Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2008 December 4

= December 4 =

Is there any tools helping with Article for Deletion (AfD)?
I have nominated some articles for deletion, however I found the process slightly complicated and annoying. Is there any tools which can make this process more convenient and quick? Fangfufu (talk) 20:12, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Changing information referred to between double brackets
I am going to create an article about a Patrick O'Brian novel. I would like to add the box above the categories that contains other titles, but first I need to add this novel to the list. I don't know how to access the titles. There are double brackets (these: "{") around the following text: PatrickOBrianWorks. Can anybody tell me how to make the double-bracketed text display the box contents so I can edit it? Thank you. Hammerdrill (talk) 00:04, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds like you want to edit the Template? What novel do you want to add? &mdash;Noah 00:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If you want to edit the template you can go to Template:PatrickOBriansWork and just edit it. But please be careful editing templates (use Preview!) as any change you make affects multiple articles. &mdash;Noah 00:12, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) That's called a "navigation box" or "navigation template." See WP:NAVBOX. You will have to edit the PatrickOBriansWork (note the correct spelling) navigation template. If you can't figure out how to do that, tell us the name of the novel you want to add to the navigation template, and someone here can add it for you. Another option is to add a comment to Template talk:PatrickOBriansWork stating specifically what you would like to add, and someone else who watches that template can add it for you. If you mess up the template, you can mess up every page that transcludes it, so this is kind of a high-risk thing to try if you have not done it before. Just be ready to revert your changes if you screw it up. Or better yet, test your edits by copying the template to a user subpage such as User:Hammerdrill/Sandbox where you can experiment with no risk. --Teratornis (talk) 00:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Fundraising Notice
Just a quick one: It seems to me that the software has been changed so that it is no longer possible to cover this up with a div. I know I can disappear it so I don't have to see it, but it would be nice if I could cover it up on my user and user talk pages.

If I am wrong in thinking this is no longer possible, do feel free to correct me :) Brilliantine (talk) 01:29, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You can remove the notice by enabling "Suppress display of the fundraiser banner" in the Gadgets tab of your preferences. Cheers.  C h a m a l  talk 01:32, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I know (as stated in my question) just wondering if there was still a way to stop other users from having to see it on my User and User Talk pages :) Brilliantine (talk) 01:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, stupid me :) Sorry, but I can't help you there.  C h a m a l  talk 01:50, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Help with database dumping?
I was wondering if someone could help me, or point me to someone or somewhere that could, convert a database dump to multiple, non-treed base-raw html pages. I've already followed the somewhat bland instructions at Wikipedia:Database but never get quite the results I needed. I have http://download.wikimedia.org/enwiki/20080724/enwiki-20080724-pages-meta-current.xml.bz2. I want to convert the uncompressed code (using ANY program) to multiple html pages. The equivalent of going to every page and clicking save:as... Am I missing something? Lostinlodos (talk) 01:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You may want to ask at Village Pump (technical). Calvin 1998 (t·c) 02:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Using WikiMapia Images on Wikipedia
I have searched the help desk archive and I can't seem to find anything on this. Can we screen grab Wikimapia images to use as satellite images of bays, urban areas, parks, geographic features, etc? How do they relate to WP policies and copyright? Nick carson (talk) 02:35, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The images on Wikimapia are from Google Maps. At the bottom of Wikimapia you'll see a link to terms of use, which provides statements such as:"'Google Maps is made available for your internal use only and may not be commercially redistributed' and 'You may not delete or in any manner alter the copyright, trademark, or other proprietary rights notices appearing in map information, including photographic imagery' and ' 'Google Maps is provided under license by... and subject to copyright protection and other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to...'"
 * All this means to me that the content is completely incompatible with the GFDL and thus we cannot use it on Wikipedia as free content and using it would be a copyright violation. Of course, there is always fair use, but I don't think maps, which can be made or sought from other sources would likely qualify (though I should qualify by saying that this is not the heart of my Wikipedia expertise).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:48, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * In short, no, because the images are not licensed under the GFDL and I'm quite sure they wouldn't qualify for fair use. But if you can find them, imagery from sources such as NASA or the USGS should be copyright free, you could try that. Calvin 1998 (t·c) 02:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I mean, these are images of people's houses, trees, roads, lakes, rivers, rail lines, how can a copyright be applied to such images without them being subject to fair use? Moreover, how can NASA images come under fair use but Google images not? they're of exactally the same subject matter taken in exactally the same manner. Nick carson (talk) 01:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

bracket templates
How do I create my own tournament bracket templates? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.176.183.54 (talk)


 * It depends on what you're trying to achieve, the easiest thing to do would be to see if one has already been created in Category:Tournament bracket templates that you could use. If not then you can look at the code of some of those and adapt it to your needs. Nanonic (talk) 03:52, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

A problem on a discussion page
What exactly is going on here-? There seems to be a misguided person here. Any ideas on what to do of the mess?--Leif edling (talk) 03:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The mess on Talk:Euler's theorem does not follow the Talk page guidelines. It looks like a paste of some material from the Italian Wikipedia by an unregistered user. The original copy appears to be here:
 * it:Wikipedia:Vaglio/Eulero
 * If you want to see that in Google English, use the Translate wikipedia template I recently created:
 * Interestingly, the page doesn't seem to make any sense on the Italian Wikipedia either. Could be an example of WP:NONSENSE. I doubt anyone (who matters) would mind if you deleted all that stuff and replaced it with Maths rating and Talkheader templates. If the user who pasted that material had a user page, you could userfy the material there, but if someone can't be bothered to create an account before putting garbage on an article talk page, I wouldn't see the need to feel any more concerned about that person's "work" than he or she is. --Teratornis (talk) 04:24, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's been deleted. See Talk page guidelines for information about when it's acceptable to meddle with other editors' talk page comments. You should of course use great discretion when editing others' comments, but if it's a case of obvious vandalism, nonsense, etc, be bold and remove it yourself. Cheers! --Fullobeans (talk) 04:32, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's been deleted. See Talk page guidelines for information about when it's acceptable to meddle with other editors' talk page comments. You should of course use great discretion when editing others' comments, but if it's a case of obvious vandalism, nonsense, etc, be bold and remove it yourself. Cheers! --Fullobeans (talk) 04:32, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Bot operating
How to RUN the bot, this account will be an bot?? Roded86bot (talk) 06:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Beats me, but have you seen WP:BOT and WP:MAKEBOT? --Fullobeans (talk) 06:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * On second thought, assuming you are the same person as 140.128.148.217, you may want to hold off on the bot and start reading through the links on your talk page to learn how to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. Remember that all your edits are recorded permanently in both the page history and your user contributions, so you should think carefully about your edits before you save them. --Fullobeans (talk) 07:14, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have reported the user name to WP:UAA, because IMHO it is misleading, masquerading as a bot account when it is not. – ukexpat (talk) 15:39, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * User name now blocked. – ukexpat (talk) 20:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Advert
I want and wish wikipedia to open paying for advertiment, and wikipedia will be have more revenue to resolve currect financial crisis. 140.128.148.217 (talk) 06:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * See Perennial proposals. -Optigan13 (talk) 06:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't think Wikipedia itself is suffering much of a financial crisis. The fundraiser is an annual event and to me it looks like we're pretty much on target at the moment. The Goal only needs to be reached somewhere early next year. - 131.211.211.5 (talk) 08:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it's time Wikipedia is sold off to a business (like google) that has the financial and technical capability to support this project. Wikipedia is held back a lot in it's current form.-- intraining  Jack In  09:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is a non-profit organization for a reason. Selling it to a company would mean NPOV would be down the drain. Look at the mess that is Google knol. Everyone is posting like crazy to earn money. Duplicate articles galore and no cooperative editing. I don't want Wikipedia to turn into that.- Mgm|(talk) 11:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The sale of Wikipedia does not necessarily mean that policy's will change, What I mean is that change's we want to make but are currently restricted by weak servers (lack of funds) will be made. An example is the symbols in the edit function now have to be copy and pasted instead of just clicking it like it used to be.-- intraining  Jack In  11:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia always slows down before new servers are installed. It's no more than logical. The site still grows and until the new servers are installed, the existing ones will be strained. As for the "symbols in the edit function" What are you talking about? - Mgm|(talk) 12:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * When you click edit this page the symbols are located under the edit summary, They look like this, Symbols: ~ | ¡ ¿ † ‡ ↔ ↑ ↓ • ¶  # ½ ⅓ ⅔ ¼ ¾ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ ∞   ‘ “ ’ ” «»   ¤ ₳ ฿ ₵ ¢ ₡ ₢ $ ₫ ₯ € ₠ ₣ ƒ ₴ ₭ ₤ ℳ ₥ ₦ № ₧ ₰ £ ៛ ₨ ₪ ৳ ₮ ₩ ¥   ♠ ♣ ♥ ♦   m² m³

Characters: Á á Ć ć É é Í í Ĺ ĺ Ń ń Ó ó Ŕ ŕ Ś ś Ú ú Ý ý Ź ź  À à È è Ì ì Ò ò Ù ù   Â â Ĉ ĉ Ê ê Ĝ ĝ Ĥ ĥ Î î Ĵ ĵ Ô ô Ŝ ŝ Û û Ŵ ŵ Ŷ ŷ   Ä ä Ë ë Ï ï Ö ö Ü ü Ÿ ÿ   ß   Ã ã Ẽ ẽ Ĩ ĩ Ñ ñ Õ õ Ũ ũ Ỹ ỹ   Ç ç Ģ ģ Ķ ķ Ļ ļ Ņ ņ Ŗ ŗ Ş ş Ţ ţ   Đ đ   Ů ů   Ǎ ǎ Č č Ď ď Ě ě Ǐ ǐ Ľ ľ Ň ň Ǒ ǒ Ř ř Š š Ť ť Ǔ ǔ Ž ž   Ā ā Ē ē Ī ī Ō ō Ū ū Ȳ ȳ Ǣ ǣ   ǖ ǘ ǚ ǜ Ă ă Ĕ ĕ Ğ ğ Ĭ ĭ Ŏ ŏ Ŭ ŭ   Ċ ċ Ė ė Ġ ġ İ ı Ż ż   Ą ą Ę ę Į į Ǫ ǫ Ų ų   Ḍ ḍ Ḥ ḥ Ḷ ḷ Ḹ ḹ Ṃ ṃ Ṇ ṇ Ṛ ṛ Ṝ ṝ Ṣ ṣ Ṭ ṭ   Ł ł   Ő ő Ű ű   Ŀ ŀ   Ħ ħ   Ð ð Þ þ   Œ œ   Æ æ Ø ø Å å   Ə ə Greek: Ά ά Έ έ Ή ή Ί ί Ό ό Ύ ύ Ώ ώ  Α α Β β Γ γ Δ δ   Ε ε Ζ ζ Η η Θ θ   Ι ι Κ κ Λ λ Μ μ   Ν ν Ξ ξ Ο ο Π π   Ρ ρ Σ σ ς Τ τ Υ υ   Φ φ Χ χ Ψ ψ Ω ω Cyrillic: А а Б б В в Г г  Ґ ґ Ѓ ѓ Д д Ђ ђ   Е е Ё ё Є є Ж ж   З з Ѕ ѕ И и І і   Ї ї Й й Ј ј К к   Ќ ќ Л л Љ љ М м   Н н Њ њ О о П п   Р р С с Т т Ћ ћ   У у Ў ў Ф ф Х х   Ц ц Ч ч Џ џ Ш ш   Щ щ Ъ ъ Ы ы Ь ь   Э э Ю ю Я я IPA: t̪ d̪ ʈ ɖ ɟ ɡ ɢ ʡ ʔ  ɸ ʃ ʒ ɕ ʑ ʂ ʐ ʝ ɣ ʁ ʕ ʜ ʢ ɦ   ɱ ɳ ɲ ŋ ɴ   ʋ ɹ ɻ ɰ   ʙ ʀ ɾ ɽ   ɫ ɬ ɮ ɺ ɭ ʎ ʟ   ɥ ʍ ɧ   ɓ ɗ ʄ ɠ ʛ   ʘ ǀ ǃ ǂ ǁ   ɨ ʉ ɯ   ɪ ʏ ʊ   ɘ ɵ ɤ   ə ɚ   ɛ ɜ ɝ ɞ ʌ ɔ   ɐ ɶ ɑ ɒ   ʰ ʷ ʲ ˠ ˤ ⁿ ˡ   ˈ ˌ ː ˑ ̪    Do these ring a bell? As for your server installing comment I think you do not really know what you are on about!-- intraining  Jack In  12:12, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * What do you mean? The clicking still works.  C h a m a l  talk 12:18, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well I and many many other have to copy and paste, I read in this help desk a while ago that the cause is weak java servers or something like that I will try to find the question and get back to you.-- intraining  Jack In  12:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe browser differences? I'm using Firefox.  C h a m a l  talk 12:24, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I am using Firefox too, It even says Copy and Paste next to the symbols.-- intraining  Jack In  12:30, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm baffled. It works fine for me now, and always has. These symbols: ฿ÁΏЂףصɦ were all inserted by clicking on them.  C h a m a l  talk 12:37, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I am also baffled. I thought everyone had this issue - I need a beer.-- intraining  Jack In  12:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems those characters are a browser issue. The reduced menu where you need to click the sort of symbol you want before clicking the actual symbol does not change the symbol bar for me. - Mgm|(talk) 12:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * About the advertising on Wikipedia issue, see Advertisements and especially Advertisements. --Teratornis (talk) 21:26, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Quick way of adding articles to your watchlist
Is there any quick way to add certain articles to your watchlist without having to click the watchlist tab on the article? For example if i wanted all the articles in a certain category on my watchlist this would really help. Is there anyway quick way to do this? Maybe a script perhaps or is it just a very long process? Thanks, advice appreciated  Monster Under Your Bed  (talk) 10:44, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * All I can suggest is that you edit your raw watch list.-- intraining  Jack In  10:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks but theres got to be an easier way. I am sure someone can make something up to speed it up. If there was a link on a certain cat. to add all the pages within the cat to your watchlist that would be great.  Monster Under Your Bed  (talk) 11:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Please read the above question for your answer:).-- intraining  Jack In  11:17, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Install navigation popups as a gadget in your user account (Preferences --> Gadgets, check the appropriate box, save, and clear your browser cache). You will then be able to add to your watchlist using the popup interface. – ukexpat (talk) 15:43, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

edit tag is unavailable!
Hi there I have made my very first Wikipedia edit, adding an original image file to the article on (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migraine_aura) Migraine Auras. The edit link for the main body of the page, where I would like to have placed my image, is directing me to the "see also" section. Each edit tag on the page seems to be linked to the section below it, resulting in no edit tag available for the top section. I have put the .jpg in the "see also" section but it looks funny there and I would love to put it at the top of the page where it belongs. Can you help me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.211.3.106 (talk) 12:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You have probably clicked on the wrong edit links. The edit link for the whole page is on the top of the page (the edit tab). Use that link if you want to edit this section. There isn't a edit link to the first section (lead section) unless you're a registered user and have enabled that in your preferences. Edit links for every other section are in line with the section header, aligned to the right. Cheers.  C h a m a l  talk 12:40, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Question about removing false/unverifiable/defamatory information
Hello,

I'm the President of a small company that has a Wikipedia entry (Legitscript). Our entry has been vandalized with some inaccurate and unverifiable (because it's inaccurate) as well as defamatory information twice over the last couple of days. We removed the false and defamatory information, which simply cited accusations in blogs as the basis for facts.

Two questions: 1. The page now says that major edits to the entry (our edits) were put up with someone that doesn't have a neutral point of view. That's true, but our understanding is that it's permissible to remove false, unverifiable, etc. information about yourself or your own company. What is the best way to approach this? Surely, we aren't required to refrain from removing false information about our company. 2. Is there a way to prevent continued vandalization to the page? We certainly don't have any problem with anyone editing the entry with verifiable facts, but of course want to be able to remove information that is inaccurate (and being inaccurate, unverifiable).

Thanks very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jchkayaker (talk • contribs) 13:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The notice at the top of the Legitscript directs you to the conflict of interest guideline. Read this, and it will let you know what you should and shouldn't do with this article. Take a look under Defending interest - notice that it says that anyone (even a conflicted editor) may and should remove unsupported defamatory material from an article. If you think the article is being persistently vandalised and you want to ask for assistance, you can place a short note on the administrator intervention against vandalism page. User:ukexpat seems to have taken an interest in the page, so you could also leave a note on his talk page. Gandalf61 (talk) 17:17, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Banned
What will happen if i get "banned", not only may not edit any pages, what other sitition will happen? JustbeBPMF (talk) 13:47, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * See the Banning policy. A ban may apply to an area of Wikipedia or even the whole project. It could also be temporary or permanent.  C h a m a l  talk 13:52, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Your mean is all language version of Wikipedia won't able to edit? JustbeBPMF (talk) 13:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think what Chamal N was referring to was a topic ban versus a site ban. For example, an editor can be banned from editing Palestine/Israel articles or Scientology articles. Or an editor can be banned from the entire site. This only applies to English Wikipedia, however, as other language Wikis make their own decisions.  TN ‑  X   - Man  14:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes. I should have made myself clearer. When I said "Area of Wikipedia" I meant it could be an article, or a topic area.  C h a m a l  talk 14:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The obvious thing to do is not get banned so you never have to find out... - Mgm|(talk) 14:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Also see the blocking policy, as "blocking" means something different from "banning" on Wikipedia, and people often confuse the two. Pyrospirit  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 01:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

IPs signing posts
Why do IPs almost never sign their posts? 89.242.164.133 (talk) 17:50, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The large majority of IPs I've encountered do not make very many edits. While they may have experience reading Wikipedia, they may not have much experience editing Wikipedia. Signing posts (along with wikilinking, templates, etc.) is something that usually takes a few tries before you remember to do it automatically.  TN ‑  X   - Man  17:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia editing skill follows a Pareto distribution - most Wikipedia users merely dabble, and have little editing skill; a small fraction have modest skill; and a tiny fraction have read the friendly manuals in depth and developed advanced skill. It's hardly surprising that most unregistered users would not have learned (or feel bothered to follow) the Talk page guidelines, because registering an account and signing one's talk page comments are both acts that show consideration for other users, and indicate that a user has made some progress in learning Wikipedia. When we establish an identity (or even a consistent pseudo-identity) by creating an account, signing our talk page comments, and leaving useful edit summaries, we help other editors by informing them about who we are. It's very difficult for people to coordinate their efforts and (especially) to resolve conflicts when they aren't able to associate identities with the people they are dealing with. The reason for our unease is our inability to predict the behavior of people whose track record is inaccessible to us. (IP addresses can change or be shared, so the edit history of an IP address may be incomplete, or downright misleading.) When you know absolutely nothing about another person, you can't be sure whether they will like what you say to them, or feel deeply offended. Humans have emotional brains which weigh these factors for us, which is why we might feel nervous about getting on an elevator with a complete stranger, but we feel at ease around our friends. While there are some unregistered users who read the friendly manuals and contribute productively, there are many more whose failure to register is part of a larger mindset which fails to "get" Wikipedia. Thus it should not be surprising that a larger fraction of users who log in to edit will be similarly courteous to other users in other ways (such as by signing their talk page comments). However, there are exceptions, such as a few users who create accounts specifically to increase their vandalism damage potential. --Teratornis (talk) 19:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Editing a Page.
Hello,

I wanted to add a fact to the BILLY GIBBONS page, but cant figure out how to do it. Is there an editor I can send the info to for consideration? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billygibbonsproject (talk • contribs) 18:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You should be able to edit the article by clicking on the "edit" tab at the very top of the page. Please be sure that any facts added are supported by reliable sources. You may also want to discuss your addition on the article's talk page. Cheers!  TN ‑  X   - Man  18:27, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

extensive rewrite of existing article
Wikipedia has had an article about my work for a while now (Matthew Stadler), but it is inaccurate and out of date. I tried to correct it through a small number of line edits, but many of my edits were rejected because my sources were not acceptable. I worked on the edits so they are properly sourced, and that work turned into a complete rewriting of the article. This rewrite is is much longer and more detailed than the existing article.

My question: what are the best next steps to take so that this rewrite can be posted and cause the least amount of problems or work for Wikipedia volunteers? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MatthewStadler (talk • contribs) 18:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Because of your conflict of interest your best option is to post a message to the article's talk page declaring your conflict and noting how the article needs to be improved and see if any editors will assist with the edits. – ukexpat (talk) 20:30, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Also see: WP:BLP and Biographies of living persons/Help. The latter page contains instructions both for you (the subject of the biography) and all the other users who edit the article. We also need to clarify what you mean by "this rewrite" and "best":
 * Presumably by "this rewrite" you refer to something you wrote with something other than Wikipedia. For example, maybe you wrote a document with Microsoft Word and have it as a local file on your computer. The more specific you can be about what you mean, the more easily someone can give you specific advice. Perhaps the most practical way to make your rewrite easily available to other Wikipedia editors is to:
 * Transcribe (perhaps by copying and pasting) your rewrite to a user subpage such as: User:MatthewStadler/Sandbox (on Wikipedia we use the term "sandbox" to refer to a page where we make practice or test edits). If you need help with this, let us know.
 * Leave a comment on Talk:Matthew Stadler explaining that you have a user subpage containing your suggested rewrites to the article, with a link to it. Again, if you don't know how to do this, let us know and a more experienced user can handle it.
 * As to "best," I'm guessing you probably really mean "optimal." The "best" way to work productively with other Wikipedia editors is to learn as much about Wikipedia editing as they know, but that would require you to do a lot of work, which might not be worth your time if you only care about correcting one article. Wikipedia is perhaps the most efficient system ever devised for remote collaboration, but it is so different than anything most people have experienced that it takes a lot of work to master. If you would like to become an accomplished Wikipedia editor, you'll need to read lots of help pages (and/or read the book Wikipedia - The Missing Manual) and edit lots of different articles, over a period of months or years. Your contributions show your first edit under this username was in 2007, but you haven't made many edits yet. How much do you want to learn about Wikipedia? The "best" way to proceed depends on your answer to that question.
 * --Teratornis (talk) 20:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Page version control on userpage
Someone appears to be excercising version control over my userpage without my consent and apparently against basic policy and courtesy. I didn't know we had version control implemented, and though its a wonderful idea, its application to own userpage is not welcome. I'd like it corrected. -Zahd (talk) 19:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * What do you mean by "version control"? Have you read WP:UP? --Teratornis (talk) 19:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I was mistaken. Must have been a caching issue. Thanks anyway. The content isn't the relevant issue. -Zahd (talk) 20:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict)It appears that User:Spotfixer has been editing your user page. You can see on his talk page where other users have warned him/her about this. However, as Teratornis mentioned, please review what userpages are not.  TN ‑  X   - Man  20:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I just blanked the user page again -- the content was clearly inappropriate per WP:UP. – ukexpat (talk) 20:34, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If you want to express opinions on your user page, a compromise method is to put up some userboxes. Jimbo Wales doesn't like them, but at least userboxes generally take care to qualify themselves with "This user believes/likes/does X" rather than to make unprovable truth claims such as purporting to speak directly for God. Saying "I believe (in some doctrine)" is very different than saying "(Some doctrine) is true." On Wikipedia, our standard for truth is much stronger than someone's mere personal assertion, which is useless anyway because billions of people around the world assert all sorts of contradictory things. When people develop the bad habit of asserting things they cannot prove, it's one step from there to Religious war, because when two people believe incompatible things and view the other's opinion as blasphemy, their only two options are to avoid each other, or try to settle their differences with force. Wikipedia avoids this type of stupidity by requiring all users to agree on a specific truth standard (see WP:V and WP:RS). The truth we all agree on is to document who asserted what, not to determine which of the unprovable assertions were true. --Teratornis (talk) 20:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The statement on my userpage does not violate the clause " extensive personal opinions on matters unrelated to Wikipedia." Likewise the statement is an apologetic statement, not a polemical statement that the policy prohibits; nor is it "attacking or vilifying groups of editors or persons," as it is merely stating a concept of absolute discernment. -Zahd (talk) 22:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * OK tell me what is "apologetic" about this: There is a God, and He hates abortion. The sad truth is that in this world of Godless "freedoms," even a single word in support of an actual abortion can cause one to be destroyed in the hellfire, or condemned to hell. This is the way He sees it. IMHO you are pushing your anti-abortion beliefs in an inappropriate manner. – ukexpat (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

(undent) Unverifiable assertions are perhaps the weakest possible form of apologetics, which is why some folks who have nothing more to back up their supernatural claims have a bad habit of beheading people who don't accept their unverifiable assertions. If I claim the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists, I have not given FSM doubters any reason to change their minds, and neither have I made the claims of FSM proponents any more believable (adding more people who make an unprovable assertion accomplishes nothing; see argumentum ad populum). You should brush up on critical thinking, and if you have any well-sourced, useful material to add to an article such as Existence of God, please add it. And if you think you'll be able to wikilawyer your way to placing these kinds of highly divisive unverifiable claims on your userpage - and nothing else - then I can assure you that you will lose this argument just as many others lost it before you. You might find another wiki such as Conservapedia more welcoming to your point of view. --Teratornis (talk) 00:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I understand your atheism. -Zahd (talk) 00:14, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Editing (deleting) an ostensibly promotional link in an article CLETE BOYER
I am very new to editing, but I looked up the article for my favorite baseball player CLETE BOYER and clicked through the references. All of them were OK except reference #7 to something called ETERNAL IMAGE (which, when I clicked the link) sent me to a commemorative products site (urns, baseballs, etc.) I believe this violates policy and has nothing whatsover to do with the article.

When I tried to edit it all I see is: ==References== {Reflist} I don't see anything I can edit. Can you help?

In other words, there is nothing to edit. Can you help me? Thanks, Web20librarian (talk) 21:19, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The code for the footnote is at the place the footnote link appears, not in the references section. See Help:Footnotes for more info. Algebraist 21:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * linkspam now deleted. – ukexpat (talk) 22:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Algebraist!

printing an article
I don't seem to be able to print the exact article I am viewing "History of Religion in the United States". Something else about the subject prints. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.196.85.125 (talk) 21:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Did you try printing the printable version of the page? Click on the "printable version" link in the toolbox on the left hand side of the page. – ukexpat (talk) 22:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Joke categories on Book of Proverbs
Hello, there are some joke categories on the Book of Proverb page, like "Articles with unsourced statements since November 2008 Now there's no way you know this on your own..." and "Articles with unsourced statements since November 2008 There are? The state them, scholars like to write books so they can be referenced... :)". I can't figure out how to fix this. Could somebody please help? Thank you. Loves  Macs  (talk) 22:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Someone's been using fact in a rather strange way. Fixed. Algebraist 22:27, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * See for the explanation. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

"Save page" times out for logged-in user (proxy IP blocked for anonymous)
It seems my internet provider (Virgin Media) are experimenting with transparent proxies. My proxy was blocked for vandalism (anon-only). I can log in normally (after solving a Captcha) and access my watchlist. But whenever I click "Save page" nothing happens – except that if I wait long enough, in the end I am offered a file  for download.

My solution is to log in on the secure server. Is this a known problem? --Hans Adler (talk) 22:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi Hans. Go to your account preferences, click on the "editing" tab and untick the box that says "use external editor by default". If that does not solve the issue, or it's already unticked, please advise and wait for further help:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It's already unticked – otherwise using the secure server wouldn't have solved the issue. I am not really helpless, but others in the same situation might be. Therefore I would like to report this problem to whatever is the right place. But I am not sure if it's a configuration problem with en.wikipedia, a mediawiki bug, or even a known feature. --Hans Adler (talk) 23:47, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a caching issue. Try bypassing your browser cache on the non-secure server. I doubt it's a MediaWiki bug or a configuration problem; if it was, a lot more people would be reporting the same problem. Pyrospirit  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 01:15, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Apparently I have the problem currently discussed at Administrators' noticeboard as affecting thousands of users, plus a complication. No, I don't think it's a browser cache issue. Otherwise rebooting all equipment, or turning off the computer over night, would have helped. I have now reported this bug to Bugzilla, so this can probably be closed. Thank you. --Hans Adler (talk) 21:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)