does not work literally, apparently HTML provides for the possiblity to specify any character in hexadecimal form, so you can write '%7C' instead of the pipe." So I assume that works. fabiform | talk 11:43, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think '%7C' will work in urls either. http://www.example&7C.com also produces the Invalid URL error. Angela. 18:45, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
Right, let's clarify things here:
  • First, the address of a page has to do with HTTP (a protocol for transmitting and receiving data), not HTML (a way of formatting a document)
  • URLs (the full address of a page) should not be confused with domain names (just the first bit) - and domain names have additional restrictions that don't apply to the rest of the URL (because of yet another standard, DNS)
  • Finally, article titles within the MediaWiki are subject to their own restrictions, to avoid the system breaking horribly when someone does something weird with "magic" characters; this is yet another issue (um, where are we, number 4!)
  • Meanwhile, the MediaWiki software has an idea of what it thinks a valid URL should look like, and it actually appears to be there that this issue arises: I can access a page by typing http://rwec.co.uk/~ron/test|page into my browser, but to make a link from here to there, I have to use http://rwec.co.uk/~ron/test%7Cpage which is defined as equivalent by the HTTP definition.
My, now there's an unnecessarily long-winded explanation for you - anyone would think I'm procrastinating or something... :-/ IMSoP 21:58, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Reducing size of uploaded images

How do I reduce the size of an uploaded image? Or will I have no choice but to somehow change the image on my own computer (which I also don't quite know how to do) and upload it again? I've uploaded a portrait of William Wallace Denslow that is obviously much too large. If I can figure out how to do this reduction, I will be able to upload some additional images (all in public domain) that I happen to have scanend into my computer and could be of use here, such as a map of the Land of Oz. --Woggly 11:27, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

There's an automatic thumbnail syntax to use for this job, I've done it to the image on William Wallace Denslow. I typed the following: [[image:Denslow WEB.jpg|thumb|250px|William Wallace Denslow]] - start with the image file name, end with the text you want in the caption, and in between (in any order) you add elements like "thumb" to make a thumbnail, and a width in pixels if you don't like the default thumbnail width, "left" or "none" if you don't like the default right-align, etc. You can find all the details of this at Wikipedia:Extended image syntax.  :) fabiform | talk 11:50, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Practicing in sandbox. --Woggly 18:02, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to link directly to a Page history?

I've tried a number of Google searches across the wiki project and can't find an answer. The fact that page history is sometimes referred to as the revision history and edit history isn't helping ;o) --bodnotbod 16:04, May 5, 2004 (UTC)

Yes, it's possible. Go to the page history and copy the complete URL. Then use the same syntax you'd use for making an external link. Here's an example, linking to this page's history. The same trick can also be used to make links to difference pages and other pages of the same sort. Isomorphic 16:11, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
You can also link to specific versions in a page history, but be aware that these are not permanent as the page IDs change if a page is deleted and then undeleted, or when a page is moved. Angela. 18:49, May 5, 2004 (UTC)
Thanks, and thanks to all above who answered various questions of mine. I don't know whether to keep thanking people (my polite instinct) or whether it's less annoying just to leave it as implied... --bodnotbod 00:05, May 7, 2004 (UTC)

Why does Völkerwanderung go direct to edit

In the migration page, there's a link to Völkerwanderung (it is underlined red for a non existing page). However the Volkerwanderung page does exist and has content.

I've looked in the migration page and the reference seems to be done normally with two square brackets like so: [[Völkerwanderung]]

This is a known bug, sometime the link table gets confused, and not all incoming links are listed on the "What links here". The case that a link stays red even though the target page exists is more rare, sometimes it goes away by editing the target page one. However not this time - so I changed the link to Volkerwanderung, which is a redirect to the correct spelling with umlaut anyway. That way the link is blue at least. andy 20:52, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Single or double space?

Uh, this might be silly, but I've noticed that in some articles people use double spaces after a period (Like "Hello. How are you?"). I've been using just one, and I've seen articles like that too. But I was thinking that double spaces could be some recommended thing when writing the articles, or that the double space might be used for some internal wiki thing I'm not aware of... So, is that completely irrelevant or there should be a "after period spacing standard" hehe?

Kieff 03:52, May 6, 2004 (UTC)

Well, in proper English writing, there are two spaces after a period at the end of a sentence. The wiki software, however, displays one and two spaces as the same, so it really makes no difference. Yours, Meelar 03:59, 6 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, I think somebody told me that this was a British English convention, but I could be wrong (I've always thought of two spaces as "correct", but I know Microsoft Word's grammar checker has an option for which you want to standardise on). And FWIW, the squashing of multiple spaces is done by web browsers when reading the final HTML - I think it's designed to allow the source of web-pages to be formatted independent of their rendered appearance. Hence the wide use of the "non-breaking space" entity &nbsp; - IMSoP 17:40, 6 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I'm British and I've taken typing classes. And I can confirm that we were taught to use 2 spaces after a full stop (or period as you would have it). And I have the habit now, so I'm glad nobody's telling me not to do it. Apart from the way it looks, I like the way it gives me a nice percussive dugga-dugga when I finish a sentence. Too much info? OK... --bodnotbod 01:28, May 8, 2004 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:Manual of Style states:

There are no current guidelines on whether to use one or two spaces after a period but it is not important as the difference only shows up in the edit box. The page itself will only display one space (unless you use &nbsp; to force it otherwise). See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (spaces after a period) for a discussion on this.

See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (spaces after a period) for a discussion on this. Angela. 01:43, May 8, 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia Talk and Google

Moved to Wikipedia:External search engines

Repeated vandalism over a two week period

Where would I report someone who has been vandalising articles for two weeks between making useful edits? I have 15 instances of vandalism I can link to directly between Mar 20th and May 4th.

Also, I am worried it will lead to edit attacks on my articles, is it possible to submit to a committee anonymously?

--bodnotbod 01:31, May 7, 2004 (UTC)

Well, Vandalism in progress is more for attacks that are taking place in real time. You're talking about a long-term pattern. If you want, you can tell me or another admin by email. Unless you think the violations are enough that the user should be banned, all it will do is alert us to keep an eye on their contributions. Isomorphic 03:40, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I have passed my evidence on to another administrator (I saw their offer first), thanks for the offer, though. --bodnotbod 01:31, May 8, 2004 (UTC)

Math formula doesn't show up

Hi,

I just created the article Edgeworth series, and the first displayed equation doesn't show up. The others appear just fine. I am using the rendering option "HTML if very simple or else PNG". It would be great is somebody could help me out here. Wilke 20:47, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, it looks OK to me, even with that setting (normally I use the stupidly named "Recommended for modern browsers"; just wanted to rant about how stupid that name is again...). Have you tried the eternal magic of Wikipedia:Clear your cache, and seen if it's still not showing? - IMSoP 21:38, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Works now, so was probably just a cache problem. Wilke 21:52, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Collaborative arguments

This novice has a question for the Wiki community about the use of Wikipedia for the collaborative examination of complex problems.

There are increasing numbers of what some call 'non-trivial problems' in the world, problems that are complex and multilayered, exhibit conflicting data, and are often dynamic thru time (e.g. are we running out of oil?). Determining answers can easily be beyond the capacity of any individual or single institution, and apart from scholarly journals there is no public forum for hammering out the relative merits of different evidence & arguments.

If the talking points of an issue can be laid out (in say a nested heirarchy), and appropriate near-blank pages created, contending views and independant thinkers could make progressive contributions. 'We all stand on the shoulders of giants', simply cos the view is better. I think Wiki could play a role as a less-biased forum for individuals to examine all sides and make their own minds up on the evidence, as well as providing a valuable repository of state-of-play info on the issue.

This is not too dissimilar a use to the open law project (from the little I've read on it), but I know that is seperate to Wiki & obviously there are issues of storage and issue framing, as well as the basic point - does Wiki want to go there? If I've posted to wrong list, overlooked some existing open source tool, or missed strictures in Wiki policy blocking this, I apologise humbly, but would still like to here from anyone who has explored this idea, would be interested in doing so or knows of related online efforts.

Thanks, Liam C. Melbourne, Aus. e51049 at ems.rmit.edu.au

You'd like Wikinfo. Dysprosia 14:31, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Did I edit this page correctly?

I added a picture to the Jerry Rice page and I just want to make sure I did it correctly. Could someone please look at the page and make sure? Also, could someone please click the image and look at what I did copyright-wise? I found the image on a certain website (a website that sells autographs), so I simply added a link to the website.

Thanks, Sheil

You did it properly. Good work :) Re to the copyrights, you said on the image page that the image is freely usable with attribution - where does it say this on the website? It's good to know you're being mindful of copyrights, however. Thanks Dysprosia 13:27, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]


math typesetting problems

Apologies if this isn't the right place. Why doesn't the following work?


In a paper in Nature in 2003, it is shown that , the expected abundance of the n-th most abundant species, may be calculated by


(this is an early draft). Why does the maths typesetting stop and the text revert to text?

any tips welcome

Robinh 20:46, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

You had an extra </math> in the middle, so you were inadvertently telling it that the maths typesetting should stop there! (I've taken it out so you can copy-and-paste the new version, in case anyone's about to say "looks fine to me"). You had ...{\Gamma(1+y)}</math>\frac{\... - easy to miss in amongst all that TeX; it might be a good idea to split it onto multiple lines to make it easier to edit (a single newline within the TeX markup doesn't make any difference to its display).
What a thoroughly scary equation, by the way - keep that thing away from me! - IMSoP 22:37, 8 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

List of National Arms

I added a bunch of links to images to national arms previuously not listed. I just want to make sure its cool.

Rudy Galinda

Not on the list?

Not on what list? - IMSoP 16:54, 9 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Request for feedback

I've just contributed an article for the book Sunshine Sketches of a Little Town and would welcome and feedback or suggestions for improvement. Please use my Talk page to contact me Andrew Sly 02:08, 10 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

the wiki will be locked in a few minutes

Hello people new to this game, but liking it enormously, I find the red message

the wiki will be locked in a few minutes

appears at odd moments. Why? By whom? What does it mean? It sounds vaguely menacing, (viz: If I happen to be around when it happens, will I be locked in, or locked out? Ot even locked up? ) as an error message is certainly disconcerting, and is absolutely unclear to a neophyte like myself.

Grateful for clarification

Richard Brown

Hi Richard. :) It's eye-catching isn't it! A few days ago wikipedia was locked down (inaccessible to read or edit) for a couple of hours during hardware upgrades, that was the warning message that was posted before this happened to let everyone save their work, etc. So the message is old and out of date, and you can ignore it. I'll explain why you're seeing it (and only occasionally).... anonymous users (that is anyone who's accessing wikipedia but who isn't logged in) are served a cached version of pages to reduce the load on our servers. Evidently some of the pages you're looking at were cached a few days ago, when that warning message was relevant. To get rid of it on a single page, try refreshing/reloading it. To stop getting cached versions of pages you need to create an account (all this requires is that you pick a username and password), as logged in users don't get cached pages. I hope that helps. :) fabiform | talk 15:27, 10 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Concatenate Articles

I would like to make a big article out of smaller articles.

[[include ArticleN]]

Is this possible?

It is possible to include elements like this, but we wouldn't use it for standard article content. If you would explain exactly how you want to use them, or why you want to break up a large article like this, it will be easier for me to explain the best course of action. :) fabiform | talk 17:20, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
To elabourate, currently you can include special pre-defined sections, for instance that would be used on multiple pages, by putting them in the MediaWiki namespace. The next version of the software will allow "transclusion" from any namespace, making it technically feasible to do what you seem to be asking (the syntax, by the way, will be {{:ArticleN}} if ArticleN is just in the normal article namespace).
However, I'm going to take a stab in the dark that you want to make a long page easier to edit - in which case you have two options:
  • if it's really really long, maybe it just needs to be in several articles anyway - after all Wikipedia is not paper, and we can make use of the power of hyperlinks...
  • if it's just getting hard to edit, you just need to learn how to use section editing - use appropriate headers, and you can edit the contents of one header independent of the others.
Hope that helps. - IMSoP 18:11, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
This probably should have gone into meta, as it's more of a general mediawiki question and not one specifically for anything I am doing on wikipedia, but thanks for the info, anyway.  :) I'll look forward to the feature in newer versions. Msporled 18:33, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Weight o other planets

Moved to wikipedia:reference desk

Battle of Entries

Hiya, I just recently joined and one of the first articles I've altered is the Whiteness page. The article posted was ill-informed and not that helpful so I added some more info. Later I noticed that someone (a non-registered user (NRU)) reverted the article. We seem to disagree about this topic. The NRU says that "whiteness" means "white people are racist". Whiteness Studies has never made such an assertion. SO- shall I alter the entry once again? Will this turn into a battle of the entries? How do we proceed? Worldtyrant 01:23, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous users have the same rights to edit articles as do those with login accounts. From the history of the article you mention, it looks like you've been removing the "votes for deletion" tag on that page. Please don't do that, even if you feel its insertion wasn't justified. Instead, discuss the matter over on the votes for deletion page, and an admin will remove the VfD tag once the discussion and voting is done. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:28, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and in general what you're describing (one person adding stuff, another removing that and putting in something else, repeat at nauseum) is described here: Wikipedia:Edit war. It seems to be a hobby for some :) -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:31, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I can see it now - we should create a Wikipedia Dungeons and Dragons scenario. I'll be Grethor, a 9th level edit warrior, chaotic-evil affilation. If I get promoted one more level, I'll learn the spell of permanent reversion. →Raul654 18:11, May 13, 2004 (UTC)

Is it OK to exactly quote dictionary definitions (with attribution)?

On controversial topics, it's good to quote a difinitive source. But dictionary publishers are in the business of selling dictionaries. Is it OK to quote a definition exactly? Mackerm 03:37, May 12, 2004 (UTC)

You wouldn't be quoting the whole entry. Most dictionaries give details of pronounciation, alternative spellings, examples of usage etc. I can't see how you could violate copyright if you are sensible and only quote the actual definition, as long as you put it in quotation marks and attribute correctly. It's not as if we would be doing it for every article. only the ones where the definition is variable. theresa knott 08:47, 12 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Mackerm 14:20, May 12, 2004 (UTC)

Spellcheck

Could you provide a spellcheck while editing pages?

Link to user talk page

How do I get to my "user talk" page? I use the "Nostalgia" skin, and suspect that the problem is in the skin.

Go to User talk:Rajasekaran Deepak. Also, when you log in, you should see (in the upper-right hand corner of your browser) your username, and (talk) next to it. →Raul654 23:39, May 12, 2004 (UTC)
When I am logged in; from any page on this site, I must be able to directly go to my "user talk" page. The "Nostalgia" skin gives direct access to "special pages" using a drop-down menu. The "user talk" page ought to be included in this menu.
The "user" page also ought to be included in this ("special pages") menu.

POV to VFD

MediaWiki:PremierCollegesofIndia is listed on VFD, citing POV as the reason.

  1. Isn't it wrong to list on VFD just because of POV?
  2. Can I remove it from VFD?
  1. Not necessarily
  2. Absolutely not.
→Raul654 23:42, May 12, 2004 (UTC)

Number of Words in English&French

Could you please give me the web site address(es) where I could find the number of words contained in the English and French (and other) languages? Thank you Chris

Three tildes and four tildes

When I add three tildes or four tildes, I don't get my "user" page (I have created my "user" page already). Could you look into the three tildes <Rajasekaran Deepak> and four tildes <Rajasekaran Deepak 18:06, 2004 May 13 (UTC)>?

Your user page still does not exist (as it evidenced by the red links above). It has no page history either, so you probably missed something. →Raul654 18:12, May 13, 2004 (UTC)
Indeed. Deepak made a page called User:Deepak Rajasekaran, although his username is Rajasekaran Deepak. Deepak: yea, it's weird, but the softwar lets you make pages in the user namespace that aren't really your userpage. The pages created by the tildes are the correct ones. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:15, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I'll move it to the correct location if no one beats me to it. Isomorphic 18:16, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
You created a user page at User:Deepak Rajasekaran, but you are actually User:Rajasekaran Deepak. I moved the user page to where it should be. In future, get to your user page by clicking on your username in the very top right. :-) That way you'll avoid further confusion. Jwrosenzweig 18:16, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Hehe. Beaten. Isomorphic 18:17, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=3566123"