Help desk
< May 5	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 7 >

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.

May 6

Multiple categories

Surely there has to be a way to search for Category:X plus Category:Y, to find "all X that are also Y," but I can't figure it out, and every time I try using boolean operators all I get back is garbage. Little help? 71.231.226.48 18:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Preferences/cache bypassing

After doing some old school recent pages patrolling, I wanted to not have all pages I created (i.e. talk pages with vandal warnings) on my watchlist. However, once I unchecked the option to watch new pages and successfully bypassed my cache, the talk pages I created still show up. Do I have to manually unwatch all of them? there are alot. VanTucky 00:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid so. An alternative would be to check out this, or if you don't mind having all of them removed, check out this. *Cremepuff 222* 00:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or just go to your watchlist, at the top of the list will be a link that says something like "Edit items on your watchlist". Click that and a list of all your watched pages will come up. User pages and user talk pages are listed all together near the bottom. Check the checkboxes for the ones you want removed and then click the button at the bottom of the page that says something like "update watchlist" or something akin to that. Dismas|^(talk) 04:33, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Creating articles

Can I make my own artical?Kiwifruit89 00:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, go to Help:Starting a new page. *Cremepuff 222* 00:10, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but make sure you spell check it. (it's article, not artical). - Mgm|^(talk) 12:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as long as you follow wikipedia policies. I notice that your account has been used mainly or exclusively for vandalism in the past. If you create a nonsense article or an article to disparage others, it will be deleted. Calliopejen1 15:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check out this reading, too. - Mailer Diablo 16:15, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with Images

Hello,

My name is Scott Martin and I'm writing to you concerning a problem I'm having with Wikipedia.

For several months now I have not been able to view images on your website.
I am able to get the image if I click on it to enlarge it, but otherwise all that I can see is the text and blank space where the images should be.
I read your contact page, here is the information regarding my computer and browser.

Browser: Mozilla Firefox v 2.0.0.3

O/S: Windows XP v 2002

I don't think any of the other information applies. I do not have an account with Wikipedia. Any help ou could give me regarding this would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers,

Scott.
--58.106.158.227 06:39, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the "> " from your message and put in line breaks. I think the problem may have to be with your computer, I am using the exact same browser and operating system. Try purging by pressing "Ctrl-R" or "Ctrl-F5". It might be wise if you scan your PC for virus's, there are some good free ones as AVG Antivirus (search on google for the download site). It also could be if you haven't updated your windows with Windows Update (you can update here, you need to access the site with Internet Explorer. Come back if you have any more problems, and continue the thread here. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_VPS 11:37, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen this before. It's a setting in your Firefox 2.0. Unfortunately, I am clueless as to how to solve it. Try taking a look at your options and preferences and make sure they're all set to allow images. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tools -> Options -> Content. Then ensure that the "Load images automatically" box is checked, and that Wikipedia is not listed under Exceptions. Prodego ^talk 12:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking talk page

A user blanked his or her user:talk page yesterday, thereby hiding the fact that it previosuly showed two recent 3RR block warnings and an unblock refusal.

I'm trying to think of a polite way of encouraging him or her not to do that (without myself starting an edit war on the user:talk page, which would surely be bizarre). I'm sure I've seen discussion about this, and the consensus, as I understand it, is that users are discouraged from blanking warnings on talk pages, although the matter is a bit borderline. Am I right about this, and if yes, is there a link I can point him to? AndyJones 08:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The consensus, if I remember, was that blanking a talk page without archiving it was discouraged, but legal. The warnings are still in the history (and should be checked by anyone giving further warnings). (Note that a bluelinked talk page with no content is like a large alert saying CHECK THE HISTORY to people giving warnings, so there's unlikely to be a problem with information being hidden.) I'd suggest that you take no action unless things get worse. Hope that helps! --ais523 10:51, 6 May 2007 (U T C)

~~A user can blank thier page but not if it holds recent vandalism warnings. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_VPS 11:38, 6 May 2007 (UTC)~~[reply]

I stand corrected, it is actually ok to remove warnings. And warnings can be found in the user history. See: Wikipedia:User page#Removal of warnings. I would normally revert page blankings if there are a recent warnings that are above warning level 1. ~~ AVTN ^{T C}_VPS 11:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is okay of they take the warning to heart. Keep an eye on them to make sure they have. You could also encourage them to do archiving instead of blanking without mentioning the warnings. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- All useful comments: thanks for the help. I'll keep an eye on things, and take no action unless I get the impression the warnings weren't taken to heart. AndyJones 15:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting a schoolblock?

We've had wikipedia vandalism originating from within our school's network. Rather than risk a block of the entire network, I'd like to request a schoolblock so that only people with accounts on wikipedia can edit. How can I go about that? Jpellino 11:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can request an 'anon-only' block at the admin's noticeboard if it's not an emergency, or admin intervention against vandalism if it is. --ais523 11:51, 6 May 2007 (U T C)

Headlines in succession boxes

Hello!

A little question: You can introduce headlines like "British royalty" ({{s-roy|uk|}}), "Regnal titles" ({{s-reg|}}), "Religious posts" ({{s-ecc|}}), "Titles in pretence" ({{s-pre|}}), etc. in the succession boxes of the articles concerning monarchs and pretenders. Is it possible to create such headlines yourself or do only certain users have the permission? And where can I look up all available headlines? Yours sincerely,

Louis88 12:00, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These are succession templates. Various ones of them are listed in Category:Succession templates and a project relating to them is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization. You can create your own by copying the syntax at {{s-reg}} and creating the page at "Template:s-example" or whatever title you choose.--Cherry blossom tree 15:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those are called templates. Most of what you need to know about templates is probably here: User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia#Tem (and what you need to know is a lot). You can edit your own templates, but you may find it a bit challenging at first. Be careful about editing any existing templates, because many other pages may use them (and thus many templates violate the somewhat disingenuous Wikipedia precept that anybody can edit anything by being protected). The only way to learn is to read the friendly manuals and then get in there and start ~~breaking~~trying things. To find lists of templates you can use, you can browse from the top down at WP:TEMPLATE. To find templates related to templates you see, browse to their template pages (e.g., {{s-roy}}, {{s-reg}}, {{s-ecc}}, {{s-pre}}) and follow their category links (e.g., Category:Succession templates). --Teratornis 15:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

i want to create a new article but the name already exists (but it's not the one that i want..disambiguation)

Hello!

I'm trying to create a new article about a british writer; unfortunately he shares his name with an australian fertility doctor, whose article already exists. I'm new on wikipedia, and i can't figure out how to create a disambiguation page and then a new article. I looked on every FAQ and help menu but i'm getting lost...can someone help me?

Thanks so much in advance! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AlmaMatters (talk • contribs) 14:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

To start with, get the new article created as "Fred Blogs (author)" or whatever the name is: author in brackets, lower case "a". When you've done that, let us know and we can help you with the disambiguation changes to the other article. Notinasnaid 14:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re editing content

Hi, to whom it may concern I am a avid fan of Wikipedia and often have used it to finish and complete many of the college assignments for a wide variety of subjects and topics what I did not know until just now is that it is a website that cna be edited by anyone. this is no trouble but what I have to wonder is anyone at wikipedia responsible for fact checking or determining the vaildity of what is changed or added for instance topics related to history events, science theories etc.....Jim —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.166.206.254 (talk) 15:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

That is why material needs to be attributed to reliable sources, via the use of citations. This allows the reader to verify what he reads. There is a lot of material that falls short of this standard. Adrian M. H. 16:12, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Volunteers monitor changes and revert them if they find anything fishy. Unsourced/unverified content is usually removed on sight, we insist on third-party independent sources. - Mailer Diablo 16:14, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If the information is reliable, it came from somewhere. You should use Wikipedia as a stepping stone to further more detailed information. See Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia - Mgm|^(talk) 19:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An orphaned article

I happened to find an orphaned article and knew its category. But I do not know what to do. The article is topwater fishing lure. And it should belong to Fishing category. Tell me what to do. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oda Mari (talk • contribs) 17:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Among its categories at the bottom of the edit window, add [[Category:name of category]] Adrian M. H. 17:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Topwater fishing lure is an orphan with no current categories at the bottom. Just edit the article and add the category at the bottom on a new line. A more specific category like [[Category:Fishing equipment]] may be preferred. PrimeHunter 01:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Homeowners association article

I have been following the Homeowners Association article for some time.

A very thoughtful and competent editor "Jance" to this article has been banned, and all the contributions made were deleted.

The article has fallen into a state of biased propaganda, which was not the case when "Jance" was allowed to contribute.

This figurative assasination of this editor is a blow to the credibility of Wikipedia.

Please let me know why this has happened.

If this contributor was banned for another topic, please do not ban this user from this particular topic which is important to almost 57 million Americans who live in Homeowner associations. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mike Reardon (talk • contribs) 17:59, 6 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

A bit of detective work is required here. A search for User:Jance revealed Contributions/Jance, the edit summaries of which suggest some issue with another editor or editors and a discussion at ANI. I have not looked into the details and frankly, this is not the place to go into such details. What I can say for certain is that a ban will not have been made without serious consideration by experienced admins and not without a very good reason. A ban is a last resort and, as I understand it, requires a past history that included being blocked from editing (which is different to a ban). That is assuming that this user has in fact been banned, which I cannot confirm either way. Adrian M. H. 19:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jance was, in fact, blocked indefinitely in March:[1]. As for the article, a lookover indicates it could probably use some balance from the HOA side, as it's got a strong focus on controversies right now. Tony Fox (arf!) 21:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can't figure out how to get my page posted...

Hi, all:

I have a login account and just created my first Wikipedia page yesterday. I am a representative from the Society for Technical Communication (STC) and have recently been appointed to two IEEE/ISO working committees. We have published an online searchable database for software and systems engineering terminology. In 2008, the vocabulary will become an international standard.

Representatives from the committees working on this project asked me to create a Wikipedia entry for the database (the database and entry are called SEVOCAB), so I logged into my account, drafted the page using the IEEE Computer Society's press release as a baseline, and saved the page. I have added See Also links to existing Wikipedia pages, as well as Related Links to the Web pages for IEEE, ISO, and the Project Management Institute (PMI).

I have read all of the tutorials about creating and editing pages, and for the life of me, I can't figure out how to integrate my page into the Wikipedia knowledge base. Right now, it exists on my page under my user name. If I search for it, I don't see it.

I'm sorry if I have missed some key information, but I really need help.

Best Regards, Evanarsdall Evanarsdall 19:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have you looked at Help:Starting a new page? *Cremepuff 222* 18:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You will, however, first have to rewrite it in your own words. Copyright contributions cannot be accepted, and much of the same text can be found on [2]. Copyright text will be promptly deleted. Once it is posted, other editors will change it, and the information will be copied to countless other web sites, but the copyright must be dealt with first. Notinasnaid 08:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page

How do I write a suggestion on a talk page if I am not logged in?

I'm not sure what you're asking. Also, can you please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~)? Thanks. *Cremepuff 222* 18:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't actually type the above question; I think I posted it by mistake by clicking on something while I was looking for help. Sorry. I did read the topic you suggested, but the answer wasn't obvious until I got to the summary section below.

So now have created a page, but the title needs to be all caps, and Wikipedia is using an initial cap (i.e., "Sevocab," where it should be "SEVOCAB"). How do I change that? Evanarsdall 19:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Subpages

Hi everyone. By the way anyone who answers someones questions here should have medals because they deserve it...helping othe people. Anyway how do you create a subpage of a user page? Wiki.user 20:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just type a / followed by the name of your subpage. Also, see WP:SUBPAGE. *Cremepuff 222* 20:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Starting the link with a / only works if you're on your userpage. If you're linking to it deom somewhere else, you should add User:<your username here> in front of that bit. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I meant typing it in the address bar. Sorry. *Cremepuff 222* 20:46, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For example, you could say User:Wiki.user/Sandbox. (I'm amazed the username Wiki.user was still available.)

We sort of do get medals, they're called barnstars for some reason steeped in history I guess. Answering questions on the help desk can be a good way to learn about Wikipedia in more depth, and/or faster, than one might learn by focusing exclusively on one's own problems. And for those of us who have provided our share of technical support in the real world, it's kind of hard to get over how incredibly efficient the Help desk is. The answer to almost every question is written down somewhere, and on Wikipedia it is easy to link to the answers. This is actually fun, compared to providing telephone support. Plus we can pick and choose what questions to answer, knowing that someone else will answer whatever we don't know. In a real support job, you have to answer every caller, no matter how baffling their question is, or how angry they might be, and you have to answer instantly. --Teratornis 21:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah ok but how to you get the toolbar with like sandbox illustration in your user page or is that just for sysops.Wiki.user 21:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Can you give an example? That is, can you give us a link to a page that illustrates what you are talking about? Type the link like this: [[Page name]] and it will turn into a link we can click on. Without seeing what you refer to, I'd guess you might be looking at a template. You can click the edit link on the page you have in mind to look at its wikitext to see the codes that generate the various things you see when you view the page. (Click the Cancel link below the edit window to avoid making any changes after you view the wikitext of a page, if you just want to view and not edit.) The nice thing about editing on Wikipedia is that when you see something interesting on a page, you can (usually) figure out how the author(s) did it. And if you can't figure it out, you can leave a question on the author's Talk page, or ask on the Help desk (being sure to give us a link or at least tell us the page name so we can have a look). --Teratornis 04:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What is +53 mean?

I was looking at my watchlist and I saw a + or - number for each page (for the example given the number is +53). What is this?

(diff) (hist) . . Haroun and the Sea of Stories‎; 13:49 . . (+53) . . 24.45.6.165 (Talk) (→Characters)

Que? 20:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Number of characters added or removed in the change -- fairly new feature, but it comes in handy. If you'd really rather not see it, there's at least one way you can "turn it off." – Luna Santin (talk) 20:54, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) That means that someone has added 53 characters of text to the page. Likewise, -53 would mean 53 characters have been removed. *Cremepuff 222* 20:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is this in total or just the last edit?

Is it 53 characters added since my edit or is it that the last edit added 53 characters?

It's since the previous edit. So if I editted a page, it would be how much I added since the previous version. *Cremepuff 222* 21:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Techie jargon alert) Actually, to be more specific, it's the number of bytes added to a page. Hence, if someone adds the template code {{subst:welcome}}, it's going to show the number of bytes included in that template, not the 17 bytes added just by typing that code. Usually, however, it is equal to the number of characters. The tool serves as a early indication of vandalism - if a lot of bytes are added or removed all at once, without an edit summary to explain it, there's about a 90% chance the edit was vandalism. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 21:34, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

adding to afd log

After creating Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Anatole, I seem to be completely incapable of correcty adding it to the log on WP:AFD. Every time I try and add it, the entire debate page shows up. VanTucky 21:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's what should show up. WP:AFD has detailed instructions for listing pages for deletion. In any event, I've added it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2007 May 6 for you. —Wrathchild ^(talk) 23:04, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Legality of old images.

I want to add an image to the article on Prosper Guéranger, and as he died in 1875, does that mean all images of him are certain to be in the public domain? this image at Canon law as an example. Is this digital image public domain due to the age of the painting imaged? Thanks, i kan reed 21:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a chart with a helpful summary.[3] If it was published before 1923 in the US or before 1909 outside the US, it's in the public domain. So if this was a portrait painted while he was alive, it's certainly in the public domain. However, if there is a possibility it was painted after his death, it might still be copyrighted. Calliopejen1 22:55, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just to note, if you photograph (or someone else photographs) a 2D work whose copyright is expired, that photo is not itself copyrighted. (That is, if you're doing it to replicate the original image.) Calliopejen1 22:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just did a little bit of research and it looks like this was done in 1878 by someone named Gaillard.[4][5] This means its copyright has expired and you're clear to upload it. Calliopejen1 23:06, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I'm wrong, but didn't the public domain bit apply to writing? As I understand it, for pictures in the US, the rule was that the creator has to be dead for over 100 years. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surely if you take a photograph of an out-of-copyright image and use your image in a book, postcard, Wikipedia etc then your reproduction will be protected by copyright? Otherwise you could produce a book with new high quality pictures of old masters and someone could copy all your high quality images and use them in their own book? --jmb 20:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And indeed anyone can do just that. For the matter of that, if you reprint an out of copyright book, the book is still PD, and scans of your new edition can and quite possibly will be used to create public e-texts - thsi is doen at Project Gutenberg all the time. If an image (2D) is in the public domain, a new photograph of that image is also PD. It's palcement in a book together with a newly written caption, or its combintation with other images in a gallery or the like miught well be subject to a compilation copyright, but the new photo itself is not protected under US law. (The law in other counteries may be different.) DES ^(talk) 20:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BTW Mgm is incorrect above. Image copyrights in US law generally follow the same time limits as all other copyrights. Any image published before 1923 is PD under US law. Any image published in the US before 1964 whose copyright was not renewed, and whose creator or copyright owner is a US national is also PD, an in neiether case does anyone's date of death amtter at all. Newly published images, like newly published text, are protected for the life of the creator plus 70 years. Annon images and images with corporte authroship now get 95 years. All this is under US law, copyright law elsewhere varies. DES ^(talk) 20:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting content of user talk pages

What's the policy about user's deleting text from their User talk page? Specifically, information put there by other people asking them what they're doing and especially a vandalism warning? A user I'm encountering doesn't appear to want to work with the community. —Wrathchild ^(talk) 23:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, most users frown upon removing content from talk pages unless the content is unconstructive (such as vandalism) or unimportant. Usually, a user will have an archive to place old conversations. You could see WP:ARCHIVE, or WP:TALK for more information. *Cremepuff 222* 23:07, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See the "blanking talk page" discussion above on this page. Calliopejen1 23:10, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism

how do u make wikipedia so good, with little vandalism? there must be millions of people who jsut wanna screw this site up. thx =] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.119.201.174 (talk) 23:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Well, we have recent changes patrollers at Recent changes monitering all of the recent changes (that makes sense...). If you would like, you could help out! Just see Wikipedia:Why create an account?. *Cremepuff 222* 23:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok now i have a account, so how do i help out?

You can start by signing your posts on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). Just find an article about an interest and start contributing. I'll also put a few more links on your talk page. *Cremepuff 222* 23:26, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you're interested in helping combat vandalism, check out Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism for lots of different ways to help. The simplest (but most tedious) way to do this is to go to Recent changes and click on the "diff" links. Calliopejen1 23:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok i have a question about that, how do i no if its just a new member testin it out, and if he tests it out more than once, should i report? here comes my sign MyChemcialHamster 00:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Wp:vandal#Warnings. If you think it might just be a test, put {{subst:uw-vand1|putpagenamehere}} on the user's talk page. If they continue, you can increase the number to vand2 up to vand5 (but go to that link and check out what the warnings say before you post them). If after you've given sufficient warnings (it's a judgment call as to what that is) they continue to vandalize, you can report them at wp:aiv. Calliopejen1 02:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As to your original question about how Wikipedia stops vandals from wrecking everything, the key technology is MediaWiki's revision control system, which allows users to keep track of what other users are doing, and if necessary to quickly revert malicious changes (see: Help:History, WP:REVERT, Help:Contents/Tracking changes). Wikipedia runs on the MediaWiki software which generates a highly developed kind of groupware called a wiki. Wiki technology has been evolving since 1995 and is still rapidly evolving, and a number of advances in this technology originated with the Wikipedia project. Even so, Wikipedia's quasi-religious devotion to the principle that anybody should be able to edit just about anything does encourage a tremendous amount of vandalism, as you would expect, and thousands of volunteers donate (probably) millions of hours of labor to fighting it. Over time, many people get tired of repeatedly wasting their time to fix vandalism, as you would also expect, so Wikipedia has gradually been introducing more restrictions. For example, you must create an account before you can create new articles, and newly registered users cannot create new articles until their accounts are at least four days old. Administrators can protect frequently-vandalized pages from edits by various classes of users, and they can block registered users, IP addresses, and even entire schools from editing when repeated vandalism originates from these sources. Many templates are protected from edits by anyone below the rank of administrator, because many pages may use a given template, making it an especially inviting target for vandals (and because clever vandals could introduce subtle defects into templates that could create difficult-to-diagnose problems on thousands of pages at once.) To get an idea of how much work Wikipedians have expended to painstakingly construct an elaborate anti-vandalism infrastructure, read the links under User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia#Van. --Teratornis 04:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]