Help talk:Cheatsheet/Archive 1

Unformatted text
a space at left makes page too wide if lines are single spaced.

I think the software means by the dotted-line box that a mistake has been made; I think the "Ignore wiki formatting" command is for unformatted text.--Chuck Marean 14:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


 * They're both useful for different things. nowiki for showing typed wiki commands, unformatted text (dotted box) for composing ascii art representations and suchlike. See How to edit a page. --Quiddity 21:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Poster
There was a wall-poster in printable pdf form listed somewhere. Very similar to this. Cheat sheet indeed (rename this to?).

Aha. Image:Cheatsheet-en.png

We should update this to include some of that (but not all. link it at bottom instead).

Specifically from current, i don't think we need the Horizontal rule (it's essentially deprecated). But we should add internal/external link markup. --Quiddity 22:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Chuck: I changed it back to the direct image link, as it's better to not force an oversize image on users. The linked image page allows image preference sizes to work. I'm going to change that cheatsheet page into a redirect here. -Quiddity 00:57, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The other reason i suggested making cheatsheet redirect to quick guide, is to prevent the redundancy of mentioning them both each time. The quick guide is clearly more suitable for actually looking at online whilst editing, or small-scale printing; and the image/pdf more suitable for large-scale printing (poster size).
 * I strongly recommend that we just link to the quick guide, within the tutorial and suchlike. And redirect cheatsheet to the quick guide (or rename/move the quick guide to cheatsheet).
 * Specifically: The image is less helpful because, one can't copy the text, the resolution might be illegible/wrong depending on screensize, and the download time is far longer. --Quiddity 18:50, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Redirect/merge from cheatsheet

 * I've suggested that we Redirect/merge this page with Cheatsheet, for the reasons above. Chuck Marean disagrees, and keeps reverting my changes, but without replying in talk page threads (he's a fairly new user still). Feedback from others on the issue of a merge would be appreciated. Is it confusing enough having near duplicate pages that they need to be merged? or is the redundancy irrelevant and they both deserve to exist? (leading to potential troubles of linking both everywhere). Thanks. -Quiddity 00:46, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I think we should redirect Cheatsheet here (or rename this page) and provide a link to. As this page is created in wikimarkup, I think it should be the "primary" (eg. linked) page, with the pdf file for printing. The image of the pdf says "this is just a preview", so the pdf is the logical choice. Certainly, the two pages shouldn't be linked everywhere. What links here, shows no pages link to the png or pdf files & 3 pages link to Cheatsheet, where as this page is integrated into the help system and has started appearing on user and talk pages. -- Gareth Aus 05:42, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect is what i meant, yeah. :) I'll change it back, and make a userspace version of the image for chuck marean. I agree with the renaming this page to cheatsheet proposal. Is there an admin reading this that agrees and can perform the necessary rename/move magic, or does it need to go to process...? -Quiddity 06:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Quick guide needs work
I noticed "Bullet list" and "Numbered list" in this table--regardless of where ever it came from--are not formatted right. "Two point one" is supposed to be indented, like the first word in the paragraph of a book. If you don't believe me, try it in a sandbox. If anyone knows how to get it to indent in this table go ahead. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chuck Marean (talk • contribs).
 * It seems Opera8 (and possibly other browsers) were misinheriting the column title's centering. (It appeared properly in ie5, and firefox. hence the confusion) Simple text-align:left fix. :) -Quiddity 01:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Adding HTML Tips
It took me for ever to find out that you can use html tags instead of just wikiformatting, allowing me to alter the ever elusive C O L O R S of text! I run a wiki, and I imported the chart from this article to my Help page, with the below information added above the "Internal link" section. Perhaps we could add this in to the Wikipedia one?
 * (I dont know why " ... " is being wrapped on this page, it's fine on my Help page.)

--HantaVirus 21:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
 * We're trying to keep this page ultra-short/simple, and html is required very little in most wikipedia-editing scenarios. So this isnt really appropriate here. Also:
 * you need a space in those linebreaks, before the slash. Not, but
 * bold and italics are better done in wikimarkup, to avoid a confusing mix of systems
 * strikethru/sub/sup are all available via the mediawiki:edittools box under the "show preview" button.
 * Thanks anyway though :) -Quiddity 21:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

automatically, so it doesn't really matter which of these you use. - dcljr (talk) 20:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, the MediaWiki software converts both  and   to
 * Indeed, but that encourages poor xhtml habits outside mediawiki. Better to aim for accuracy in tutorial materials, and let the error-correcting mechanisms catch the legitimate errors. -Quiddity 21:37, 23 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm... What if wikipedia used binary xml ... ;> (24.99.192.9 05:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC))

Cheatsheet
It's really annoying to try and find this sheet - which the rest of the world would call a reference card.

Surely Wikipedia is open to all! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.31.216.212 (talk • contribs).
 * Where would you suggest additional incoming links need to be added? There are already links to here, from a large number of help pages. --Quiddity· (talk) 20:22, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

This page is really good!
this page needs to be more easily accessed from main page with the same format used to explain other functionalities of WP the help pages are so bad

Page move
Pursuant to the 2 "make it easier to find" requests above, I'm going to move this page to Cheatsheet, to mirror that at Cheatsheet, and also add a redirect to here from Reference card. --Quiddity 02:51, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Adding a link to the Cheatsheet in editing-mode helpnotes?
I'd like to propose we add a link to Cheatsheet, in the editing-mode layout, next to the "#|Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)" links. eg:


 * #|Cancel | Editing help & Cheatsheet (opens in new window)

Proposal at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals). -Quiddity 06:26, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Re-Proposed update at Village pump (proposals). -Quiddity 06:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Done - This page is now linked from "Editing help (opens in new window)" in editmode. --Quiddity 21:17, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

How do you make a redirect to a category page?
There's some special way to do it, otherwise if you put in the code as if it were a regular page, except with "Category" in it, it'll just categorize the page you're trying to turn into a redirect. --Sycotherejekt 01:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Please ask help related questions at the Help desk. Thanks :) --Quiddity 06:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

How do you change an article name?
See How to rename (move) a page

Links to editing topics for intermediate users
(Note: this page, Cheatsheet, was made the main "Editing Help" link around three days ago, on December 13th 2006.)

OK, I consider myself an intermediate user as far as wiki-markup goes; I have all the syntax on Cheatsheet down pat. What I (and I assume a lot of other editors) have a problem with is the weirder stuff: tables, formulae, etc.

When Help:Editing was the main editing help link, all was well; one could clik on "Editing help" and then on the relevant topic. Now that Cheatsheet is the main "Editing Help" link, one needs an extra page load for the same, which is hell on a slow connection.

Thus Cheatsheet page should have links to the main editing topics, its status as a beginners' page notwithstanding, since it is now by default the main editing help page. EdC 10:06, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm know of the change - see the topic above. This page has evolved with a consistant guideline to keep things simple. May I suggest Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia. There was a link from here to this page but it has been removed. I think the idea behind the decision to change the link to this page is that newbies don't know where to go for help (they also don't want the more technical stuff that more experianced users want). It should also be noted that the original proposal was to put a link to the cheatsheet in addition to the link at Help:Editing - this was apparently rejected on technical grounds. Your problem is worth keeping an eye on, but for now I think we should leave the page as it is. After all the link was changed to point to this page because this page was thought to be a better target than Help:Editing. --Gareth Aus 10:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I know the various places to get editing help; however having to type in page names, bookmark URLs, or go via extra pages negatively impacts usability. The change to Cheatsheet as main editing help link imposes a burden on editors; what I'm asking for is that it should be possible to get from the editing interface to the syntax guides for tables, formulae etc. in no more than two clicks.  This used to be possible; that it is no longer is a loss of usability. --EdC 11:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * It's a common mistake in usability to think that hiding information makes what's left more valuable. I agree that new users won't know what to do with intermediate markup, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't link to it here; this page is not just for new users anymore, so if links can be added without confusing things for new users then we should do that. This page might be better for new users, but at present it is far worse (at least 50% worse) for people who need to look up non-beginner markup. --EdC 11:14, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Not sure why this hasnt progressed to action now. Seems there are no objections. I will add a few and see if we get any reactions. Facius 13:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

More links to pages you need for good editing
I just came here looking for cite php templates but don't see a link. If we want articles to be better referenced wouldn't it be good to provide all the help we can for people who want to add references? A link to the clean-up resources page would be good too. I still can't remember which links to click on for the cite php templates, so off I go on a journey round the encyclopedia - wish me luck. Itsmejudith 19:18, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * wp:cite ;) -Quiddity 19:42, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. This time I found it quite quickly anyway but my memory is not what it was and a link would help. Itsmejudith 23:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Linking everything generally useful is more what the main Help:Contents menu (linked in sitewide sidebar) and it's submenus are for; it contains a link to wp:cite under the links subheading. -Quiddity 01:40, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Can we please have links giving the markup for requesting citations to dubious facts? I can never remember what they are!! Asd28 03:45, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Changes
I'm not pleased that "Editing help" now redirects here. The previous page had more links to more features and I don't know how to find them now. (Table help, for one thing.) There is such a thing as over-simplification; does the page that used to appear at this link still exist? I'll create a shortcut to it myself. Thanks. &mdash; Chidom   talk  08:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * This change was discussed at WP:VPR, if you'd like to express your opinions there. Tra (Talk) 16:48, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That's a closed discussion; is there a more current link? --EdC 00:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That link seems to work for me? It's currently the 5th discussion down at the WP:VPR though.
 * But things can be changed here too. We could move the "See Help:Editing for more detailed explanations." line that's at the bottom to the top (done). Or other updates/clarifications as needed. --Quiddity 01:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

My main problem with the Help:Editing page is it breaks at 1024x768 because of the long navbox (see image). This all comes back to the massive problem of the overlap/redundancy of the meta-help page copies vs our local help pages (both of which have pros and cons); I don't know what to do about any of that. --Quiddity 01:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Not sure I see what the problem is there. I'd still like to see some of the navbox info on the Editing help page, esp. links to table and formulae markup. (Perhaps at the bottom, inline?)  Incidentally, if this is a beginners' cheat sheet, what's nowiki and dl doing here? --EdC 09:27, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The problem shown in the 1st screenshot is the left-hand table column is highly-compressed, making the information hard to glance through and understand. Here's another screenshot of the Unordered List markup; see how hard that is to mentally parse, because of the bad linewrapping?
 * I agree that the nowiki and DL code is not needed here (nor included in the meta-cheatsheet version); I've removed it. --—Quiddity 20:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, OK. Couldn't that be fixed with ? --EdC 01:38, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * That would result in a variably sized whitespace gap, which is an imperfect compromise. (even worse if the user has "ToContents" boxes in hidden-mode), however, it's better than nothing, so I've done just that :) I'll see if there are any complaints.. -—Quiddity 11:15, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Notes to other editors
Do you think that this page should have a piece explaining how to put up notes in the editing box that will not come up in the actual article? G man yo 10:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd guess that comments are better left on the article's talkpage, and that we shouldn't advocate placing hidden messages within comment tags in the article. Especially to the newcomers this page is primarily targeted at. But I'm open to persuasion if you can think of a legit reason they'd need to know :) —Quiddity 18:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it should, because i remember seeing it somewhere, and I wanted to put a note to other editors on a stub i had written. So I looked at the cheatsheet, but it wasn't there.  isnt it <<! type here >> or something? G man yo 21:59, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
 * But I still think notations are best left on the article's talkpage; that's why it exists :) —Quiddity 00:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Cheatsheet annoyances

 * See Help:Editing for more detailed explanations and advanced syntax

Or not. Help:Editing has more detailed explanations but little if anything about advanced syntax. Trial-and-error required. I suggest:


 * See Help:Editing for more detailed explanations and Help:Editing tips and tricks for advanced syntax.

I also suggest changing name of the latter page to Help:Advanced editing syntax. And it seems strange that the main Help page doesn't link to an explanation of advanced syntax. As for the current page, IMO it would be improved if it had entries for time stamp and nowiki. --munge 06:55, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I think we really need a description of templates! I had a really hard time finding the templates page and it was really annoying! Peter 22:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry if this is in the wrong place, but I noted that the format for Internal Links: Internal link(within Wikipedia) = Text to display seems to be inaccurate. What worked for me is Sync350 (talk) 06:28, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Adding a Resource
Quick reference made into a redirect to WP:CHEAT. Archive of discussion can be found here. // Mara N e  o 127  talk  05:18, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Example.com.org
I'm guessing the change is something to do with this: Template:Linksearch, but I don't have time now to dig deeper. Just a note for anyone else wondering what was going on. --Quiddity 20:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Numbered lists not showing correctly
The issue is back in Firefox 2.0.0.1. The numbered list item for "two point one" is only showing 1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.155.189.137 (talk)
 * (Different issue, indents vs numbering.) Actually I think that's the way it's meant to display, as it's the same in Opera9, Opera 6, and IE5.5.
 * The "Table of Contents" boxes however, do display the "2.1" in the way you suggest (e.g. on this page). Possibly the source of the confusion? --Quiddity 20:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Take a look on the Cheatsheet I tried Firefox 2 and IE 7 with the same results.

Why does this:


 * 1) one
 * 2) two
 * 3) two point one
 * 4) three

appear like this: 1. one 2. two 1. two point one 3. three I do not think there is any confusion about how it is intended to look. The spelling of "two point one" shows what should appear and it is not appearing as "2.1". The Cheatsheet looks broken to anyone with this same problem. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.155.189.137 (talk)


 * I've asked at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. We'll see what they say :) --Quiddity 20:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Tagging
I've just started copy editing and for safety's sake I've been copy->paste-ing the HTML for the COPYEDIT IN PROGRESS and PLEASE PROOFREAD tags, also when and where to put them. Could those be added to the cheat sheet for convenience? Right now I search around the various editing help pages until I find them and then open a new window to work in, leaving the page with the HTML open. ~ Otterpops 16:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Just to be clear, the wikicode is not HTML, though they are both markup languages. The best place to put notes for things you want to refer to often, is on your userpage. I see you already have a handful of templates there; I'll add the copy-and-pastable code versions there for your convenience :) --Quiddity 19:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

You're wunderbar Qiddity, thank you! <3 (I wondered where those came from...) ~ Otterpops 20:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Talk Examples
I would like to see more info on how to write properly threaded comments in the cheat sheet. * alone without double linebreaks works, but it would be good to see some examples
 * like this
 * 1) which has inner content
 * 2) and stuff
 * and replies
 * just in general a lot of nested stuff to show how to do complex stuff
 * all in a one or two very small comprehensive examples

I think a lot of people start running into issues when they try to write comments and replies in discussion. I myself dont know how to write a multi-line comment in reply to someone else. The examples can be really short, and I think they'd be capital for aiding Talk pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rektide (talk • contribs) 22:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC).

2 cheats I miss
This cheatsheet lacks the "endings blended into the link" and "hide stuff in parenthesis" cheats, that I find useful. 89.129.167.171 23:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:How to edit a page
The "Editing help" link on every Wikipedia editing page links here. The help on this page is directed at very beginners, more experienced users have to go to How to edit a page for their questions. Therefore, I am considering this the most important link on the page and it should be highlighted on top of the article and be repeated in the "See also" section to prevent frustration and/or confusion. It is beyond my understanding why the link has been completely deleted from the article recently (diff). Cacycle 02:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you!
I wish I had come across this a few months ago. Much of it I already figured out but it still had some information I didn't know, like about Article Redirects. NewJerseyLiz Let's Talk 02:31, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Edit source / Edit
For me the two links Edit source / Edit no longer appear. I only get [edit] and I do not use the icon which appears in the corner which is connected to VisualEditor perhaps. Does this mean the Cheatsheet needs updating?--Felix Folio Secundus (talk) 07:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well spotted. I've updated VE documentation slightly. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:47, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the edit but I meant to remove that earlier. I don't think we should be distracting people with that yet. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 14:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Adding link to Help:Displaying a formula
I always have found it difficult to find my way to the math display help page. I think the casual editor would benefit from having a link to it when they arrive here by clicking the Editing help link next to the Save/Show buttons in an edit session. Okay if I add the following entry to the See also section?
 * For a guide to editing and displaying mathematical equations and formulas, see Displaying a formula

The presence of the words "mathematical", "equations" and "formulas" would be useful when using the search function on the cheatsheet. - DVdm (talk) 10:16, 30 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Per no comment/objection I went ahead - DVdm (talk) 20:46, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Help
Hi I just what to know how to link my sandbox, thanks ClaraRoper (talk) 12:11, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


 * A question for the help desk really, but try User:ClaraRoper/sandbox. - DVdm (talk) 12:41, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Frog Jumping Dead Link
The example of links to article sub-sections uses Frog Jumping which has been renamed Frog Locomotion. I suggest someone with privileges update that. 96.245.173.118 (talk) 16:38, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Well spotted! I've made the change. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:45, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2015
please give me rights to edit pages

CMS:112 (talk) 10:38, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  11:41, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Naked URLs
The example REFs shown on the Cheatsheet contradict the Manual of Style. The first example is just wrong; it won't even resolve into anything useful. The second example is a naked URL which is undesirable. Using these as examples of the REF tag on the Cheatsheet is contradictory and steers new editors, who are most likely to rely on the Cheatsheet, in totally the wrong direction. I suggest that:

"Hello, World."

be modified, at the minimum, to show an example like the following:

"Hello, World."

But perhaps we ought to show a couple more parameters as well, like date and author:

"You can also use the Citation Template wizard to produce a full citation like the following:"

— btphelps (talk) (contribs) 06:14, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I agree that we want to show best practices, but we also want to balance that with non-complicated directions, at least at this level. Additionally, we don't want to imply that only online references are valid (nor that root-urls are good enough). Hence, I'll suggest that we replace the current copy, with something like this:

"Hello, World."


 * What do you (or anyone) think? –Quiddity (talk) 17:19, 25 August 2013 (UTC)


 * I understand the desire not to overwhelm new editors with a solution that's too technical. So your idea is a step on the right direction. I'd like to suggest a slightly more realistic book example that's hopefully not too complex for new editors:


 * — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 02:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hee! I'm curious, in what way are you considering The Story of Philosophy to be less "realistic"? (I chose it based on a glance at my bookshelves, looking for something non-fiction, with a short title and short author-name to minimize wordwrap). Ideally we'd use something without any links (internal or external).
 * I've updated the LoC example for now. –Quiddity (talk) 17:11, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Preparing for an edit-a-thon I find I having to advise my students not to use this cheat sheet. It is not explained that naked urls (while allowed by the software) should never be used in the text outside the #External links section. Secondly there is the issue of references- again it is the naked url that is shown in the example- no mention of using the four templates, and that a web reference is basically useless with out the date-accessed. Could this be passed to someone with a notable FA count for suggestions how current practice can be expressed. ClemRutter (talk) 21:50, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Red Link Confusion
I believe the instructions for how to do a red link are confusing. The coding looks exactly like that for an ordinary link to another page. And I believe it is identical. I think the article should clearly explain that a link will display in red automatically if the article linked to does not already exist. Richard27182 (talk) 23:25, 20 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Done. --Thnidu (talk) 19:45, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Named reference confusion
"References and footnotes" says


 * References and footnotes (first use on page)




 * References and footnotes (subsequent uses)



"First use" and "subsequent use" are easily misunderstood as referring to position in the text, though they're really about chronological order of insertion:  throws an error message if there's no full ref. I'm adjusting the text to clarify.

--Thnidu (talk) 20:15, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Move back to Wikipedia:Cheatsheet (or maybe "Wikipedia:Cheat sheet"
I don't feel like doing an RM. I'd just note that I think this should be moved back to Wikipedia:Cheatsheet. The prefix Help: almost always flags a page that is for help with the topic identified in the following name or phrase, e.g, Help:Moving a page is for help with the topic of: moving a page. This is the Wikipedia cheatsheet (or even "cheat sheet" [as spaced]); a cheat sheet for editing Wikipedia. It is not for "help with Wikipedia's cheat sheet", but that non sequitur is what results when applying the standard convention to this title.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:40, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose as this is definitely a help page, and as such the Help: namespace seems appropriate. It can be seen as a highly condensed form of Help:Wiki markup, which is also in the right namespace. I always read "Help:Cheatsheet" as "Help page: a cheatsheet" and have no difficulty seeing it as appropriate. Project pages I feel are inappropriate for pages that directly help the reader to understand topics, and overused in this capacity in general. --Jules  (Mrjulesd) 00:08, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
 * But we don't separate pages into help versus the Wikipedia namespaces by whether they are for helping or not, but by the convention I spoke of. You may see it the way you say you do, but actual use is otherwise. If followed, we need to move loads and loads of help pages that are at Wikipedia titles, e.g., Wikipedia:Your first article, Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia, etc.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:46, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Well if you look at Help namespace it says These pages contain information intended to help use Wikipedia or its software. Also why separate out the Cheatsheet when most of the other wiki markup pages reside in Help: namespace? Also I feel straight up help pages like "Your first article" and "Contributing to Wikipedia" would be better off in the Help namespace; project pages are too broad in this respect. Actual usage of the two namespaces is very inconsistent, but if help pages went in the help namespace this could be improved. This is a straight-up help page so it belongs in the help namespace. --Jules  (Mrjulesd) 21:05, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Table
How I can draw a table to insert information in it? Kundan Ravindra Dhayade (talk) 14:17, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * This is not the place to ask questions on topics, you'll be far better off asking at Teahouse. But there are introductory pages at Help:Basic table markup and Help:Introduction to tables with Wiki Markup/1. --Jules  (Mrjulesd) 14:36, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I can see that you are confused! If you Edit source, you can find out how to do it by looking at User:ClemRutter/training where there are examples of quite complex tables- with the source code below. Just copy and paste that over, and start changing the data. If that is useful- tell be about it on my talk page. ClemRutter (talk) 16:02, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

The Language
I want to rewrite it in Hindi language. Please guide me. Rohit.jathlana (talk) 07:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Rohit.jathlana Thank you for the offer of translation. No doubt you'll be submitting the translated page to Hindi Wikipedia, as English Wikipedia only contains pages in English. The Hindi Wikipedia will have its own systems for accepting new project pages, so you will have to find out there how to submit your page. Here is detailed guidance about translating Wikipedia pages into other languages, and here is a list of editors who may be able to help with the translation itself Noyster (talk),  23:13, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Surma
The details given here for surma is actually for kajal. I think writer doesn't have proper information about surma Perwez mb (talk) 21:14, 16 February 2018 (UTC)