Help desk
< July 25	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 27 >

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.

July 26

Why is my domain blacklisted from creation?

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 14:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to setup a new page for my company fighterz.com (its a niche social networking website for boxers and martial artists) but the system tells me that the domain is blacklisted for some reason

A little help on this subject would be hugely appreciated!

edit: I should mention that I initially signed up with a differetn username (fighterzcom) before realizing the domain would be a better username. Tried registering with a different email. 96.49.141.91 (talk) 06:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC) 96.49.141.91 (talk) 06:02, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about blacklist issue, but articles about future companies and websites (as yours—"Coming soon!"), that are not even mentioned anywhere by the media[1] are likely to get deleted very quickly as non-notable or spam, specially when the owner himself posts the article under a spammy username like fighterzcom (talk · contribs). I suggest you read WP:COI, WP:WHYNOT and not create the article yourself; if the website becomes notable in the future, someone else will do. --59.95.99.49 (talk) 06:52, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a collection of promotional articles and the username change violates the username guidelines. See also: WP:ORIGINAL; WP:IOWN; WP:COMPANY and links provided by anonymous user above. Zoo Fari 06:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also, WP:BLACKLIST and meta:Spam Blacklist • S • C • A • R • C • E • 06:57, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much... new to Wiki gotta spend some time reading through how things work. appreciate feedback —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.82.135.70 (talk) 08:13, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

blackberry storm

Do you have an app for this phone, or maybe a mobile version? thank you Jim May —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.64.122 (talk) 08:09, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've no idea if any of these are of use, but you could look at Google Search: "Blackberry storm wikipedia app". How official they are, I don't know... you'll have to read the pages! Caveat emptor PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 08:20, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. —teb728 t c 10:02, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Mobile access. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure there's one.I have it on my phone. you could also look in the mobile web. type in wikipedia.org. that might work.--Microartg (talk) 17:07, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

antique oriental fan

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 14:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

need to know what the red stamp looking symbol under artist signature means —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.101.204.158 (talk) 13:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps.PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 13:41, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question for Template experts

Resolved

I'm trying to clean up some pages, when a person has more than five awards in a nav box, I'm moving them into a collapsible nav box. One template seemed to be misbehaving.

The template in question:

Extended content

When I look at the code, I see: </td></tr></table></td></tr>

Looks like closing tags, without corresponding opening tags. I don't know whether that is causing my problems, but it appears to me this is spurious code, perhaps left from an earlier approach using tables. I'd like to remove it, but I'd like someone more familiar with templates/html to reassure me that it can be removed without harm.

They aren't doing anything useful. They don't even affect the html produced. Algebraist 14:16, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The closing tags can have an effect if the template is transcluded to a position with open tags before the template. I guess the removal by Algebraist will fix your problem. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:23, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback - I just checked, and the new version does not cause the same problem.--SPhilbrick T 14:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How much experiance is needed to participate at ACC?

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 14:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

– I'm happy with the responses Harlem675 18:56, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I recentley requested access to the Wiki ACC Interface but was quickly declined. Whilst I realise I am still fairly new here, I wasnt aware of any large requirements needed. When would be a more appropriate time to re-request as I am eager to help in that area of Wiki aswell, Thanks. Harlem675 15:50, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no fixed time-based criteria as such, but users who have been here for < 5 months usually get declined quickly (unless an interface admin knows and trusts them personally); those with > 1 year of trouble free editing without long wikibreaks maybe approved, but as I said there is no set-in-stone criteria. --59.95.104.239 (talk) 17:05, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure it was declined? A tool admin would normally notify you on your talk page and ask for confirmation (unless the procedure has changed now). For the record, I got it when I had edited about 4 months and had 2000+ edits. If your request was declined, it was probably because your account is still new as you said. You should have a bit of experience and there should also be an indication you can be trusted; best and easiest way to judge this is a good and clean editing history (not only the edit count though). If you don't get it, you should probably request after a few more months. ≈ Chamal ^talk 17:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok cheers, I'll probably give it another shot after 5+ more months of experiance. Harlem675 17:11, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Chamal: I was not notified on my talk page, I tried to log in to AAC and a message came up saying my request had been declined. Anyway, I'll rack up about another 5 months experiance first and then retry. Harlem675 17:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

b —Preceding unsigned comment added by Microartg (talk • contribs) 17:01, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the WP:SANDBOX for test edits. You can ask questions about using wikipedia here. --59.95.104.239 (talk) 17:06, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) Unfortunately, a single letter question isn't quite enough information for us to respond, but given the name you gave this post, see Wikipedia:Images, Wikipedia:Image use policy, Wikipedia:Picture tutorial, Wikipedia:Ten things you may not know about images on Wikipedia Wikipedia:How to improve image quality and note the existence of you sister project, the Wikimedia Commons.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:07, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

dates?

Hi

how do I list this on the dates page ?/ thanks Gregory

Hans Julius Hubertus Liebrecht (German Industrialist) Ingelheim am Rhein died Ing born 26.July.1931 died 27.July.1991 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregorypa (talk • contribs) 17:16, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As he has no article, he can't be added! You could always create an article!

Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Help:Starting a new page. You might also look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation.-- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 17:18, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do I program a bot in JavaScript code?

Back in April, I attempted to have my bot, Dylan620 Bot (talk · contribs), approved, but I withdrew because I did not know how to program a bot. Since I would like to program it in JavaScript, can someone please teach me how to program in JavaScript? Thanks, Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 19:38, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can't really program a bot in JavaScript, because JavaScript is a client-side scripting language, which means it is run in the browser when a person visits a particular page. Bots, as (semi-)autonomous entities, need to be programmed in either a server-side scripting language (PHP, Perl, etc), or a fully-fledged programming language like C, C++, or Java. In any case, if you want to learn JavaScript, the W3C's JavaScript tutorial is an excellent place to start. Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 20:06, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As an example, Sinebot and Cluebot are programmed in PHP, while the AIV helperbots are Perl. You can do some semi-automated editing with AWB, but that's really not the same as programming a bot. As for learning a language, I've had luck with the "For Dummies" series of books. Your local library, if it's in good shape, should have a decent selection of such books and others relating to programming. Xenon54 (talk) 20:16, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since I can't technically make a bot in JavaScript, how could I make one in Perl? --Dylan 620 (contribs, logs) 01:15, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, if you don't already know how to code a bot, you would likely be better off not writing a bot. Writing a bot is no easy task, and trying to write one while learning the language you're writing it in is not going to work. Instead, you should simply put the idea at Wikipedia:Bot requests, and see if someone good at writing bots will write one for that task. Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 01:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Everybody has to start somewhere. All programs were written by people who at one time had no idea how to write programs. The odds are against the average Help desk questioner who might want to write a bot, but it is possible to learn. Just be prepared to work very hard, and you'd better get good at looking things up with Google. Start by reading all the links under WP:EIW#Bot, especially Wikipedia:Creating a bot. Read the Perl article, and read the Perl documentation on Perldoc.org. A bot framework in Perl is available. You should practice by first installing your own Personal wiki that runs MediaWiki by following the procedure in mw:Manual:Wiki on a stick. Then you can write and debug bot programs by running them on your own wiki, with no worries about causing damage on Wikipedia. Once you are confident you understand bots, and you can demonstrate your competence, you should have a better chance of getting approval to run your bot on Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 16:22, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What links here

Why isn't the What Links Here page alphabetized? Can it be made to do so? --Siddhant (talk) 21:34, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure, see Help:What links here • S • C • A • R • C • E • 05:37, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

missing fonts?

The Phoenician and Syriac characters at Aleph don't display for me. What do I need for my browser (Safari) to display these? Шизомби (talk) 23:29, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

talk page vs discussion page

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 14:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

i am new on this site, i would like to ask what the difference is between a talk page and a discussion page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zthatin (talk • contribs) 23:43, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's the same. See more at Wikipedia:Talk page. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the appropriate way to comment?

Hi, I didn't know where to go to ask this (I thought the Administrator's Noticeboard would be a bit extreme): I have discovered a user who makes almost all their edits (it appears hundreds a week) without edit summaries, and marks the vast majority of their edits with the "minor edit" qualifier, many of which are minor, but upon closer inspection some are definitely quite significant. I would like to point this out to this contributor, but I do not wish to cause any animosity, as the user appears to be a frequent, long-time editor and I don't know how to bring it up. I don't think I should just pop out of nowhere and instruct the editor on procedure, but in a lot of contexts edit summaries are quite important, and I have seen some of the editor's contributions to articles where he makes significant changes over the course of several edits with no explanation (even marking many of them minor). So, a question for you more experienced editors out there: What would be the appropriate way to deal with such a situation (or should I just leave it alone)? I have learned in a short period of time the importance of edit summaries and the care that ought to be taken when using the "minor" tag. Peace and Passion (talk) 23:43, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS Half the time when he does leave a summary it says something along the lines of "edited." Peace and Passion (talk) 23:57, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just say what you said in this message, leave him/her a message saying "I've noticed the majority of your edits often have no edit summaries and are marked minor, many of which are important, you might want to watch out for that!" There comes times when you have to be bold • S • C • A • R • C • E • 01:11, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would try to make it not sound too much like a warning or too harsh. If you give that to an experienced editor, you are likely to get some sort of policy quote telling you in effect to get lost (there is a reason that templating someone is not the best option). Rather than that, inform them politely and in a friendly way that this is bothering you a bit and ask them to be more specific in their edit summaries for important edits. WP:MINOR clearly says that an edit should be marked minor only if it is not a significant change to the article as well. ≈ Chamal ^talk 01:30, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have rarely seen this kind of thing from experienced editors; you might want to see how experienced they actually are :) Anyway whether they are experienced or not the best approach is a friendly one; taking the holier than thou attitude is not a good idea for any situation and it is less likely they will listen to you if you do that. ≈ Chamal ^talk 01:38, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Never link guidelines (like WP:) in messages to experienced editors, you're very likely to get a heated response • S • C • A • R • C • E • 02:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: my preferences → editing → Mark all edits minor by default. I once forgot I had this setting checked, and someone approached me and brought it to my attention, and I unchecked it. That is probably the situation here. You might suggest to them that this setting is "intended" for people who are engaging in minor tasks habitually, like adding categories to articles. Agradman ^talk/_contribs 03:29, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't template a regular with {{Uw-editsummary}} and {{Uw-minor}}, but I think it would be OK to pipe links to Help:Edit summary and Help:Minor edit in a post like the suggestion by Scarce. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed on checking that the editor has gone through a series of articles and slowly, but surely, severely de-linked them as a series of minor edits, for one John Patten (representative), two John M. Vining, but there are numerous others if you keep looking. I'm not sure how to handle this now. I mentioned the edit summary issue to the editor, they said they would try and note their edits, but these other issues seem like a systemic, ongoing problem (notable after reading their talk page and looking at their history) that maybe an administrator should talk to them about? There are also many examples of editing the formatting against strong consensus and marking it as minor. Peace and Passion (talk) 05:23, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars • S • C • A • R • C • E • 05:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not linking guidelines in messages to experienced editors sounds un-WP:BOLD to me. If someone objects to something I do, I appreciate it when they link directly to whatever guideline they believe supports their objection, so I can examine the guideline myself and see whether I violated it. If they don't link to the guideline they have in mind, then I have to guess what they are alluding to. Not linking to guidelines implies that someone's personal opinion is the issue - but personal opinions do not matter on Wikipedia, only the policies and guidelines matter. (See Wikipedia:There is no common sense - everybody has different opinions, so the only way we stay coherent is by limiting ourselves to the agreed-upon policies and guidelines.) Everything we do gets the scrutiny of any number of other editors, and by editing here, we voluntarily agree to being critiqued by everyone else. Nobody is above scrutiny here. Also, few people have read and fully grasped every last policy and guideline, so when we see an editor who behaves as if he or she has never heard of some particular rule, there's a good chance he or she hasn't. Lots of people don't read manuals. Making the same mistake 5000 times is not what I would count as "experience." An editor's experience level would be the number of times he or she has properly followed the rules. --Teratornis (talk) 16:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see nothing wrong with linking to the applicable guideline or policy when you post a request that an editor changes how he edits. See the essay User:DESiegel/Template the regulars. He might have never read the guideline, despite having edited for three years. Or the guideline might have been revised since he read it. I strongly agree that it is best just to ask nicely, without being officious and snotty. Edison (talk) 20:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]