MyWiki:Help desk/Archives/2010 June 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This template must be substituted. Replace {{Archive header with {{subst:Archive header.

{| width = "100%"

|- ! colspan="3" align="center" | Help desk |- ! width="20%" align="left" | < June 1 ! width="25%" align="center"|<< May | June | Jul >> ! width="20%" align="right" |Current help desk > |}

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.


June 2

[edit source]

Wiki stopped working on BlackBerry Fri May-07-2010

[edit source]

It was working fine, but now I get the following error message

Uncaught exception:java.lang.ClassCastException

I spoke to Sprint Tues Jun-02-2010 and they do not have a solution

The phone is a Sprint BlackBerry World Edition —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.68.134.132 (talk) 00:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

From the history of MediaWiki:Common.js: "Disabling mobile until mobile system upgrades can be completed". This was done by Hcatlin who seems to have done a lot of work on mobile access. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 00:35, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Problem

[edit source]

I created my account Joe Chill 2 specifically for Commons with an explanation on that page as to why. Now, I see that it's appearing as a new user here also. How can I fix it so that the account is only usable on Commons? I don't want to be viewed as a sockpuppeteer. Joe Chill (talk) 00:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

See m:Help:Unified login for why your account is propagating across Wikimedia projects. An account is judged only based on its edits. This has two effects. First, if you make no edits to any project but Commons using the Joe Chill 2 account it is effectively the same here as having a single login. The only difference is that if someone were to look at the logs for the account here they would see the account was created automatically by unified login and that it has never been used to edit. Second, socking is not just use of a second account but use of it with some bad intent, such as vote stacking and so on. Many users have two alternate accounts, often in the manner of account and account 2 (I have one); see Wikipedia:Sock puppetry#Legitimate uses. There is nothing to worry about, no possibility of being viewed as a sockpuppeteer unless you engage in sockpuppetry, which is not just editing with an alternate (doppelganger) account, much less having an alternate account name that was created automatically that has no edits.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Difference between Twinkle's built-in reverter and Rollback?

[edit source]

I was thinking about (re)applying for rollback in order to use Huggle. However, upon looking at the actual rollback abilities, it appears almost the same as Twinkle. It appears that the only difference is that Rollback is quicker, isn't limited to Twinkle, and doesn't have any sort of confirmation dialog. Am I missing something? Hmmwhatsthisdo (talk) 01:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, the rollback that's granted to accounts is actual rollback that is a function of the MediaWiki software. The rollback that is used with Twinkle isn't really rollback, it's just called rollback but basically just uses the undo tool. Jeffrey Mall (talkcontribs) - 03:13, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok. Because it seems like Twinkle's rollback tool is a clone of (A knockoff, if you will - No offense!) MW's rollback tool. Hmmwhatsthisdo (talk) 04:38, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Rollback is much, much faster. Twinkle is good for New Page Patrol, but Huggle is faster for general RC patrol. {{Sonia|talk|simple}} 05:46, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Is there a place to request help in verifying material in pay only sites?

[edit source]

A number of times the results on a news.google search would appear to verify claims that I want to enter into an article, but when I click to the source itself, it is a pay site and the part of the article that is freely visible does not contain the actual information that I wanted. I am wondering if there is a place on Wikipedia where I could place specifc requests for verification of that material and someone who has an EBSCO or New York Times or other subscription to the paid site would be able to see the whole content of the article and be able to confirm or deny that the source actually says.

In particular this time, I am wondering if [1] from the Irish Times would be able to confirm

  • In 2001, Ireland’s first case of internet defamation involved ads placed on Escort Ireland by a Galway businessman which included a rival businesswoman’s personal details and led to her receiving over a hundred calls asking for prostitution services.

for the article Escort Ireland. Thanks! Active Banana (talk) 02:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a case for Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request (WP:REX to its friends). BencherliteTalk 02:28, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
That does indeed! TYVM. Active Banana (talk) 02:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Performance

[edit source]

Wikipedia seems to be getting very slow again just lately. Is it just me, or is anyone else noticing the same? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.26.25 (talk) 02:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Occasionally Wikipedia does go through periods of slowness; this is often marked with a banner on the top of one's watchlist notifying users of lag. A few minutes ago, that banner was up; so yes, the lag is affecting everyone. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:45, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I meant consistently over the past days and weeks, not just in the last few minutes. 86.173.36.183 (talk) 14:02, 2 June 2010 (UTC).
The new layout could be slow on your computer. (If you have an old one or a old browser) would you like to use the old view? ~QwerpQwertus ·_Talk_·_Contribs_· The Wiki Puzzle Piece Award
23:04, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Applying {{REVISIONTIMESTAMP}} to a different page

[edit source]

Hello. I am trying to indicate when a certain page was last edited using the {{REVISIONTIMESTAMP}} magic word, but I want to call the last revision of a different page than the page that I'm actually putting the code on. The relevant help page states that the magic word can, "take a parameter, to operate on a page other than the current page." But how is this parameter specified? Using a pipe (|) or a colon (:) doesn't seem to work (mind, the page I want to specify is in the Template namespace, and so has a colon in its full name). Any help is appreciated. Robert Skyhawk (T C B) 02:58, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

The notice on the page says "The above can all take a parameter, to operate on a page other than the current page" (emphasis added). The magic word at issue is below that notice. I can actually hear you smacking your forehead:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
D'oh! You have good ears. Well, is there some way to do what I'm asking, or will I have to find another way? Robert Skyhawk (T C B) 03:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
In the event that nobody knows how to do this, would you care to explain why you want to? Maybe there is a different approach. See the links under WP:EIW#Query; maybe the MediaWiki API can do what you want (I'm not sure). --Teratornis (talk) 06:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Wayne Bonney

[edit source]

Could someone please tell me why I can not be listed under my own name in Wikipedia. My name is Wayne Bonney I am a digital graphic artists. Living in Calgary,Alberta. Canada. You may find me at: http://waynebonney.com Yours truly, Wayne Bonney —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.75.30.52 (talk) 03:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Individuals are generally only listed who have an article on Wikipedia, or who can be demonstrated to be likely to one day have an article on Wikipedia. Please refer to Wikipedia's inclusion guideline for biographies.A list of every digital artist ever would simply be unmanagable, and also beyond the scope of Wikipedia. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:51, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Recently, I added photos of recycling bins around the globe on Recycling bin. I've considered adding the photos in turn to the cities they're from. I fear someone may believe this too much of a trivial contribution. But I feel that it still has some ties to the place they're from. I look forward to reading anyone's post to this question. Yours sincerely, SwisterTwister (talk) 06:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

The typical thing to do when the photos start overwhelming the article's text is to build an image gallery page on commons, and place {{Commons}} at the bottom of the article (with appropriate parameters, according to the template's documentation). Someguy1221 (talk) 06:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
See Commons:COM:EIC#Gallery for more about that. --Teratornis (talk) 06:13, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
You can also categorize images on Commons more thoroughly than on the English Wikipedia; see Commons:COM:EIC#Cat. I've seen image categories getting deleted on Wikipedia that do not get deleted on Commons. If you refer to images that are on the English Wikipedia and not on Commons, see WP:MITC. There is no account on Commons with your username yet: Commons:User:SwisterTwister. Go to Special:MergeAccount and grab it now. See WP:SUL. --Teratornis (talk) 06:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
See Commons:Category:Recycling by country and Commons:Category:Sorted waste containers. I did not see a related gallery, but I did not search very hard for one. --Teratornis (talk) 06:21, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Political affiliation

[edit source]

In the future, please note that there are two political parties - Republican and Democrat. They are both in the democratic system. When stating the political affiliation of a Democrat, please use the term "Democrat" not, as you erroneously stated in the case of Theresa Heinz Democratic. I thought for sure you would know better. Sincerely Timothy E. R. Moulson —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.88.191.139 (talk) 06:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

If you refer to the link with text: "Democratic" in the {{Infobox Person}} template in the Teresa Heinz article, clicking the link takes you to Democratic Party (United States). Do you dispute that this is the name of the political party of which Ms. Heinz is currently a member? --Teratornis (talk) 06:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Most readers aren't going to click through to see what is underneath. Many members of the Democrat Party find it offensive to use the term "Democratic" as a party affiliation.--SPhilbrickT 11:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)Sorry, had it backwards. The party name is the Democratic Party. Some members are offended when the term "Democrat Party" is used.--SPhilbrickT 11:05, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Gentle reminder: there are many, many more than two political parties... internationally, and in the United States. TFOWRidle vapourings 11:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Democratic is misleading and can be though of as subtle propaganda by certain people. Do not to opinionate because it destroys Wikipedias reputation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.169.137.113 (talk) 14:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

How can it be misleading? It is the name of the party. It's no more misleading than calling David Cameron a Conservative or Gordon Brown Labour.  – ukexpat (talk) 15:36, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I think I understand where he is coming from, though the objection tends to be backwards from this. In common usage by the Democratic Party itself, a member (noun) is a Democrat, the party (adjective) is Democratic. So Al Gore is a Democrat, and was the Democratic Nominee for President in 2000. Most of the misuse is with the pejorative term Democrat Party, see Democrat Party (phrase). As for the Infobox, I generally would express a line in the Infobox as "Her A is B", so that "Her Ethnicity is Portuguese" or "Her Residence is Boston", so the B would be a noun. However to properly use a noun here, it would have to be "Her Political Party is the Democratic Party", which seems a little wordy for an infobox. Not sure what the solution is, but I thought I would put out that information.Naraht (talk) 15:47, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I think the IP is concerned that saying Democratic about the Democratic Party (United States) could be seen as implying that other parties, specifically the Republican Party (United States), are not for democracy. I disagree with this. Everybody, including Republicans, calls it the Democratic Party because that is their name. A Google search of the official website of the Republican Party finds lots of hits on "Democratic". Nearly all of them are referring to the Democratic Party. Wikipedia shouldn't change a name which is both correct and used by everybody. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Cannot change one detail of a page I moved and edited.

[edit source]

I was successful in editing and moving the page Little Fugue in G Minor BWV 578 to Fugue in G Minor "Little", BWV 578. I wanted to change all references to Little in the title. I did all except one: the first link in External Links:

Little Fugue in G Minor: Free scores at the International Music Score Library Project.

The first word "Little" (part of the link to the external page) I edited by deleting. But, in the edited page, it is still there.

How do I edit this word?

I read the help pages on links, specifically external links such as www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Links, but could not see how to edit the link.

RGB2 (talk) 06:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Here's a link to the article for anyone who wants it: Fugue in G minor, "Little", BWV 578
In general, it's polite to provide a link to the article that you're referring to. After all, if you're asking for help, you want to make it as easy as possible for people to see what you're talking about. Dismas|(talk) 06:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I've edited the first external link. Look here to see the change. Is this what you had in mind? -- John of Reading (talk) 06:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Article translated by friend - does he need an account?

[edit source]

Hello, I was wondering if the following coule be an issue: Some of my friends would like to translate an article, but don't want to open an account for just this translation. Would it be ok if I added the translated version or would that be against the copyright-rules? Cheers, alias 79 06:45, 2 June 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alias 79 (talkcontribs)

There shouldn't be a problem with that. Any derivatives of a Wikipedia text are implicitly licensed for re-use on Wikipedia. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 08:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

File extension does not match MIME type

[edit source]

I keep getting the error "File extension does not match MIME type" when I try to upload a new version of a current file. It is ridiculous and I cannot seem to upload anything without getting this error. Can someone explain this to me in nonprofessional terms and tell me what to do to fix the problem? Thanks! Andrew Colvin | Talk 07:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Is the new version of the file in the same exact file format as the original. For instance, are you trying to overwrite a .jpg with a .svg? Someguy1221 (talk) 07:42, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
No it is not the same format (jpeg to png) so I decided to make the image the same format (jpeg) and it worked but the image doesn't show up now. Grrr... Why is this so complicated!

This is the original image that I wanted to overwrite with a new version. This is what happened:

These are the other two attempts at uploading the image and it wont show up!

Andrew Colvin | Talk 07:49, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

You can only overwrite an image with another one of the same type. As for the thumbnail not showing in the second example, clicking through to the image page explains why: MediaWiki will not display thumbnails for collossally-large PNG images. If you want to display an image with over 3000x4000 pixels it needs to be in a lossy format. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Until recently, you could upload a new version of a different type and rename it, but this was fixed as a bug recently. Now you need to upload to a new file and include the licensing info, update the article and tag the old file as orphaned so it will get deleted. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 09:31, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Well how do I go about orphaning the old files? Also, the image was huge as a PNG so I made a JPEG of it but it still wont display. What gives? Andrew Colvin | Talk 19:02, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Tag an orphaned non-free image with {{subst:or-fu-re|xxx}} (check to see if that works on Commons), replacing the xxx with the image name, less namespace (no Image: or File). Neither of the images exist on Commons now, so I can't see what is going on. As to PNG size, I use Corel Paint Shop Pro X3; when saving, there is an optimization option where I can select the palette. If you use a full palette, the size will be large; using an optimized palette only the colors actually used. You can also try PNGGauntlet. I am sure other editors have a similar option. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 00:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I get this same error when uploading a new image, not overwriting anything.

Site change or is it me

[edit source]

For the past short while, maybe a week, Wikipedia pages do not "level" at the bottom of my browser. What I mean is that when I drag the scroll bar to the bottom, or hit end page the screen travels down way past the bottom of the page into white space. A picture is usually easier, so here's a screenshot. The top of the browser screen shown is the bottom of this page. It's not a huge deal but I am finding it annoying and it does slow me down on certain actions. Maybe it's a change to the latest version of Firefox? Really just looking for confirmation of whether this is on my end or if it's a Wikipedia software change.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I do not see this in IE. 86.173.36.183 (talk) 14:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC).
It's probably just a temporary issue at your end. -Reconsider! 14:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Do you happen to have the peerreviewer.js script installed ? Any other scripts perhaps ? —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 21:11, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Aha! I do have peerreviewer, though I've been using it for a few years now without this happening, but that may not mean anything—I updated my java a few days ago and maybe that, in conjunction with the scripts, is the culprit. I'll take the fact that no one dropped by to say they've had the same problem recently as confirmation that it's just me.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
FYI Javascript and Java are two completely different things. Upgrading Java does not affect Javascript. Try commenting out the line with "User:AndyZ/peerreviewer.js" at Special:MyPage/skin.js by placing // before that line, then bypass your cache, and see if that works. Gary King (talk) 03:29, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

I had a login and it does no longer work. Please Help!

[edit source]

Hi, and all apologies for bothering you.

I had registered in wikipedia as a user quite some time ago, say in 2005 or 2006, under the user "IllegalKnowledge" (it may have had a space between, or alternately, a "@yahoo.com" at the end).

I cannot log in using that name (there is no user by that name) and I have tried all forms and places, with and without spaces and/or @domains, including at the secure server and the merged login and what have you. Nothing works. Has it somehow been deleted? If so, Why?

Illegal Knowledge is the name of a TV show that I produce on Access Tucson, in Tucson, Arizona, and is not a company name, but an Ad Hoc of my person, Michael Oatman, and should not be construed as a "Sock Puppet" since I have no account named "Michael Oatman", as I am leaving that name for the Artist in New York State by the same name as me.

Incidentally, there is also no login of "Michael Oatman" (with or without spaces/caps/etc.).

I had edited some sections of "October Suprise" in those years, under the IllegalKnowledge username and the edits I made have been erased. There were some other edits to articles under the same username from this time period and later; perhaps you could look that up and tell me what my user name is.

I would like to continute using that user, with all of the previous edits, however abandoned, attached.

I know you wrote in the instruction to not use my email, but I would appreciate a reply to IllegalKnowledge -=at=- yahoo -=dot=- com, if you could manage to invesigate this matter.

In the interim, I will attempt to create a new user of the same name and character. If you manage to locate the former, could you please merge the two users for me?

I just managed to create my user again. It is IllegalKnowledge, one word, like the email.

Thank you, Michael Oatman —Preceding unsigned comment added by IllegalKnowledge (talkcontribs) 14:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

User accounts are never deleted. Even if you found your old username, accounts cannot be merged either. Are you sure that you created the other account on this site, the English Wikipedia? --Mysdaao talk 15:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I assume you mean October surprise (although interestingly, October suprise works.
here are the edits from 2006 to 2008. I don't see any version of your name. Do you recognize any of the changes as yours? Is it possible you registered, but made edits without being logged in?--SPhilbrickT 16:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Here is a list of all user names starting with "Illegal". The only with "Knowledge" in the name is the one you created today and posted with here. No user with either "Illegal" or "Knowledge" in the name has edited October surprise or October surprise conspiracy theory. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:25, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Wilhelm Scream soundbyte removed

[edit source]

Many people might not recognize it from it's listed uses in film but will be able to know exactly what it is if they hear it. It's a public source why not keep it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.169.137.113 (talk) 14:43, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Can you tell us which article you are referring to please? -- John of Reading (talk) 14:49, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Wild guess based solely on the question - Wilhelm scream. The audio file was removed here [2]. DuncanHill (talk) 14:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

So can it be put back in? ----

The audio file File:Wilhelm.ogg was deleted from Wikipedia because the licensing information was missing, but I see that [The Internet Archive] says the sound is in the public domain. I'll ask HJ Mitchell to review his deletion of the file. Copyright is not my strong point. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
If it can be shown that it is public domain, there should be no problem undeleting it. It should however be on Commons not en Wikipedia as PD files meet Commons licensing criteria. – ukexpat (talk) 15:41, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I've undeleted it for the time being, but the file is tagged as fair use and doesn't have any source information so that will need to be fixed ASAP to prevent it being deleted again. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:00, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
The file File:Wilhelm.ogg, now undeleted, is not the same length as the one from [The Internet Archive], so its source is unknown and I suspect it will have to be deleted again. I've tried to upload the new file to commons but have been totally baffled by the choice of copyrights/licenses on the upload form! -- John of Reading (talk) 16:21, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
What you do is choose any PD license in the dropdown menu, then once uploaded, edit the page and change the license to an appropriate one. I think The Battle Cry Of Freedom.ogg will be instructional to look at as it is a Commons sound file with licensing that is indicated to be public domain at the Internet Archive.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, still baffled. On the commons upload form, all the licensing options listed under the "Public domain" heading clearly don't apply to this file. What, exactly, should I choose? -- John of Reading (talk) 08:20, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
If I have understood Fuhghettaboutit correctly you can choose absolutely any PD licence, even if it is inappropriate, and then edit the page using the Battle Cry Of Freedom.ogg as a guide. Either that or you could choose "none selected" under licensing and put " {{PD-author|Internet Archive}}" in the permission box. Equisetum (talk) 11:09, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
Done. Thanks for the help everyone. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:02, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Request clean up of talk page at the Wrap-up tab of Wikipedia:Tutorial

[edit source]

There are several entries on this page that pretty clearly do not belong there and some have been there for quite some time. Here's a list Richard Finch, Donna Milo, Robert Zeitzman, Nicholas Scott Spray, John Led and time. These entries are distracting and make it harder for a new person to use this page and I think the page is intended for new people! I'm not so good at this yet to know if all of these can be deleted? I'd but happy to do this myself if that's OK. Am I allowed to delete them myself? My impression from what I've read so far is yes but I'd like a confirmation first. --Ngstanton (talk) 14:54, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

First, thank you for your suggestion at Wikipedia talk:Tutorial. I've made a change to the tutorial page which I hope makes it clearer. Full marks for reading the tutorial, too.
The talk pages are not aimed at new users particularly, but are for general discussion of the corresponding article/project page. They can get quite technical or heated at times. From my reading of the Talk page guidelines you shouldn't delete sections from project talk pages; instead they will eventually be archived. There are different guidelines for your own talk page. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:44, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

General Aristide Razu article ,photos upload in the article?

[edit source]

Hi,

About the article I made about my ggrandfather general Aristide Razu ;I didn't know how to upload the pictures so I have send them to photosubmission @wikimedia.org. Is that OK? for the ones who put together the article in the end?

Many thanks.

Andrei Radu Georgescu ,please send the reply ,if any to <blanked> cause i get entangled in this Wikipedia thing —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aristiderazu (talkcontribs) 16:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


Autograph-Cards LLC

[edit source]

I have attempted multiple times to create Autograph-Cards LLC. Each time, I have given more specific, encyclopedic information. There was even a link provided to an interview of its owner. I tried to resolve it with an administrator who deleted it, but he passed me on to another administrator, which looks to be a bot. I cannot even to a Deletion Review because the page cannot be edited anymore. Davidomansky (talk) 17:40, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I cannot see the content because it was deleted (only administrators can see the content of deleted pages) but it was repeatedly deleted under criteria for speedy deletion G11 as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion". Articles on companies have to be written from a neutral point of view and must be notable under certain guidelines (see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)). You can request undeletion at Wikipedia:Deletion review, but it's likely the deletion will be upheld unless you can show the article can be rewritten to not be blatant advertising. --Mysdaao talk 17:49, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I can't request undeletion because to do that, I have to edit the Autograph-Cards LLC article, and am unable to do so unless an administrator lifts it. Davidomansky (talk) 17:40, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

No you don't - just go to Wikipedia:Deletion review and follow the instructions. But before you do that please read WP:SPAM, WP:CORP, WP:FAQO and WP:RS. – ukexpat (talk) 17:59, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
You may also try Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion and request the page be userfied where you can work on it in your userspace. --Mysdaao talk 18:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Please don't encourage a user to have userfied an article about a topic that is obviously not acceptable for inclusion. If it were a case of a notable company or something that was borderline acceptable ... ok ... but there is nothing to work on here - it obviously does not meet our guidelines. Even if someone wrote a neutral, non-promotional article about this company, it would obviously not meet WP:CORP. --B (talk) 19:26, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Improper citation resource

[edit source]

Your Special:BookSources page is wicked cool. However, it has a problem that users need to be made aware of.

In the "Bibliographical information" section, links for how to site the book are given using various formats, which seems useful. However, it seems to consistently give an improper publication city of "San Francisco" with an improper publisher of "Ignatius Press".

Either that resource needs to be removed until OttoBib fixes their broken citation generation tool, or users of the Special:BookSources page need to be made aware that the generated citations contain factual errors.

Unfortunately, it seems I can not edit that page, so I could not add the warning myself.

Example-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0395382548

gives the following APA style citation from Ottobib:

Stebbins, R., (1985). A Field Guide to Western Reptiles and Amphibians. San Francisco: Ignatius Press.

The correct publication city is New York and the correct publisher is Houghton Mifflin Company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FunkyRes (talkcontribs) 17:49, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

The "Bibliographical information" section of Special:BookSources links to OttoBib.com using the ISBN. Wikipedia has no control over its content. --Mysdaao talk 18:11, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

General Aristide Razu

[edit source]

Hi .I would like to make some small modification to the text about my ggrandfather General Aristide Razu:

(translated by me from Constantin Kiritescu-"Razboiul Pentru Intregirea Romaniei"(The War For Wholing Romania 1916-1919,published in 1921) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.114.127.23 (talk) 18:52, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

This is not the right place to create an article. Please do not post article text here
You have to provide references in the article. See WP:RS and WP:CITE.
If that is a translation from a book published in 1921, it is quite likely that it is in copyright, and so your translation is a copyright violation, and not permitted on Wikipedia. Do you have evidence that it is not in copyright? --ColinFine (talk) 20:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)
This page is the help desk, for asking questions about Wikipedia. Please don't place any more large pieces of text here.
The page Aristide Razu is an article, part of the encyclopdia. You edited this page about four hours ago, adding a couple of paragraphs of text. This is the page that will describe the life and achievements of General Aristide Razu.
The page User:Aristiderazu is your user page, space within Wikipedia for you to use. You edited this page about three hours ago, adding a very large amount of text. It is not part of the encyclopedia.
So, to answer your questions: (1) Your text did not show up in the article because you actually edited your user page, not the article. (2) Yes, you must provide sources. You do this by including them as part of the text of the article. For a simple guide to citing sources I suggest you look at this part of the Wikipedia Tutorial.
I must point out that your text is much longer than a typical Wikipedia article - see these guidelines - and that much of the text relates to the Battle of Mărăşeşti which already has an article. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


I agree with John: this is not really of Wikipedia quality. Not only is it very long (see WP:LENGTH), after looking through it (a very long time...), it appears to not meet Wikipedia's NPOV policy. Along with that, it does not follow the manual of style in many forms (see MOS)), and it needs many grammatical and spelling corrections. This work seems more to be of an promotional essay more than anything else, but with (a bit) of work, it can be released into namespace. I recommend putting this in your userspace (here is a good place to put it, after posting this I will copy the current text to it), and once it is done post a notice at Requests for Review (NOT THE ENTIRE ARTICLE), and will go from there. But, keep working, and this could be something.  A p3rson  23:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
That place wasn't such a good place for it; he is really User:Aristiderazu. That user page already has a copy of the text. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:50, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Teardown actually contains two articles

[edit source]
 –  – ukexpat (talk) 17:46, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

greetings: the article for teardown looks like two articles for different things: a real estate term, and a technical term. is that supposed to be that way? i've not seen that before, and only the first one appears in my navigation popup. Badmachine (talk) 21:28, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

It should probably be split into two articles. The equipment stuff (which was added later) going into a new Teardown (equipment) article or something related. – ukexpat (talk) 21:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Which I see you have done! Resolved. – ukexpat (talk) 17:46, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Why are my edits being deleted?

[edit source]

I edited several pages and cited my sources, yet a few moments later they are deleted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JVansen (talkcontribs) 22:21, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

See WP:TWITTER. You cannot use Twitter as a source for claims about living people. BencherliteTalk 22:28, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Image not showing up

[edit source]

I have an image that I attempted to update with a newer version. I used the same format and it worked, but the image is blank. It won’t show up as a thumbnail!?

The image in the link is the old one, but the history section has the new version. Its obvious being that it is the blank one. What is the cause of this and how can I fix it?

Andrew Colvin | Talk 22:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

What year was it established that IP addresses could not edit?

[edit source]

I was just wondering about that because I found an article where a IP address created an article in 2005. Thanks in advance!SwisterTwister (talk) 22:48, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Anonymous page-creation was banned after the so-called "Wikipedia biography controversy", in late 2005. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 23:01, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2005-12-05/Page creation restrictions. BencherliteTalk 23:06, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
To clarify (in response to the wording of the question title), IP editors can still edit - they just can't create pages any more. Gonzonoir (talk) 07:39, 3 June 2010 (UTC)