Please read the following before asking your question:

1. Before asking, please read the FAQ or search the Help desk archive. Your question has probably been answered before.
2. Please be aware that we cannot, under any circumstance, provide medical, legal, or any other sort of advice that is normally regulated by governmental authorities.
3. To ask a new question, click the "Click here to ask your question" link below. Remember to use a descriptive title in the Subject/Headline field and sign your post with 4 tildes (~~~~).
4. After asking your question, check this page for response(s).
5. If there are no timely responses, you may want to try Wikipedia:Highly Active Users to find someone who can help.

Special services:

1. If you place {{helpme}} on your talk page, an editor will visit you there ASAP! (Helpers can find you at Wikipedians looking for help.)
2. If your request specifically requires administrator assistance, place {{adminhelp}} on your talk page. (Administrators can find you at Wikipedians looking for help from administrators.)
3. Join the #wikipedia-en-help IRC chat room for live assistance. New to IRC? Click here to be connected instantly!

January 4

info on Fabiola Gatti doesn't appear

Resolved. Corruptcopper (talk) 17:22, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm a fan of Uruguayan Fabiola Gatti and her pop group The Fabs, www.myspace.com/fabsonline but the links to Wilkipedia don't appear to work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.110.27.67 (talk) 23:53, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

The page Fabiola Gatti was deleted following this discussion. Algebraist 23:58, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Finding all articles by a particular editor

Resolved. Corruptcopper (talk) 17:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi all. I'm doing some cleanup of some articles that were created by a serial plagiarist a while back. Does anyone know a quick way to find all the articles created by a particular username? Cheers! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

This link does it. Regards. Woody (talk) 00:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Note that the toolserver is currently having a few issues, so it might not work for a few days. Woody (talk) 00:31, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Yep - toolserver's still down. That looks like what I want, though. Thanks! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 01:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Display settings

Does anyone know how to change display settings as a test for viewing a page? I have a widescreen monitor, but sometimes I want to know how a page might look on a square CRT monitor to make sure that it isn't being rendered improperly. (Note: I have attempted to change the settings locally on my monitor, but the display driver does not allow for that; I thought there might be an easy way to compare that someone on wikipedia might have come up with.) Thanks! Cardsplayer4life (talk) 04:20, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Can you adjust your browser window so it's not fullscreen? Pseudomonas_(talk) 20:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I could adjust my browser window, sure. How would you know when it is the right proportions, though? I realize that square monitors are 4:3, and widescreen are 16:9, (and I could estimate, or eye ball it) but how would you know for sure that you were at the correct proportion? I generally want to know because sometimes things interfere with each other (images, infoboxes, etc.), and a few pixels one way or the other could make a difference. Cardsplayer4life (talk) 09:21, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Converting excel spreadsheet to wiki markup

Is it possible to create a sortable table in wiki markup from an excel spreadsheet, and if so, how? ←Spidern→ 08:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

See WP:EIW#Import. --Teratornis (talk) 09:45, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

The link leads to here, which lists 3 options that don't explicitly specify that they support sortable tables. Are there any options available that support sortable tables? ←Spidern→ 11:01, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

None of the converters I am familiar with will add the sortable class. After you convert the table, edit it and add class="sortable". --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 11:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Agent.AWF

Resolved. Corruptcopper (talk) 17:29, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Is written in an unusual style. What is the right tag? Kittybrewster ☎ 08:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps template:Technical is a good starting point. But it really seems to warrant something else in addition. -Seidenstud (talk) 09:06, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

{{Wikify}} also. For example, see WP:LEAD and WP:LAYOUT which are a useful start for reminding oneself of what an article should contain. --Teratornis (talk) 09:49, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

You can also explain in detail on Talk:Agent.AWF exactly what you think the article needs. It's often good to elaborate a little on what you see as the problems, since the complaint templates may not be very specific. For example, saying an article is "too technical" doesn't clearly point out which sentences you found impenetrable. On the talk page you can list the exact sentences, or some of them, that are not easy to understand. That will make it easier for an expert to know which parts someone else doesn't understand. It's often hard for experts to be aware of exactly what someone else does not know, when they know all of it. So, the more specific you can make your complaints, the sooner someone might fix them. --Teratornis (talk) 09:54, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Blunder at wikimedia

Resolved.

I tried to upload an image at wikimedia. In an attempt to rename it better, I mistakenly uploaded a duplicate. How do I get rid of one of those?--Leif edling (talk) 13:57, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Got the answer at wikimedia help.--Leif edling (talk) 14:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Template for image links

I know that we have a number of templates for users and articles which, taking the article or username as a parameter, generate a list of links to talk pages, history, etc. For example, {{userlinks}} and {{article}} generate

• TenOfAllTrades (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
• Wikipedia (|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

respectively. Is there a similar template for pages in the File: (Image:) namespace? TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:02, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

{{li}}, which generates Image:Example.png (|talk|history|links|watch|logs). Xenon54 15:37, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia : A propaganda of UK Unioinism?

Is Wikipedia supposed to be A propaganda of UK Unioinism? 78.148.91.80 (talk) 17:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

No. Algebraist 17:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

But how come I see "London, United Kingdom" everywhere? 78.148.91.80 (talk) 17:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Because that is the country in which London is located. The official name is United Kingdom as used in international organisations such as the UN. Woody (talk) 17:53, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

But how about London, England? I know that's true (the London, UK thing). 78.148.91.80 (talk) 17:55, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

• Mentioning the country is the common standard when clarifying place names. - 87.211.75.45 (talk) 18:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(places)#Countries and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (settlements). At such time as the United Kingdom chooses to Balkanize itself, then we can name London according to a smaller containing geopolitical unit. Also, I think the word you mean is "Unionism". If you're going to accuse Wikipedia of something, please spell it correctly, and ideally link it, to help the 1000+ worldwide daily readers of the Help desk understand what heinous transgression they are guilty of (many Help desk volunteers aren't aware of the latest political row going on in the (still) United Kingdom, particularly those of us who spell words like "color"). And by the way, London, England exists as a redirect to the primary article title, which is just: London. Evidently London is notable enough not to need further qualification in its article title. We have a London (disambiguation) page to list all the other pretenders. Note that Wikipedia has something to offend just about everyone. And yet Wikipedia, despite its near-universal offensiveness, has become one of the world's top-five Web properties or something like that. The other top sites offend lots of people too - I detect a pattern here. --Teratornis (talk) 19:05, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Copyright violation?

Hello, I noticed that there is a chart of textual differences on the Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition page that seems to be lifted verbatim from the back of that particular translation of the Bible. Normally I would delete the chart without hesitation but this seems to be information that anyone could compile independently if they spent enough time doing it. Do you think this is a clear violation of copyright (i.e. should be deleted) or not? Thank you. LovesMacs (talk) 23:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

The Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition article makes it pretty clear that the work is under copyright. I don't see much wiggle room there for an extended verbatim copy. You might mention your concern on the talk page before taking an ax to it. See for example the section with the amusing title (as if organized religion has ever been in the forefront of intellectual progress): Talk:Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition#Why can't they copyleft bibles? (I've read the Bible cover to cover several times, and I don't recall seeing anything in it that could support the modern notion of intellectual property. Other than possibly the mark of the beast.) --Teratornis (talk) 02:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

January 5

How to add a search term to an already existing article?

Resolved. Corruptcopper (talk) 19:15, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello,

Is there a way to add a search term to an already existing article?

Eg: User searches for "abc", and there are no search results. The full name is "xyz: abc", but the short/common name "abc". I want to set up a redirect to "xyz:abc".

--Agamemnus (talk) 02:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

See WP:Redirect. Algebraist 02:41, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Bahia Honda MO or MOE giant hammerhead shark Florida Keys

New to wiki Not sure how to categorize ask for stories etc. sorry if I am in the wrong place. please redirect. Thanks for your help - I am not very good with the comuter since my seizure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moebh (talk • contribs) 03:11, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

It's somewhat difficult to understand what you are trying to find. Wikipedia has articles on various words you used in your question heading: Bahia Honda Key, Hammerhead shark, Florida Keys, and even Bahia and Honda although I doubt you are looking for those last two. We have disambiguation pages for MO and MOE but I'm not sure what you are getting at there. If you are looking for news reports, try Google Search, Wikinews, or ask on the Reference desk. You can try googling for your question heading:

• Bahia Honda MO or MOE giant hammerhead shark Florida Keys

--Teratornis (talk) 05:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Apparently, there is, or was, in the Bahia Honda area a large hammerhead that folks nicknamed Moe (see this page, for instance, about halfway down). It doesn't seem to me to be notable enough for an article, but Moebh could try creating one if s/he can supply enough reliable sources to support notability. Alternatively, s/he might submit the article idea to WP:RA and see if anyone else can put together an acceptable article. Deor (talk) 14:23, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Pages fading

Do the pages of Wikipedia ever fade away? I was looking at a page today when for a brief moment(2 seconds) the words started to blend in with the white background. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wcmainz (talk • contribs) 04:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Are you running Windows Vista? I've seen all sorts of weird behavior on my laptop computer that runs Vista. Almost enough to make me give up and install Linux. But not quite. --Teratornis (talk) 05:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

printing of an article on E.C.T.

When printing this article it dose not print out some of the content. it stops at (roughly estimating a ___) under Administration and then starts up again at (physicians in its prescriptions___). this is just one example,Im I doing something wrong? I checked my printer and everything was working correctly. please help me resolve this issue. thank you <e-mail address deleted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.140.191 (talk) 04:14, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Are you trying to print the printable version, accessed by clicking the appropriate link on the left hand side of the article window? – ukexpat (talk) 15:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Barack Obama image on United States presidential election, 2008

I'm getting a weird rendering, for which I have no explanation: On United States presidential election, 2008, in contrast to all other pages on which the exact same version of the portrait image (File:Poster-sized portrait of Barack Obama.jpg) is being transcluded, the image appears jolted, i.e. the aspect ratio is not the same as the source image (height is reduced disproportionately).

I've confirmed this by taking and comparing screenshots and I get the same result using both FF3 and IE6 on Windows XP. I'm at a loss what the problem might be. AFAIK, this should be technically impossible to achieve in MediaWiki, and nothing in the markup of Template:Infobox Election looks in slightest suspicious. Moreover, in the same article and infobox, John McCain's image is being rendered perfectly normal with truthful aspect ratio. 78.34.140.1 (talk) 04:47, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Nevermind, purging the cache resolved the problem. 78.34.140.1 (talk) 05:15, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Editing a title page

Hi everyone, how can I edit the title of a page? For example, the page named "Even in My Dreams" has been written with a lower case "m" in "my" instead of "My". How can I do it? Thank you very much. LisaSmithNY (talk) 06:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

In order to change the title of a page, the page must be moved. New users are not allowed to move pages due to vandalism. I will make the change for you. My mistake, I was under the impression that your account was fairly new. You should have the move tab up at the top of the Even in my Dreams article. Dismas|^(talk) 06:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and moved it, since I wanted to do a bit of cleanup to it. Deor (talk) 14:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Dhimmi

Could someone who is more familiar with the correct formatting of a lead section please look at the Dhimmi article? It starts out with "A dhimmi (" but that parenthesis is never closed and I'm not at all sure where it should be closed. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 11:15, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I've taken a crack at fixing it (actually, I think it was a different, internal parenthesis that wasn't closed). There was a missing closing quotation mark as well. Deor (talk) 13:59, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Dismas|^(talk) 01:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Category Talk

Which speedy deletion template should I use on a category talk page(eg. Category_talk:Palestinian_Eastern_Orthodox_Christians with only a few words?Jamie Shaw (talk) 11:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Why is it necessary to delete that? It seems to me that someone has stated that they don't believe that someone should be listed within that cat. They could have worded it more clearly, I'll grant you that, but it seems relevant to the content of the page. Dismas|^(talk) 11:29, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

editing

Dear friend--after I've logged in to edit I'm sent to a page of news and the like, and when I navigate back to the page needing editing I've been logged out. How do I get from the article with an error, to the log-in, and back to the error? Thanks for your help! Clay2 (talk) 13:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

• Did you hit the "remember me" button when you logged in? - Mgm|^(talk) 13:48, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

If you navigate back with your browser's "Back" button, the browser may reload its locally cached version of the old page, which will show you as logged out when you really aren't logged out on the server. To see if this is the case, refresh the old page in your browser (on some browsers, you can do that by pressing Ctrl-R). --Teratornis (talk) 20:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

editing templates

For a template I created I copied and edited an existing design. Now I have attempted to add an extra year to the template and although it is in the template it will not show up on any of the templates which are embedded on the pages. Also the editing and viewing links link to the original template. How do I solve these issues the template is Template:UK Rock Chart and it is on page UK Rock Chart. --Hammard (talk) 14:13, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

The year 2009 is showing up for me in the transclusion on UK Rock Chart, and it links to the appropriate page. Cache problem on your end, perhaps? Or perhaps the change just had not completely propagated when you were looking at the page. Deor (talk) 14:50, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Template gone wonky?

Hi. For some reason the (not particularly widely used template) {{Subscription}} is no longer doing its thing, which is to say "subscription required". It says, "Unrecognised language code": (subscription required). Unless it says something different for you, in which case the problem is clearly on my end. :) Can somebody fix this or direct me to a similar template that works? I figure there must be one, or there'd be more transclusion than there is to that one. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that it works by calling a totally inappropriate template, which has now been rewritten such that the hack no longer works. I've changed it to display as it used to without the silly transclusion. Algebraist 15:18, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:20, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Making a photo visible in an article but unavailable for copying

Resolved.

I'm preparing a biographical article and would like to include a photo in it. However, the people who provided me the photo have asked if there is any way we could display the image while preventing the general public from freely downloading the image and using it for unrelated purposes. For example, some people might use the photo but forget to include the credit to the photographer under the image. We realize of course that Wikipedia and HTML in general are open-source and that content is generally available to all users. But we have seen simple javascripts and other apps that can make content visible to viewers without actually embedding the material in the HTML. Are there any Wikipedia-compatible techniques for presenting an image in a Wikipedia article, while limiting the options for free downloading of the image? Thank you for your advice! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Propagator (talk • contribs) 15:58, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

That goes against Wikipedia's copyright policies. Most images on Wikipedia are released under a free license (GFDL/creative commons/Public domain) and everyone is allowed to modify and distribute. Fair use images are allowed if they satisfy the criteria, but anyone can still download it. Also what those people are asking is technically not possible on any wiki as far as I can tell (Even if it is, its use will definitely be frowned upon by other editors). If they wish to provide images for Wikipedia, they must be provided under a free license through the OTRS system. See also Wikipedia:Image use policy--Unpopular Opinion (talk) 16:15, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree with this. You may be able to add an external link to a photograph on another website. Kittybrewster ☎ 16:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Wikipedia accepts free licenses that require attribution of the photographer. But even on Wikipedia the attribution goes not under the image in the article but rather on a separate image description page.—teb728 t c 21:02, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

• We allow pictures that require someone to give credit to the original source, but not allowing someone to copy an image at all because they could forget is against the principle of Wikipedia. Sorry. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:11, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

You should be aware that what you are asking is not possible on any website, wiki or no. If a use can view an image, they can download it. The techniques you refer to can make this more annoying, but cannot make it impossible. Algebraist 01:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for all this help! I'm new to Wikipedia and totally impressed with the quick and thoughtful responses. When I shared your advice with the owners of the photo, they agreed to let us post the image without protection. Propagator (talk) 03:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Deleted article still not on Deletionpedia

I created an article about Patrick Dunnevant, an American Christian apologist who makes his opinions known through blogging and online videos, and it was deleted eight days ago. However, it has still not been uploaded onto Deletionpedia, and I'm not sure why. I certainly didn't say anything malicious, and I don't think I wrote anything against copyright - all I did was put in one quote from a social networking site. Could you please tell me why it hasn't been added yet? Jprulestheworld (talk) 19:28, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletionpedia is not a related project, you will have to ask on their site. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 19:35, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

This is Deletionpedia's page explaining why a deleted page may not be on their site. – ukexpat (talk) 20:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Everything Channel Posting Deleted

I posted an overview of Everything Channel that was deleted by your staff. It is a media company in the technology. And has a similar business model to the companies listed at the following links: http://en.wikipedia.org/en/Forrester_Research, http://en.wikipedia.org/en/Usa_today, and http://en.wikipedia.org/en/Techweb and their information is still posted. Can you help me get this information reposted, please?Delllatitude (talk) 20:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

It was deleted as blatant advertising, please see WP:Spam. Also take a look at WP:YFA and WP:CORP. – ukexpat (talk) 20:52, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

And see WP:BFAQ and WP:PEACOCK. On Wikipedia we do not have "staff" in the usual corporate sense. Instead Wikipedia has thousands of volunteer editors from around the world who coordinate their efforts by following a complex set of policies and guidelines. The more effort one puts into reading and learning the rules here, the more productively one is able to edit. Creating new articles from scratch that "stick" is one of the most demanding editing tasks on Wikipedia. Most users will need to accumulate perhaps 1000 edits to existing articles before they know enough to reliably create new articles that won't get deleted for running afoul of one or more of Wikipedia's arcane rules. In other words, Wikipedia can be pretty tough on new arrivals who assume they understand how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia is very different than anything most people have experienced before. It takes time and effort for most people to grasp. If you're serious about editing here, you might want to read the book Wikipedia - The Missing Manual, which pretty much explains what you'll need to know, and presents it in a logical order. All the same information is in our free online help, but it's hard for a newcomer to find a logical order to read the online help, which can overwhelm with its gigantic tangled ball of hypertext. --Teratornis (talk) 23:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Where to post for help on a dodgy-looking edit

Resolved. Poster referred to WP:AN/I ukexpat (talk) 14:29, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm a bit concerned that this edit may contravene Wikipedia guidelines by linking to inappropriate material. Where's the best place to report it please? Thanks Rjwilmsi 22:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

That is very concerning. Post at WP:AN/I, where administrators can deal with it and report to the proper authorities. Xenon54 23:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Have done that. Rjwilmsi 08:19, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

January 6

Check edits, please

Resolved. ukexpat (talk) 03:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Could someone check the edits of this user. I'm at work right now and given the subject of the articles that they're editing, I'd rather not check the external links that they're adding (spamming?) while on a work computer. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 01:25, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Yeah. Looks like spam to me. Just links to Celeb-O-Rama. Reverted and warned. -Seidenstud (talk) 02:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Dismas|^(talk) 02:25, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Text scans on Commons

Resolved. Poster referred to Commons Help desk. ukexpat (talk) 14:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

What's the point of having scans of pages and pages of text on Commons? Especially if they're never used. Dismas|^(talk) 03:50, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

You may have to ask on commons:Commons:Help desk. commons:Commons:Project scope explains what belongs on Commons, and I'm not immediately sure how the file you mention fits into that. You could also try asking the uploader what he or she intends to do with that file. Maybe it appeared somewhere once upon a time but the containing page got deleted or someone edited out the image. Maybe someone plans to use these text scans in a reCAPTCHA-type of scheme, who knows? --Teratornis (talk) 06:39, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll check those pages. There are hundreds (thousands?) of these pages on Commons. Dismas|^(talk) 08:37, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Table height problems

Resolved.

On User talk:SpecialWindler/Sandbox4/test, I have a trancluded template. You'll notice the height of the rows do not wrap around the text, and seem to be a particular height. Why is this and how do you get rid of it.

The template code is on User talk:SpecialWindler/Sandbox4/test

Thanks for your help in advanced.  The Windler talk  04:02, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

See my reply to the next question about substituting the template instead of transcluding it, so you can see the resulting wikitext. Whenever you are having trouble getting a template to generate a table with a particular appearance, you should first manually create a sample table that looks the way you want. Then you have the table wikitext that you want the template to generate, giving you something to compare against the result of substituting the template on your user sandbox page. As it stands, you are trying to compare a mental concept of what you want the template to look like, against the complex code in the template. That puts you one level of abstraction away on both ends from what you really want to be comparing. Do you follow me? If you have the table code that you want the template to generate, then you have turned a very vague problem into a very specific problem. --Teratornis (talk) 06:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've experiemented, and to its simple level, what I want is User:SpecialWindler/Sandbox4/test/expierement/what.

But when I put into a template, (The code here), it dosen't work in the height factor.

Seen here User talk:SpecialWindler/Sandbox4/test/expierement, notice the height of the tables is too high. Why??  The Windler talk  23:06, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry, I have fixed it myself.  The Windler talk  03:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Help with a template in development

Can someone help me with a template I'm trying to develop. You can see it in action here. As you can see there is some extra white space on those rows which do not have a description and I'm having a devil of the time removing it. The inclusion that should be edited can be found here. Any help would be much appreciated. --Deadly∀ssassin 04:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

One template debugging trick is to substitute the template into your user sandbox page, and save your edit. Then edit your sandbox page and you can see the wikitext code that results when Wikipedia expands your template. Otherwise, if you only transclude the template during your testing, it can be very difficult to imagine what your template code is turning into, since you never see the intermediate expanded wikitext, only the final HTML rendering in your browser. You can also try looking at the HTML code by viewing the page source in your browser. Occasionally that might also give some insight, but usually the real information comes from substituting the template and looking at the wikitext you are getting. --Teratornis (talk) 06:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip, when I subst it looks like it's not working properly - the true expression of the #if statement doesn't get through to the substituted page. Could this be a bug in wikimedia, or a problem with my code? The substituted page is here --Deadly∀ssassin 07:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of this article

Resolved. Jojo comics deleted ukexpat (talk) 21:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

What criterion for speedy deletion would best apply to this article? Does it even qualify for speedy deletion? The closest of the criteria would be A7, but it is still pretty vague, as the article is not a bio, company, or band, and no specific template stands out. ---RCB _talk 05:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Don't think it meets any speedy criteria as books are exempt from CSD#a7. Prod or AfD it if you want it deleted. --Unpopular Opinion (talk) 05:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to be a book though.---RCB _talk 06:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, the article says nothing about the media it was published in. Assuming it was a series of comic books or comic strips in some newspaper, a7 doesn't apply. Article doesn't assert notability but still it doesn't look like a speedy candidate to me. --Unpopular Opinion (talk) 07:40, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

• However, it does appear it is a clear candidate for WP:AFD. Make sure you read the relevant policies and guidelines before nominating. Especially WP:BEFORE - Mgm|^(talk) 10:20, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
• I've tagged it as no-context. It should be noted that there are actually historical comics by the title Jo-Jo and Jojo; this is none of them. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

You mean its a hoax? It isn't a short article though. I fail to see how {{db-context}} would apply sorry :/ --Unpopular Opinion (talk) 15:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually if you strip out the listcruft, it is short. – ukexpat (talk) 15:52, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Messages

HELLO?!?! this had happened more than 10 times

after visiting many articles in wikipedia, the next day i will have a new message saying that I was vandalising an article. OK, so i went to see which article it was, and to my surprise, it was a article that i never see before. and something ironic, I NEVER gave a sh!t about editing any article and didn't even edit anything before. so wad the heck are they saying when they sae that i was vandalising when i DIDN'T EVEN GAVE A SH!T ABOUT EDITING ANYTHING!?

for the last time, I DO NOT TOUCH AND NEVER EDIT ANY ARTICLE'S CONTENT. :) SO PLEASE. i dun wanna receive any more this sh!tty messages —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jovicci (talk • contribs) 07:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

You have a shared IP address. Someone else used that IP to vandalize articles, and when the IP was allocated to you by your ISP, you received those warning messages. Just ignore them :) --Unpopular Opinion (talk) 07:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Now that you have an account, you won't receive those notices if you are logged in. Dismas|^(talk) 08:35, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

And just a friendly word in closing -- please do not be so confrontational and please do not use offensive language, albeit thinly disguised. You are much more likely to get helpful responses if you just chill a little. – ukexpat (talk) 14:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't know, George Carlin made a lot of money off the Seven dirty words, which isn't to say profanity is equally lucrative in less-skilled hands. As Help desk volunteers, part of our puzzle is to determine how much a questioner knows about Wikipedia. Use of profanity and CAPSLOCK indicates that the questioner is probably very new to Wikipedia and hasn't yet learned the customs here. This can be useful to help us determine how to tailor our response. One needs to address a Wikipedia expert differently than one addresses a newbie who doesn't know "SH!T" about Wikipedia, so as not to insult the expert's intelligence, or befuddle the newbie by talking over his/her/its head. --Teratornis (talk) 19:19, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I must just be old-fashioned fuddy-duddy, but a polite, measured approach is more likely to elicit a response from me. – ukexpat (talk) 20:01, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure many if not most Wikipedians would agree with you, but it seems even the least refined supplicants on the Help desk get a response from someone, suggesting we have enough eyeballs aimed this way to assure that a few are connected to some pretty AGF brains. I guess it's all in how one looks at it. When I see someone venting rage on the Help desk, aimed at no one in particular, I tend to feel relieved to know I'm not the only one who feels victimized frequently by the collision of high technology with my boundless ignorance (one can virtually equate "serious computer user" with "swears a lot" - especially when they hear someone say "Get a Mac"). Now if someone were to light up my talk page with vituperation aimed directly at me, I might react a bit differently, but even then I would feel mildly embarrassed if someone were to catch me in a weak moment and derail my sangfroid. In any case, there is a lot of perhaps unintentional yet rather high-handed officiousness in the structure of Wikipedia, reflected in such dubious statistics as the thousands of articles we delete every day. Many of those articles are the work of well-meaning but naive newcomers, who got suckered by Wikipedia's way-too-welcoming Honeypot user interface, which demonstrably encourages lots of people to follow their dreams only to discover after losing hours of work that their dreams did not correspond with our stupefyingly complex and unintuitive rules. It's pretty clear that Wikipedia's design is optimized for people who are experts at using Wikipedia, which is hardly surprising because only expert users know enough to write all the friendly manuals and so on. There aren't enough people taking a hard look at Wikipedia from the rank beginner's point of view. What is it about Wikipedia that systematically and repeatedly encourages waves of newcomers to waste their time creating articles that don't have a snowball's chance? Our response is to continually improve the efficiency of our deletion process, rather than address the actual problem, which is the wrong message we send to some fraction of new users. (Ultimately, some of these problems may be unfixable until computers pass the Turing test, which I suspect may be just a few months before computers realize they don't need humans any more.) --Teratornis (talk) 04:52, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Delete article

I created an entry today and would like it to be deleted, can you tell me how to do it?Esperance10 (talk) 09:05, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Edit the page and put this tag: {{db-author}}--Unpopular Opinion (talk) 09:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Too late for that now, other editors have been working on it. – ukexpat (talk) 15:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Image placement guideline

Quite some time ago I read a Wikipedia guideline (or was it a policy) about the placement of images in articles. In particular, it was suggested that having images both left and right (like in this question), was undesirable and should be avoided if at all possible. Unfortunately, I can't find it any more. Would someone be able to provide me with a link to that guideline/policy? Thanks. Astronaut (talk) 12:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

It's part of MOS:IMAGES - "Avoid sandwiching text between two images that face each other." Nanonic (talk) 12:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

If you have too many images to fit in a section, consider using a gallery tag. --Teratornis (talk) 19:20, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Anderson

Hi, Im writing an article on my band and i just published it. It is unfinished, but is at a safe point to stop and i intend to add to it over the next few days. I recieved a message stating that something is wrong and it will be deleted?

Please can you help?

Ollie

the page is 'anderson (band)'

thank you

Funky0 (talk) 14:18, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

It appears that your page Anderson (band), has been tagged for speedy deletion. This happens when an article does not show why the subject is notable. My suggestion is add reliable sources that provide in-depth indepedent coverage of the band. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 14:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Added section title. Astronaut (talk) 15:16, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

It also appears your (possibly autobiographical) Oliver Chanter article is getting no love. You appear to be approaching Wikipedia in one of the most difficult ways, by trying to create new articles from scratch before you have spent much time editing existing articles and reading the friendly manuals. That would be like me walking into a yo-yo competition (with no training) and attempting to go up against the champions. Before one is ready to perform at a high level, one must first master the fundamentals. On Wikipedia, that means making many small edits to existing articles, and observing what other Wikipedia users do to your edits. That is, you try editing something, you watch the page you edit, and when you see another user changing what you added, you try to understand that user's action in light of what the manuals say. See also WP:WWMPD, WP:LAYOUT, and WP:EIW. If you like to read books, get: Wikipedia - The Missing Manual. --Teratornis (talk) 19:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

education

is there any free education courses to study? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.201.18.15 (talk) 16:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Maybe Wikiversity would be a better place to look. BigDunc^Talk 16:12, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Everything on Wikipedia is both free and educational, so you have 2,688,419 articles to choose from here, although some articles are better than others at the moment. You can start from Portal:Contents or type something in the search box. If you would like more specific advice, you could tell us the subjects you would like to study. Note that Wikipedia is a do it yourself system - we don't rely on human teachers to spoon-feed knowledge to students. Wikipedia users will answer well-posed questions, but in general most people who learn about and from Wikipedia do so by reading the friendly manuals (and reading the friendly articles). --Teratornis (talk) 19:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Legality of Palin email screenshots

I would like to include one of the many screenshots of Palin's Yahoo! inbox on Sarah Palin email hack, but I'm not sure if it would be legal. Are the images in the public domain, or are they considered the personal property of Palin? They have been published by several websites, but not by any professional media organizations, so I'm a little weary. For instance, Wikileaks has copies of the screenshots. --beefyt (talk) 18:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Copyright issues aside; although the email issue is public, posting screenshots of the email interface might be considered invasion of privacy WP:BLPPRIVACY. I guess that's why the images were not published by the media. Wikipedia is not hosted by PRQ after all. --Unpopular Opinion (talk) 18:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Internet Based

Which is the main internet storage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.248.68.57 (talk) 18:40, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Computing reference desk. They specialize in answering computer questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. --Unpopular Opinion (talk) 18:45, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Viewing Images

For some reason I can no longer view images on any of the pages I go to. Is there any way to fix this problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.27.245.132 (talk) 20:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Does this happen on all websites that you visit or just Wikipedia? If it happens on all websites, check your browser settings to make sure that image display has not been disabled. – ukexpat (talk) 20:03, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

This only happens on the Wikipedia. and as far as i know, i haven't changed any image display settings on my browser. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.27.245.132 (talk) 22:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

There is a setting in some browsers to block images from particular sites. Occasionally we get reports on the Help desk from users who have somehow accidentally activated this setting for Wikipedia (I'm not sure exactly how, maybe by bumping some hot key combination, all I know is that it seems to be possible to get this setting without consciously asking for it). If you tell us what browser you are running, someone could tell you exactly where to look in your browser settings. --Teratornis (talk) 10:17, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

New to Wikipedia editing and would like to add personal photos to expand on my edit topic.

When trying to upload pictures, to illustrate a text that I have added, I am blocked. How do I go about adding such images that I, myself have taken? - dstein2484 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dstein2484 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

You must be autoconfirme