Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2008 December 5

= December 5 =

Date when first published
I want to know on what date was this article first published: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)

I'm doing a report for school and my sources have to be from 2004 or sooner. Any ideas? Thanks : ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.218.7 (talk • contribs) 00:33, 5 December 2008


 * According to the article's revision history, the article was first created at 17:39, 8 February 2005 (UTC), and the article was last edited at 07:01, 3 December 2008 (UTC). Pyrospirit  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 00:53, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Also take a look at the many links under References, External links, and Further reading at the bottom of the article. Quite a few of them are from after 2004, and your teacher will probably jump for joy if you write a report without referencing Wikipedia. --Fullobeans (talk) 01:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Have a look at the Cite link in the left bar of the site, which every article page has. It gives you the information you need to cite Wikipedia in the most used formats. Fullobeans is right, though, it's better not to cite Wikipedia and use the sources we used to make the articles instead. - 131.211.210.70 (talk) 08:40, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

defaultsort
With all the notifications on talk pages now over the sortkey issue and pages being auto-populated in Category:Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts, is there a central discussion or article on the problem somewhere and a quick breakdown of what must be done to the relevant templates to fix this? Nanonic (talk) 00:41, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Please let me know if you find it! As far as I can tell, the problem arises when an article contains DEFAULTSORT and the talk page contains two or more templates with listas parameters and one of them is either empty, or contains a different sort from DEFAULTSORT. Frankly, I don't understand the point of the listas parameters in talk page templates - the DEFAULTSORT sorting should apply for all purposes. – ukexpat (talk) 01:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * As I understand it, it’s another way to solve the problem in this proposal. I think the listas parameter is a bad idea; we should wait instead for the proposal to be adopted: that (and maybe a single DEFAULTSORT per page) will remove the need for listas. —teb728 t c 01:54, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

help.
I attend Hargrave Military Academy, and I have been inducted into a secret "group" of the best cadets. The man who started this club is a senior and will be leaving next year. I would like to create a page of our "clan" in memory of him. How do i create a page on wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hobbsa92 (talk • contribs) 00:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, your club may not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. Read WP:ORG to see what constitutes a notable organization, and WP:NOT to see what's generally deemed unacceptable. I'd also recommend that you familiarize yourself with Wikipedia by editing other articles which interest you, before you start building articles from scratch. --Fullobeans (talk) 01:04, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If the group is as you say secret, there is no way it could have the substantial coverage in secondary sources necessary to establish notability; so any article on the group would be speedily deleted. —teb728 t c 01:39, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * If I may volunteer my 0.02 here: the web site http://www.facebook.com/ seems to be very flexible, in terms of allowing stuff that (in the opinion of a given observer) might not be considered very notable.  There, is it fairly easy to create a fan page, or a "group", (which can be either open to all, or somewhat exclusive regarding membership), etc.  Would it be too restrictive to require, that each person in the club, might have to have their own page on facebook?  (If they don't "already" have one, they are easy to create.)  This is just an idea.  It seems like, that might meet your needs.  I hope this helps,  --Mike Schwartz (talk) 02:41, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It seems to me that publicizing a secret group must be contrary to the rules of the group. Wanderer57 (talk) 19:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed, remember the first rule of Fight Club is you do not talk about Fight Club. – ukexpat (talk) 21:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Rollback?
This is mainly a non-constructive editor, please eval for rollback. Mjpresson (talk) 01:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That is an IP so is is technically impossible to assign them rollback. For future reference WP:RFPERM is the correct place to bring such requests. Icewedge (talk) 02:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the OP means the IP's edits should be rolled back.  TN ‑  X   - Man  12:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * * facepalm*, you are correct. Icewedge (talk) 07:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

advice, please: How do I tag an article for possible "re-naming"?
Today I started to ask (/"put") this question at "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Biography_articles_needing_attention"; but there I found, when I started to edit, that it said [quote:] << "Attention Talk pages in this namespace are generally not watched by many users. Please consider visiting the Help desk for a more prompt response or reviewing the Categorization FAQ for quick tips." >> (!!) So I decided to put it here instead. Sorry if this is the wrong place.

This is about an article ["re-naming issue"] that is not "YET" a Category_talk:Biography article, but might "become" one, in the future. For an explanation, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Austin_Bay#Could_we_re-name_this_.28already-existing.29_article.3F and in fact, see all of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Austin_Bay.

I asked about this (potential future) "re-naming" idea, more than a week ago, and apparently I was asking in the wrong place, because it appears that no one (who can advise me about how to properly tag the "body of water" article Austin Bay for possible "re-naming") has read the question (or, if they have, they didn't answer) ("yet").

Any advice? Thanks, --Mike Schwartz (talk) 02:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I responded at Talk:Austin Bay. :) --Tkynerd (talk) 03:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

How do I add a picture of an album cover and the other things in the square of information?
Can you please tell me how to add the picture of an album cover as well as edit all of the other things in the squares on the top right hand side that include information about the album? This is driving me NUTS trying to figure out...I've spent an hour getting THIS far. Lord save me!

AxRox (talk) 03:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)AlexAxRox (talk) 03:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * The squares at the top right are infoboxes a type of template. On the article you were recently editing, Snakebite (album), the template is generated by the code below which can be found at the top of the article when you open it for editing.

Changing different fields will change the values in the boxes. In the case when a field is not self explanatory, refer to the documentation at Template:Infobox Album/doc. Icewedge (talk) 03:29, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * There is also FAQ/Editing for this, which can be reached through the FAQ link at the top of this page. (Although, it needs one more click.) &mdash; Sebastian 03:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Categories don't display on a particular page
For some weird reason, the categories in Building insulation won't display. I had been using HotCat, and thought that might cause the problem, but it still persists when I uninstall it. &mdash; Sebastian 03:37, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Unclosed ref tag. Fixed. Algebraist 03:39, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah, you again! Thanks! I recently started using WikEd, and so I guess I relied too much on its syntax coloring, which appeared to look good to me. &mdash; Sebastian 03:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

John Kennedy test
early in the space program President John Kennedy developed a test to qualify those with an ability to encounte the unknown. The test was done and devoleped by 11 universities world wide. The test development I believe cost 20,000,000.00 The  firt person to pass this test became the head of the space program in houston, tex. actually he was the only person at that time to score 100 percent. The nickname for this exam. was the John Kennedy test.. My question is. What was the real name of this exam. Is it true the goverment tracks those who score very high. If so was I the 2nd person 25 years later to score 100 percent. I was told so in 1985 by a doctor at dallas diagnostics, in dallas,tex. Please reply to   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.14.1.252 (talk) 04:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. Algebraist 04:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Apologies if the questioner is sincere, but this question sounds fishy to say the least. It's hard to believe that someone who could score as high on a standardized test as the head of the space program in Houston would need to ask someone else to look up some information for him or her (and would ask in the wrong place, ignoring the instructions in the big red box over the edit window). I'd hope Michael Coats (the current Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center director) could look this up if he had to. Especially if this test "qualifies those with an ability to encounter the unknown" - what is the Web if not the playground for people having this skill? Furthermore, people who score high on standardized tests can usually spell. So pardon me if I suspect yet another Help desk hoax here. If the government is tracking the questioner, maybe the best people to ask are the guys in dark suits in those Black helicopters hovering outside. In the real world, standardized tests are but one measure of ability, and they are more of a group predictor than an individual predictor. That is, if you test a large group of young people, and then track them for the rest of their lives in a longitudinal study, the result will likely be that on average the high-scoring people will have generally better outcomes, earn more money, commit less crime, etc., but there might be some low-scoring success stories as well as some high-scoring flops. Therefore a test score by itself is never enough to qualify a person for a position of great responsibility, which is why people only gain such positions (in a strict meritocracy) after having demonstrated competence as they climb through an organization. Once a person begins compiling a track record of real performance, few people ask about the test score after that. A similar difficulty applies to drafting players for a professional sports team. You can subject prospective players to every sort of athletic ability test, but still it remains exceedingly difficult to predict which prospects will succeed at the pro level. The tests are primarily useful for weeding out obviously unqualified prospects; they don't predict which of the highly qualified prospects will become standouts. --Teratornis (talk) 18:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Can a Category be redirected?
I just noticed that Category:Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Category:Buffyverse both exist. If one is redirected to the other, will its members be carried along? —Tamfang (talk) 05:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * See WP:CAT. --Silver Edge (talk) 06:00, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have reverted Tamfang's undiscussed addition of Buffy the Vampire Slayer to Category:Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Please take it to Categories for discussion if you think categories should be merged. Note that the category history shows Categories for discussion/Log/2007 December 7 where it was kept as it is. Also note that the two categories don't have exactly the same purpose and it's not an accident that two were created. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:41, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Copy and Paste Symbols
How come I need to copy and paste the symbols instead of just clicking them like I used to?-- intraining  Jack In  07:35, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Archibald Bell Jr
If I want to do an article on Archibald Bell Jr, is "Jr" the correct way to spell it in the heading? Sardaka (talk) 09:38, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I found these two articles, Dale Earnhardt, Jr. and Ken Griffey, Jr. which suggest that you should create Archibald Bell, Jr. also see Naming conventions (common names) which have a example on James Earl Carter, Jr. suggesting that it is the corect way of doing it (even though it is wrong in that example). --Stefan talk 11:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * And Jr. generally has a period in U.S. English but not in British English. --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  11:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * In my experience it is only necessary to add the Jr suffix if it is required to disambiguate from Sr. In this case there is no existing article on Archibald Bell so that should be the title, ie no suffix. Also see Naming conventions (people) – ukexpat (talk) 16:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * If memory serves, the editor of Smithsonian magazine uses jr uncapitalized, no period, no comma. —Tamfang (talk) 23:49, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

My Home page
how do i make my homepage (User Page)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwe.fana (talk • contribs) 09:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understand what you're asking - I see you've been editing your user page for the last few weeks. What do you want to put on your userpage? See User page for more general information on user pages. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 09:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I believe he wants his userpage as his homepage. To do this, go to where your homepage URL is in your internet settings, and copy/paste the URL of your userpage into that box. Best, Peter Symonds ( talk ) 11:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

New template grammar
This is probably a somewhat odd request, but could anyone have a look at the grammar of the Duplicatepage template, which i recently created? I have a tendency to make grammar/spelling mistakes in pages where the wording is not completely my own choice (IE: Where the sentences should follow certain guidelines). Thanks in advance! Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 10:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * How about: "Hello. An article you recently created has been found to be an identical copy of another page. If you intended to point a new article title to an already existing article, please use a redirect. Otherwise, please add db-g6 to the top of the page to have it deleted. Thank you." Xenon54 11:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, a little less confrontational and less, dare I say, pompous! " It has come to my attention..." sounds like something one of us lawyers would say! – ukexpat (talk) 16:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Much, MUCH better, thanks for that suggestion. The template is an alternative for Template:Firstredirect, with the new template specializing in people duplicating (their own) pages, and Duplicatepage template being used for people creating pages about topics that are already covered. The firstredirect template served as the basis for the new one, and due to this the wording is a little... i think the right word is indeed pompous. Excirial ( Contact me, Contribs ) 16:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

where do I go to complain about the way Wikipedia works?
... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.171.169.155 (talk) 11:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * If you explain the issues a bit, we can direct you to the proper discussions. We need to know if it is a technical issue, a policy or guideline issue, a content issue or a social issue. --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  11:28, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Probably one of the village pumps. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 11:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * To complain about how complicated it has become to create a new article. It used to be easy. I'll go to the village pump if people think that's the best place to raise the issue 124.171.169.155 (talk) 11:39, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not aware of any changes in creating a new article. What issues are you seeing? --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  12:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You cannot create a new article without creating an account and logging in. [[Image:Symbol move vote.svg|20px]] Please see Your first article.
 * Ensure that you have an account and you are logged in. If you don't have an account, create one
 * Make sure the subject is notable enough to have their own article
 * Find references
 * Make sure no article on the subject exists under a different title by typing the subject into the search box to the left (←) and clicking 'Search'
 * Type the page name in the search box to the left (←) and click 'Go'
 * Click 'Create this page'
 * Create the article, including all your references, making sure you adhere to the Manual of Style and our article layout guidelines
 * Be aware that Wikipedia deletes thousands of new articles for failing to adhere to our policies and guidelines. New articles by new users are at extra risk of deletion, due to new users' unfamiliarity with our rules. Consider gaining experience by editing existing articles before attempting to create new ones. Den sock | Dendodge in public 12:29, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for all your replies, but I remember a time when all you had to do to create a page was go to the main page and click the "create a page" button. Then wiki created a policy where people had to register to create a page, which meant that unregistered users have to go through an automated series of questions in order to create the page. That's fine. I can understand why all that was brought in. However, I now find myself trying to find the right page to create an article, and then once I've gone through all that, I go to another page which says that the article will be reviewed. Then I have to come back to find the page where the review is pending to see if the article I submitted was accepted or not. Wiki used to have an easy to understand format where all the pending submitted articles for creation where listed. The format/layout is a lot more complicated now.


 * Sorry for ranting on, but I just find it complicated to create an article these days. I don't contribute to wiki that often and so lots of small changes in procedure over time tend to confuse me. I'll see if I can bring this up at the village pump, although I'm not sure of the best way to bring up the idea that wiki can sometimes be pretty complicated to use 124.171.169.155 (talk) 13:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I have no clue what you are talking about. I have created many pages.  I type the title of the page in the search box on the left and click Go.  If it doesn't exist, there is a big red link that says "create this page".  I click on that, type in the new page, and click save.  That's it.  There's a new page.  There's no hunting for the "create an article" page.  There's no review.  There's no pending period.  It couldn't be simpler.  If the page you look for isn't there, you get a link to create it (as long as you are logged in). --  k a i n a w &trade; 13:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Gee, thanks for that Kainaw. I guess it must be pretty easy for everybody then.124.171.169.155 (talk) 13:41, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think they are referring to articles for creation. Seraphim  &hearts;  13:28, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the OP is specifically referring to this this article. The IP requested that the article be created through the articles for creation process, which is one legitimate way to create articles. There have been some updates to the AfC process to make it more streamlined, which may have caused some confusion. Alternately, you could create an account, which has many benefits. Cheers!  TN ‑  X   - Man  14:10, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

(undent) Over time, the nature of Wikipedia necessarily changes. When Wikipedia was new, it had few articles. Therefore, many notable topics did not yet have articles. Before there was an article about Jupiter, for example, it was pretty easy to start the Jupiter article without worrying about whether the subject was notable enough. Wikipedia also was not very well-known, so the people who first discovered Wikipedia tended to be a fairly select and capable group. Today the situation is different. The English Wikipedia has articles, so almost all of the obviously notable topics have articles now. The remaining topics have increasingly marginal notability, making it progressively harder for new users to create new articles that stick. Furthermore, Wikipedia is so famous now that it attracts many casual computer users, along with many deliberately malicious users. Wikipedia has had to introduce progressively more artificial barriers to simulate the natural barrier that Wikipedia's former obscurity provided. However, despite the increasing difficulty of creating new articles on Wikipedia and making them stick, the pace of new article creation has hardly slowed down. Wikipedia might be frustrating thousands of people who can't figure out how to create new articles here, but thousands more are able to read the friendly manuals and figure it out. Also note that as the quality and power of Wikipedia continue to increase, this unavoidably comes at the cost of increasing complexity. In science and technology, there is a steady trend for things to get more complex over time. For example, compare a Wright Flyer to a Boeing 747. The former was simple enough for a couple of bicycle mechanics to build in 1903; the latter has more than one million parts, and requires thousands of trained professionals in a massive division of labor to build and operate. The 747 is far more capable than the Flyer, and there is probably no way to make it much simpler than it is. In many highly developed (i.e. complex) fields, there are wistful old-timers who long for the good old days when things were simple. They just have to step aside and let the whiz kids keep moving things forward. --Teratornis (talk) 19:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Expired E-mail addresses
from former employments I have two email addresses which have expired in the mean time. It might be that my account's mail address is one of these expired ones. Whom to ask for cancelling. B.Kleine —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.233.126.235 (talk) 11:42, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * You can log in and go to Special:Preferences and view or change your email address. If you lost your password and your email goes to an account that you no longer have access to, then you are out of luck. --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  12:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

What to do with an incoherent article?
Well, I'm not sure if incoherent is the right word - I put a "multiple issues" tag on an article (Glamour (presentation)), and the article's creator asked me to clarify what I meant by "multiple issues", which I explained on the talk page. Basically the article seems to be a series of approximately-related phrases which somehow go together to define what is meant by Glamour. I don't have a particular interest in this subject, but the article seems to need improvement in some sense, and at the moment it's only got one major contributor. Is there somewhere I can suggest that people can get involved and help make this article a more encyclopaedia-friendly article? Cheers, Richard Hock (talk) 12:43, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Frankly, I would nominate that for deletion per Afd as original research - it reads like someone's fashion/design school term paper and the sole "reference" is next to useless. – ukexpat (talk) 16:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I would have done so, but the page has already had a no consensus AFD less than a month ago: Articles for deletion/Glamour (charm). It seems a bit like bad form to re-nominate again so soon (not to mention the accusation of bad faith the nom has recieved from the article creator in the discussion) - but it doesn't make the page any more coherent and it remains only really edited by one person. Any other advice? Richard Hock (talk) 17:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * On the history page of every article, there is a "Page view statistics" link that recently appeared (or I just recently noticed). So now it is possible to see how much damage an article like Glamour (charm) is doing. As you can see by clicking the link, hardly anyone seems to be looking at this article. (Glamour (presentation) shows zero views for October with this tool.) On Wikipedia, the incremental cost of an article that hardly anybody views is probably negligible. It seems to me that we should focus our efforts on improving the articles that attract the most views. For example, the Wind power article supposedly gets more than 100,000 views per month, which suggests a lot more people care about what's in that article than what's in Glamour (presentation). Furthermore, Wind power is a clearly notable topic, so there are lots of good sources. It seems to me that you already did your part with the Glamour article, since you explained the problems on the talk page. Now you can either fix the problems yourself, or wait for someone else to fix them. If few people care about the article, you may have to wait a long time. You can try to call more attention to the article, and maybe that will work, but Wikipedia has lots of articles with problems that get more views, and they tend to get attention first. I suspect when an article seems to be a "one editor show" that probably means few people care about the article. Articles that matter will invariably attract lots of editors who make it very difficult for one single editor to dominate. Incidentally, clock time is not the most meaningful measure of time on Wikipedia - page views probably are. For an article to reach a certain level of collaborative development, it probably has to get a corresponding number of page views. For a popular article, that happens in very little clock time, whereas an obscure article might need decades to accumulate the requisite attention. Thus you need to apply a different concept of time when considering the slow rate of improvement for an obscure article. The obscure article is probably about as good as we would expect it to be, given the fact that hardly anybody is looking at it. --Teratornis (talk) 19:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Incoherent is a one term for the article. Can I claim points for the neologism "needs a Wiki-enema"? --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  21:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Webpage Expired when using Back button
I've been successfully editing for many months, using Explorer under Vista. Suddenly a new problem has appeared. If I start an edit, then preview, then follow a link in the previewed article, then go back, I'm getting "Webpage has expired". I can proceed using refresh, but this never used to happen until about yesterday. What's changed, and how can I change it back? SamuelTheGhost (talk) 13:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't know, but the same thing happens to me when I edit from my place of employment, but not when I edit from my home. Both computers use Explorer—the same version, even, I think. I've wondered about it myself. Deor (talk) 16:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Simple answer - use this much better browser. Den dodge  Talk Contribs 18:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * While that is an excellent idea, it's not always possible for users to install applications on work computers. From Deor's comment, it may be related to the way a firewall operates between browser and Wikipedia. – ukexpat (talk) 18:40, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I've taken that advice, and it works. Thanks. It would still be nice to know what was wrong with Explorer ... SamuelTheGhost (talk) 18:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Now that you have installed FireFox, the wonderful world of FF extensions/add-ons is open to you. I can recommend two that help with WP editing: Wikipedia history and WPCite to simplify cite web operations. – ukexpat (talk) 19:06, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If you are not allowed to install Firefox, you might be able to run the Mozilla Firefox, Portable Edition from a USB flash drive. However, the corporate security folks might not like that, as running flash drive apps on home and work computers is a classic vector for malware invasions at work. --Teratornis (talk) 20:03, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Music notability
Given that I can provide sufficient information about a song by a popular artist (I am mainly interested in songs by Sting and The Police which are not immensely popular, if I were to write an article on these, would they meet the WP:NSONGS criteria? My opinion is that adding an article to wikipedia (with proper and sufficiently referenced info, etc.) would only serve to increase the information on the site and would expand it in a positive manner. What is the wikipedically and politically correct viewpoint on this? --Leif edling (talk) 13:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * What song are you referring to? --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  14:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The question is not whether the song is popular, but rather whether it is notable. Thus, a box-office failure which was a critical success, or even attracted notable critical attention as a failure, might qualify. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:43, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Recognition for DYK nomination.
Hi, I am not sure if this is the right place to ask this question, so please point me to some other page if I am wrong. I created and nominated article Sitabuldi Fort which was featured on DYK section yesterday (Dec 04). But I did not receive a message on my talk page like this. Is the process of recognizing the DYK nominator stopped now after DYKBot took over the charge? If not, then can some good admin award me the same so that I can add it to my collection. -- GP Pande  talk!  14:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I am not an admin, but I verified that you did create said article and have added the appropriate template to your talk page. I am not sure, however, whether or not that is something that should be done automatically by the DYKBot. Cheers!  TN ‑  X   - Man  15:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * -- GP Pande  talk!  15:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

how do i enter a biography?
Profile Born: August 31st, as Meirta Villegas Galdi in Buenos Aires, Argentina, legalized nickname in childhood to Mimi Villegas Galdi.

Raised in the the United States, Torrance/Redondo Beach, California area http://www.ci.torrance.ca.us. Relocated and resides permanently in Buenos Aires, Argentina http://www.argentina.ar/ caused by Case Galdi vs. Megdal YCO30202 and all that followed. U.S. Citizen.

Political Party: Republican

Spouse: Annulled

Children: One adult child

Residence: Buenos Aires, Argentina

Occupation: Healthcare Management and International Outsourcing, Activist

Religion: Non-denominational Christian

The Villegas family is one of the first Spanish families to be established in Mendoza, Argentina http://www.mendoza.gov.ar. Argentine Military General Blas Villegas http://www.ejercito.mil.ar/ married Mercedes de los Rios in the late 1930s or Orthodox Roman Catholic background, producing son Orlando Marcelo Villegas who married Italian immigrant Anamaria Galdi Trussi in late 1960s in hence Mimi Villegas Galdi. Father registered to volunteer for Vietnam war with prior military experience. Villegas' are U.S. citizens retired in the United States.

Education:

El Camino College, Associate of Science Degree General Education/Administration of Justice, Associates of Arts Degree in English Literature.

Southern California Regional Occupational Center, Certificate in Healthcare Management, California State License Dentistry, State of California Trade School Teaching Credential.

Redondo Beach Beauty College, Licensed Medical Esthetician.

(Educational goals were not finished caused by Galdi vs. Megdal YCO30202) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mimi Villegas Galdi (talk • contribs) 16:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Well I am afraid that unless you are notable as described here, your bio does not belong on WP. There are alternatives however. See Wikipopuli and Wikibios. – ukexpat (talk) 16:21, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

What is considered notable information or articles? My page got deleted because of lack of notability.
I started a page for a musician I work with named Erin McCarley. After linking to numerous websites to verify information on her career, my page was deleted. Are websites like myspace or blogs not sufficient sources? She clearly has presence on the web, I'm not sure why Wikipedia won't allow her page to stay up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Musiclindsay (talk • contribs) 16:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, websites like blogs and Myspace are not considered reliable. See this guide for what Wikipedia considers reliable sources to be. Cheers!  TN ‑  X   - Man  16:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * And also see WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, and WP:COI. – ukexpat (talk) 18:41, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * or this essay. Garycompugeek (talk) 19:22, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

How to steal Empire State Building
How to download Empire State Building to my personal space and sharing space?? JustbeBPMF (talk) 17:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Special:Export can export it as XML, if that's what you want. Den dodge  Talk Contribs 17:14, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

How To Email An Article
Is there a better any other way to email an article than to cut and past the url into my email software? Thanks. --LexScript (talk) 21:28, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Why not just copy the URL and paste it into your email? --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  21:01, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Most browsers have a function to e-mail a page link. In Firefox, it's File - Send Link; in Internet Explorer 7, it's Page - Send Link By E-Mail. IE7 also has an option to Send Page By E-Mail, presumably it attaches the page to an e-mail. Xenon54 21:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to answer "no" because I cannot think of a better way to e-mail an article than to send just the URL. Sending the whole text of the article as a file attachment is rude unless you are absolutely certain your recipient has the necessary software to view the attachment just the way you expect, and you know your recipient really wants to see the article. Many computer-savvy people refuse to open e-mail attachments because these are a classic vector for computer viruses and other malware. Of course if you want an even better way to send articles, don't use e-mail at all. Instead, make friends who know how to use wikis, and then you can add links to your text just as I am doing. I just "sent" you six articles in the course of writing those few sentences. I didn't have to copy and paste anything, since I already knew the names of the pages I wanted to send you. I just put double square brackets  around them. Once you get used to communicating in this incredibly efficient way, it becomes difficult to leave the logical world of Wikipedia and go back to the rest of the world where everything generally sucks. --Teratornis (talk) 22:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

bray cary
why was the article about west virginia media's bray cary deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.108.225.107 (talk) 20:22, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If you're talking about the article titled Bray Cary, then it consisted only of a short string of random characters. Algebraist 20:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Can importance ratings be updated??
Strange question I know, but several articles on TV series have been rated as having mid-important, only to lose importance over time, to the point that although they were mid-importance back in 2007, they were quickly cancelled, and are almost forgotten today, plus made little impact on TV in general. My question is, can their notability rating be changed if they get even less important? Retro Agnostic (talk) 21:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, by editing the WikiProject templates at the top of the talk page. For example, for biographies, it will look like this:


 * Plus some other parameters. The other templates will look similar to the above. Best, Peter Symonds</b> ( talk ) 21:19, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

How to delete a page
Hello. I have a question about deleting completely a page. One time, I was at a friend's house and we thought it would be funny to create a page. It was silly, and I really dont want it to be up anymore. Nothing bad is written on it, but it just kind of worries me. Could you somehow delete my page fully? Or tell me how to? Ive looked and looked on wiki for deleting page articles, but it doesnt tell me alot. Sorry.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.72.195 (talk) 21:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You can put a db-author template on it. Then an administrator should delete it for you soon enough. --Teratornis (talk) 22:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * When you add the tag, be sure you are logged in from the account you used to create the page. —teb728 t c 04:50, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Talk page
While message ticker appears at the head of the page, the messages by others are not appearing on my talk page.Will you please clarify and what is the problem and rectify it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nvvchar (talk • contribs) 23:41, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * [[Image:P_ktip.svg|20px]] Clear your browser's cache by following the instructions found by following the link to the left. It may also be a good idea to . <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Den <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:red">dodge  Talk Contribs 23:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Note also that new messages will not appear at the bottom of your talk page if they are part of an existing message thread. – ukexpat (talk) 16:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


 * New messages on my talk page still do not display. Can be read only in edit mode. I have tried the above suggestions. But they are not working. New messages relate to DYK hook acceptance today on Lakes in Bangalore and other issues and not on existing sections. Kindly check and tell me know how to proceed further to rectify the problem.--Nvvchar (talk) 02:28, 7 December 2008 (UTC)


 * It was an unclosed ref and has been fixed. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)