Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2008 March 25

= March 25 =

Terry Finn & Terry Finn photograph
Please instruct me how to link an uploaded photograph to the subjects page. The subjects page title is Terry Finn. The uploaded photograph of Terry Finn has not linked up to her page. buffalo15ny


 * To the top of the the article Terry Finn (or to the top of whatever section you wish to add the photo to) place the following text: [[Image:TerryFinn.jpg|Insert caption here|thumb|insert number of pixels here if you wish to change the standard size]] If you don't use "thumb" option, the picture will be huge and cover the article. If you don't wish to change the default size of the image, leave out the last section. If you do change the standard size by specifying a number of pixels, make sure to add the letters px after the number. If you just want to do this as basically as possible and don't care about how this works, just copy-paste the following text: [[Image:TerryFinn.jpg|Terry Finn|thumb]]  I have to ask, however, where did you obtain this picture? We take copyrights very seriously, and it the digital information contained in that picture indicated it was copyrighted in 2001. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:48, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

What should "Keyboards" link to?
In a popular music related article, when keyboards are mentioned as an instrument (used in studio recordings and played at live concerts), what should be linked to? Keyboard and Keyboards redirect to Keyboard (computing), Musical keyboard talks only about the "human interface" part of a keyboard instrument, Keyboard instrument is far too general and includes pianos etc., Electronic keyboard talks about non-professional keyboards for amateurs and children, Synthesizer about the device only, which does not necessarily feature a keyboard, and includes analog synthesizers, Digital synthesizer also talks only about the device, Music workstations and Arranger keyboards aren't live instruments ... Any generally applying recommendation? Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I know almost nothing about keyboards but how about stage piano? PrimeHunter (talk) 02:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keyboard instrument or Electronic musical instrument looks like the best bet; the articles both talk about the instrument.
 * Try using  keyboards ; it might be general, but linking to the section should be specific enough because it lists the kinds of electronic keyboards--Antonio Lopez (talk) 02:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The English Wikipedia has many articles about specific kinds of keyboards, vintage and modern, for example: Minimoog, Fender Rhodes, Hammond B3, Kurzweil K2000, Prophet 5, Yamaha DX7, etc. Therefore I would recommend linking to the specific keyboard(s) a particular artist used for the album or performance in question. This information is readily available for notable artists, for example see the extensive writeups in Keyboard Magazine, which go into great technical detail about the complete equipment rigs of many legendary keyboardists. --Teratornis (talk) 04:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course in light of WP:INDISCRIMINATE, a complete listing of all keyboard instruments used on a given album may be inappropriate, but most keyboardists tend to favor a particular instrument or two or three (for example, Keith Emerson played many keyboards, but he spent (and still spends) most of his time on the Hammond B3, Moog synthesizer, and acoustic piano). My main point is that for Wikipedia to maintain high encyclopedic standards, we should try to be as specific as we can reliably be about the instruments a given musician played. By analogy, an article about a violinist should reasonably mention the musician's favored violins, for example the foremost virtuosi may get their hands on a Stradivarius at some point in their careers. --Teratornis (talk) 04:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * But what about genre articles? This was actually what spurred my original question, sorry, I forgot to mention that. While Synthesizer looks like the easiest solution that is still defendable, Antonio's suggestion is the best general solution for such cases. Thank you, guys! Florian Blaschke (talk) 00:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Problem Uploading An Article
Anne Cummins (talk) 03:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)Hello,

I have tried to many times to count to upload the article "Female Body Shape" from The Free English Wikipedia. I have searched the FAQ, and when questioning, that page responds with a "not on the deliquent list." I have read and reread the how to upload this article to no avail. I really wanted to use this article in a text that I am writing. Is there any other way I can get permission to use this aticle without uploading. Is it possible to foot note it and give recognition to Wikipedia in references. At this point I am so frustrated. I do hope you will be able to help me. Thank you --Anne Cummins (talk) 03:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm having trouble understanding your question, because I don't know what you mean by "upload" in this context. I think you are using that word to mean something different than what it means on Wikipedia. In general we do not "upload" articles to Wikipedia; instead, we edit them as wikitext. We do, however, upload images, either to Wikipedia, or to Wikimedia Commons. If you merely want to cite Wikipedia in another work, see: Citing Wikipedia. If none of this helps, please tell us more specifically what you are trying to do with the Female body shape article. Generally, if you are trying to copy the article from Wikipedia to your own computer, we would call that "downloading." --Teratornis (talk) 05:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm having trouble determining where you have seen the "not on the delinquent list" message. This Google search of Wikipedia does not find any exact instances of that phrase:
 * Many but not all error messages from Wikipedia appear somewhere on Wikipedia where we can search for them, because lots of people discuss these errors on pages such as this Help desk. But I guess that one does not. Can you tell us exactly what page you visited to get that error? If possible, give us the exact steps so we can reproduce the error. --Teratornis (talk) 05:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Many but not all error messages from Wikipedia appear somewhere on Wikipedia where we can search for them, because lots of people discuss these errors on pages such as this Help desk. But I guess that one does not. Can you tell us exactly what page you visited to get that error? If possible, give us the exact steps so we can reproduce the error. --Teratornis (talk) 05:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Comparison articles
Is it appropriate to have articles that compare two things? if its not aproprite please show me a link to it. Thanks in advance БοņёŠ ɓɤĭĠ₳₯є 05:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * It's very hard to have an article that compares two things without violating the prohibition on original research. That is, while Wikipedia is meant for compiling published information on notable subjects; it is not for users to post their personal analyses of such information. And just piecing together information from sources on two distinct subjects is also prohibited (original synthesis). So then there are only two valid types of comparison articles on Wikipedia: A) Comparing two subjects that are commonly compared in the mainstream media/review literature, and B) comparing many subjects of a common theme using raw categorizations only. Type A comparisons tend to invite the problems I described above and tend to get deleted. If this is what you were thinking, I'd suggest you just save yourself the potential trouble unless you're sure what you're doing (or just ignore my hesitations and be bold). Type B comparisons aren't nearly so problematic, and there are even many good ones. As a random example, see Comparison of text editors. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with the general advice above. If you want specific advice, you need to pose a specific question. What two things do you want to compare? Does Wikipedia already have articles about them? If we, some interesting results appear. For example, it seems we have a Category:Comparisons. Does anything in that category look like the comparison you want to do? --Teratornis (talk) 16:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well i orginaly asked this question because i was thinking of AFDing(i have a feeling a prod will be emidtly taken down Comparison of the AK-47 and M16 but i did not know whether it was appropriate to. I figure this goes under your your model "A" as there commonly compared, but also there completently different designs and made for completly different operators and needs. Could you take a look at the article? Thanks БοņёŠ ɓɤĭĠ₳₯є 17:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I just took a skim through the article. The most disturbing thing, of course, is that there is only one citation, and the source cited is extremely brief and only compares the ammunition used by the guns. The "other sources" section lists only one reference that could be easily used without violating original research, and that's a vague and presumably offline "Great Battles: AK-47 vs M16", Military Channel documentary. Thus, not being an expert in firearms history, it is impossible for me (or presumably most Wikipedians) to separate factual comparisons from the writers' opinions. In any event, there doesn't seem to be much substance to the page, and I highly doubt you could learn anything from it without just reading AK-47 and M16. I guess you can consider that another reason there shouldn't be one-on-one comparison articles. As such, I doubt Wikipedia would lose anything by deleting this pages, aside from forcing interested readers to read a whole two pages instead. Someguy1221 (talk) 17:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I could see the point in having such an article, if it was well-written, because the AK-47 and M16 are both highly notable small arms, and have directly faced each other in combat many times, over several decades, and in diverse environments. I wouldn't be surprised if the differing characteristics of the two weapons have influenced the infantry tactics employed by the armies using them, although I'm not sure if anyone has really tried to analyze that reliably. --Teratornis (talk) 19:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I just read Comparison of the AK-47 and M16 and I think it is a pretty good article, but it needs more sources. Since the two weapons have been so widely used, and so extensively in direct opposition to each other, a comparison article seems justified in my opinion, but the article makes several unsourced claims. A fact and reference check would be in order. --Teratornis (talk) 20:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Ultimately I think there should be Wikipedia articles on all encyclopedic topics. If a particular comparison is sufficiently notable (and sourceable), then it should have an article. The threshold IMO is whether or not any suitable comparisons have been made in reliable sources. It's one thing to just take published specs of two different things (like lions and tigers) and do a side-by-side comparison of them (kind of like comparing the GDPs of different countries) - which I don't think would be sufficiently unique to warrant a separate article - but have articles, papers or books been published that actually compare the two items? Anchoress · Weigh Anchor · Catacomb 20:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * As the talk page shows, the article has already been at AfD in Articles for deletion/AK-47 vs. M16 (no consensus), so it's ineligible for prod. It's a famous comparison. I have seen a TV program about it. Category:Comparisons shows other comparison articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism by Ajjay
Please can you protect the following pages from politically/religious/khalistan motivated pov


 * Khalsa
 * Singh Sabha
 * Dasam Granth
 * Tat Khalsa
 * Sanatan Singh Sabha

Thanks, Dave Green —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.3.244 (talk • contribs)
 * This is not an answer to your request, but I formatted the articles you mentioned, as a list, and I linked them for easy reference by other Help desk volunteers. --Teratornis (talk) 05:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please see Help:Talk page, in particular you should sign your comments on talk pages and on this Help desk. And see WP:EIW for information about how to handle content disputes on Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 05:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Please see Ajjay (talk) 05:33, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Non free images in template space BUT on the doc page ?
I have been developing a non trivial template, and hence with solid documentation, including real examples of how it should be used. In these examples I used some non free images from wiki commons, in correct actual encyclopedic context. I have been doing this development work to date in my User:. . Sandbox and the images have been botted out with. While this is an incovenience in my Sandbox, I do know why. I also know why such images cannot be in the actual template, etc.

My question is, can such images be used in the Template: space on the /doc page, specifically when used as exact article examples ? WP:NFCC does not address this actual issue as far as I can see ?

Pee Tern (talk) 05:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * All images from the Wikimedia Commons should be freely licensed and OK to use anywhere. Non-free images are not allowed on the Commons; they can only be uploaded to the English Wikipedia itself.
 * Point 9 of WP:NFCC says that non-free images may be used only in articles, which specifically prohibits their use anywhere in the Template namespace. What exactly are you trying to do that you feel you need to be using non-free images in the documentation page of a template? —Bkell (talk) 07:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually I think I got myself lost, and the images are not in commons afterall, but in en.wikipedia. However, I would still like to use the images in documentation for the template.  I have undone on of the bot edits to provide an example.  See User:Pee Tern/Sandbox/Template/Infobox Law enforcement agency/doc.  The image which was botted was the badge.  My reason for using the images was to provide as real examples as possible. Pee Tern (talk) 23:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Fair use images shouldn't be used in templates. The solution is to use a parameter for the image, so you have to specify which image to use for each article anyway. Remember that you need a fair use rationale for the image for each of the articles it is included in. Fair use images can't be used as simple illustrations for navigational templates either, as they have to have a very direct relation to the article where they are used. -- Sverdrup (talk) 18:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The image is not in the template. It is in the template documentation as an example.  It is a parameter being passed in the example use of the template as it would appear in the relevant article. Interestingly(?) it was botted both in the actual template call, the parameter value being substituted, and the   tagged text of the template call example. Pee Tern (talk) 01:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, sorry for not really getting it at first. So then we are using the fair use images for Wikipedia's internal illustratory purposes, although in a coherent context. This must be clearly against our fair use policy. For the purposes of illustrating an example, there are plenty of free equivalents (WP:NFCC, #1) and thus the use of fair use images is wrong. -- Sverdrup (talk) 10:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Still learning where the line is drawn in the sand I am.  I was coming to the same conclusion anyway.  The difficulty is finding an example image which is realistic enough . . .   Pee Tern (talk) 22:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Please don'0t delete my page- and give me help!
2 issues - I got a message that stated I used copy written material from  www.lifeonmarsentertainment.com

I copied the information but Life on Mars web site is mine and I hold the copyright so please dont delete my information. from: Martin mayo

Issue number 2- it stated that the name is case sensitive and I made a mistake and messed up on my last name I need it to be upper case can you fix this or tell me how to fix it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matin mayo (talk • contribs)


 * I see the article at Martin mayo. It's nice that you want to contribute writing to Wikipedia, but there are several things to note, even though we now know it is not a copyright violation. First, don't write about yourself on Wikipedia. This is an encyclopedia, not a myspace-like hosting service. Also, such a text can't go unedited into Wikipedia, it needs sources from independent publications and must assert its notability, and needs to be formatted and written according to our style guidelines. -- Sverdrup (talk) 10:37, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually it is and remains a copyright violation and can't be used here until that issue is cleared up even if it was otherwise suitable, which as Sverdrup highlights, it is not. Wikipedia cannot use copyrighted text by permission. The copyright, even if you own it, still remains, and our content must be reusable by our readers. This means the material must be released into the public domain or under a suitable free license such as the GFDL. Stanadard advice for clearing up the copyright issue is that you must remove the copyright notice on the external site and place in its stead, also on the external site, langauge like: "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." Again, though, your unmodified résumé would not be suitable material for the text of an encyclopedia article.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 10:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, but if you own the copyright and then insert the work into Wikipedia, you are assumed to publish it under the terms of our (text) license. No other contributors have to explicitly state that. -- Sverdrup (talk) 17:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * But a claim of copyright ownership must be proven.  Corvus cornix  talk  17:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

My account is going haywire
I have for the last week, been unable to use the mouseover on refs to clickthrough, which is a function of my monobook. Now, I am having a problem viewing my user page, with User:TonyTheTiger/Header template going haywire and showing at about 50x normal size when I view my user page and talk page. This causes the template to obscure the entire page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 06:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Can everyone else see my user page normally? I see huge icons from the template above.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 14:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't see your page normally, and apparently this is a widespread problem: VPT. Someguy1221 (talk) 16:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for helping me figure out what is going on.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 16:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

how do i print just two pages of an articel with out printing the whole article
same as subject/headline i really need help! thank you


 * That's down to your printer driver. Don't user the little printer icon to print instead go to "file" on the menubar and select print. A box will pop up, they look different depending on the printer but somewhere there will be a section that says something like "page range" where you can select how many pages to print. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 08:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

link to a section
Can one link to a scetion in an article so that only that section and nothing else is displyed, such as when you edit a section? 195.194.74.154 (talk) 11:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, you can, with a hash sign before the section. Here, for exampe, WP:HD. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 11:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * No, thats not what I mean, but thanks. The hash links to the section but I can still see everything else on the page, ie everything has been loaded by the browser and then its skiped down to that section. Is there a way to only load the selected section and nothing else? That would mean I'd see the "link to a section" bit, but not all the other questions. xxx User:Hyper Girl 13:29, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The only way I know of to do something like this is to turn the section into a separate page that you can then tranclude onto the page in question. For example, at the top of this Help desk page, there is a bunch of introductory text. That text is actually in Help desk/Header. We can use subpages on the Help desk because the Help desk is in the Wikipedia: namespace. In contrast, articles on Wikipedia do not have subpages, because the people who make such decisions decided to disable subpages in the main article space. However, we do have lots of templates which appear on articles, but are also viewable separately. For example, the Peak oil article transcludes the Peak oil navigation template at the bottom, and you can view the template separately. Are you trying to organize an article to modularize its section content? If so, you may run into objections from other editors. But if you want to organize your user page this way, you are free to do so, since the User: namespace has subpages, and the user page guidelines do not forbid this sort of thing. --Teratornis (talk) 19:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, duh, you did say "article." Can you tell us which article and which section you have in mind? In general, I'd suspect it would be harder to get other editors to agree on a modularization scheme for an article. However, see Summary style if the problem is that the article you have in mind is getting too big. --Teratornis (talk) 19:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

My navigation bar
Hi, someone knows why the image above sandbox in my navigation bar is so big ? It worked perfectly for 24 days. Thanks, Cenarium  Talk 12:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, it looks to me as though it's been that size from the beginning, see here. Fusion Mix  13:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * But I know that the size was perfectly normal before today. I used two different computers, two different navigators, it was completely normal. Cenarium  Talk 13:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, I've had that issue as well. The problem seems to be in the code, when it say . The px bit is causing problems recently. Anyway, it's fixed now. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk to me) 13:15, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Cheers, Cenarium  Talk 13:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Turning a portrait 90 degrees
How do I turn Katherine_Duff.jpg please? - Kittybrewster &#9742;  13:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Done.  Ty  13:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Account name
Hello,

Please, noticed that I'm french and my english writing could be approximate.

Owner of the fr:User:ILJR account, I get an error when I tried to create en:User:ILJR. However the user page en:User:ILJR doesn't exist and there is no contribution for this account.

Do you think that I could finaly use the account en:User:ILJR ?

Thank you for responding me.

ILJR2 (talk) 14:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * See Changing username/Usurpations. Someguy1221 (talk) 14:19, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Uploading a file
where can i go to upload a file that isnt a picture?the juggreserection IstKrieg! 14:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * All uploaded files use the image uploading system, and all use the "Image" prefix in the filename. But as you could guess, with the system as such you don't have to actually upload an image: you can also upload audio and video files. Only select formats are supported by Wikipedia's software. See Creation and usage of media files for more. Someguy1221 (talk) 14:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * okay, only .ogg files are allowed, do you know how i would go about changing an mp3 to and ogg?the juggreserection IstKrieg! 14:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * You might find someone who knows at Reference desk/Computing. Someguy1221 (talk) 14:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

i figured that, but i thought since we were on the subject you might know. thanks for the help.the juggreserection IstKrieg! 14:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, but unfortunately I don't know how. I hope you find what you need. Someguy1221 (talk) 14:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If you use Windows, the tool http://www.dbpoweramp.com/ is very useful.  Stwalkerster [  talk  ]  14:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Audacity is also popular, and has releases for most major OSes. Confusing Manifestation (Say hi!) 22:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Creating a randomized object on my userpage
Dear Sir, I with to display a quote on my user page which is randomly selected from a set of about five each time one visits the page. Please explane how I can accumplish this. Weasly (talk) 14:42, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Create a template.
 * To create a template, create a subpage of your user page. Type the following code in the box and save:




 * Then, on the page you want to generate the random object. Put { {The subpage name}}.
 * Visit me at Ftbhrygvn (T alk |C ontribs |L og |U serboxes ) 16:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Hebrew language in infobox of Tel Aviv
A comment on the Tel Aviv FAC says that "something's wrong with the appearance of the hebrew in the Infobox, at least it is in my Firefox browser. The vowels and letters aren't aligning." I dont know how to fix this but perhaps someone does? Thanks. Flymeoutofhere (talk) 15:52, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * They seem to align correctly for me in both firefox and IE. Someguy1221 (talk) 15:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It was me. On my screen (Firefox 2.0.0.12 and Windows XP Pro) the vowels are appearing to the left of each letter that they should be under/on top of. I'll refer the Languages Ref Desk to this thread too. --Dweller (talk) 16:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

If the only real problem is that the dagesh dot doesn't apear inside the tav, but rather after it (to the left), then the explanation is that the official Unicode standard got the combining classes for the Hebrew diacritics completely wrong 15 years ago, and some browsers are unable to compensate for this to the present day, and the Unicode standard errors can't ever be corrected due to "backward compatibility guarantees". Try to edit the page so that the central dagesh dot is before (to the right of) the two dots below (the "e" diacritic), and I bet it won't let you... תֵּ-- AnonMoos (talk) 16:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not just the dagesh, it's the vowels themselves. If they can't be aligned correctly with the letters, I suggest they're just omitted, as printing hebrew words without vocalising is quite acceptable. --Dweller (talk) 16:37, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Alignment is a matter of display in each individual browser. All that can be done on the Wikipedia side is to send out abstract characters in the correct order, and then it's up to a user's browser software to vertically align things.  Since the Hebrew characters in the article "Tel Aviv" are in an order which is as correct as they're allowed to be in (given the flawed nature of Unicode combining classes), I see no reason to delete the vowel points because they're displayed wrong in some browsers... AnonMoos (talk) 17:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Are they correctly aligned in some browsers? --Dweller (talk) 20:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think you can blame it on the browser or on Unicode, since it's being rendered correctly in the first line and not in the info box. FWIW, removing the template in the infobox solves the problem in Safari. So does replacing the  template with תֵּל־אָבִיב-יָפוֹ I think that Template:Hebrew is forcing browsers to use a font choice that is unfortunate for some browsers. It probably needs to be fixed, or not used. I've removed it from the infobox. - Nunh-huh 23:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I would like to get a special export
I would like to get a special export of anything containing the following terms. I don't think it would be very large because the terms are very specific in nature. Is it possible to get a dump of this? It appears only administrators can do special exports.

The terms are:

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tazzarkin (talk • contribs)
 * Three-dimensional
 * 3D
 * Dungeons and Dragons
 * avatars
 * graphic
 * chatbot
 * artificial intelligence
 * print
 * printing
 * stereolithography
 * microfabrication
 * games
 * photon photopolymerization
 * Direct Digital Manufacturing
 * List of emerging technologies
 * Rapid prototyping
 * RepRap
 * Stereolithography
 * Solid freeform fabrication
 * Self-replicating machine
 * 3D microfabrication
 * Digital fabricator
 * Desktop manufacturing
 * Fused deposition modeling
 * Photopolymer
 * Computer-aided design
 * 3D models
 * Computer-aided design
 * Graphic design
 * Video game
 * Visual effects
 * Visualization
 * Virtual engineering
 * Virtual reality
 * CGI
 * Animation
 * 3D display
 * Wireframe model
 * Texture mapping
 * Computer animation
 * Motion capture
 * Skeletal animation
 * Crowd simulation
 * Global illumination
 * Volume rendering
 * 3D modeling
 * 3D scanning
 * 3D rendering
 * 3D printing
 * 3D computer graphics software
 * 3D modeling software
 * intelligent virtual agent
 * Intelligent Environments
 * software agent
 * robot
 * remote controlled
 * wireless network
 * wireless
 * bluetooth
 * Universal remote
 * Channel surfing
 * Radio control
 * Domotics
 * Audience response
 * Remote keyless system
 * Telecommand
 * Remote-controlled animal
 * Control Car Remote Control Locomotive
 * Garage door opener
 * mobile phone
 * mobile
 * Wi-Fi
 * I formatted your list of items as a proper list so it is readable. See WP:EIW for some possible approaches to what you want to do. You did not say what kind of dump you want, but presumably you mean an XML dump such as comes from Special:Export. I am pretty sure there is no simple way to do what you are asking for. I'm sure it is possible for some sufficiently advanced user out there, and I don't mean to sound insulting, but I have to be honest here: if you haven't gotten far enough with editing on Wikipedia to know how to format lists, you may be a long way from being able to tackle this type of highly advanced database query (which very few Wikipedia users could manage). On the other hand, if you already have a solid background in SQL, then you might not need to know much about Wikipedia in particular to formulate the query you need. It's kind of hard to advise you when we don't know your background. I suggest reading pages linked from the entries under WP:EIW, and see if anything about querying Wikipedia's databases makes sense to you. If you have the right background, you might find what you need there, and understand what to do. If not, then please tell us why you want this export. What sort of question are you trying to answer from these articles? There may be another way to get that answer which does not involve exporting all the XML content. --Teratornis (talk) 18:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Daniel Hunt, Actor
Hi

My name is Daniel Hunt and an entry has been put on your site with details of my career etc by an ex-student that I taught at drama school.I can confirm that all of the information is correct but am not really sure that this fact warrants me as being an eligible entry on your site.I have had a mainly theatrical career playing a varied number of leading roles working in West End shows, national tours and a few TV appearances.I hope Graham's good intentions have not been a waste of time to you and your site. Best wishes

Daniel (David) Hunt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.3.53 (talk • contribs)
 * The Daniel Hunt article is already festooned with these rather ominous template messages: AfDM, expand, hoax, and unreferenced. On Wikipedia, we have to verify all information in our articles with reliable sources. Also see WP:BIO for our "notability guidelines" for biography articles. If you are curious to see how your fate is being decided, follow the ongoing discussion at Articles for deletion/Daniel Hunt. (We don't have any star chambers at Wikipedia; everything we do is open for anyone to see.) The main problem for your article seems to be a lack of references. Our lazy man's way of determining notability is to do a Google test, for example: . Because "Daniel Hunt" is a fairly common name, it's hard to sort out which references may be about you in particular. Since you may be the world's leading expert about such press coverage as you have received, you may be able to help by listing references about yourself on the Talk:Daniel Hunt page. And incidentally, it appears that User:Purdey created the Daniel Hunt article as his/her very first edit under that account. This is an unfortunate ergonomic weakness of Wikipedia's current design: creating new articles from scratch is actually one of the harder editing tasks on Wikipedia, and not something that brand-new users should attempt right away. But our software doesn't stop anybody from doing just that. The result is often that new users are unfamiliar with our policies and guidelines, not to mention our preferred article layout, and thus new users will typically make mistakes that could easily be avoided with more experience, and their articles will end up getting deleted. A safer approach to Wikipedia is to make several hundred small edits to existing articles, and read plenty of our help pages, to get one's bearings before attempting to start entirely new articles. --Teratornis (talk) 18:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It should be OK but the user may have a conflict of interest. George D. Watson  (Dendodge). Talk Help 18:59, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, my understanding of WP:COI is that the user should not edit his own biography article, but he could suggest references about himself on the Talk:Daniel Hunt page, if other users are not finding suitable references. (See: WP:COI compliance). Not every reliable source is online, and even some that are online may be difficult to find when users don't know the proper search terms. See The Hive, by Marshall Poe in which the author describes the fate of his own biography article on Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 19:07, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I was referring to the student. You cannot create an article about your employer so I presume that there's something in there that could include teachers.  George D. Watson  (Dendodge). Talk Help 20:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * COI is not a prohibition; it is a warning to take especial care to be neutral: "If you do write an article on an area in which you are personally involved, be sure to write in a neutral tone and cite reliable, third-party published sources, and beware of unintentional bias." The article appears to be written in a neutral tone and if it had good refs, then COI would not be a problem. Sbowers3 (talk) 21:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Retrieving password
I need help from an admin, I can't remember my password. Is there nothing on the front page about retreving passwords208.62.125.140 (talk) 16:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If you enabled e-mail on your account, you can get a new password emailed to you. Just click Sign-in, enter your username, and click "email new password." Malinaccier Public (talk) 16:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If you haven't enabled email, and can't remember your password, then I'm afraid you're out of luck. You'll have to create a new account. Algebraist 17:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Header
My header was previously right justified at User:TonyTheTiger/Header_template. However, fixing for the system wide px conversion this morning caused it to be left justified. Any help?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 16:44, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Mine at User:Dendodge/header uses different markup to yours, try it like that. <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:#008000">George D. Watson  (Dendodge). Talk Help 18:54, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 19:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

ref tag Mouseoverproblems not solved
Many replied at Help_desk/Archives/2008_March_21 and I appreciate the responses. I have tried:
 * 1) Viewing in a different browser
 * 2) On o different computer with a different operating system
 * 3) Rebooting/restarting
 * 4) Clearing the cache
 * 5) Checking my monobook version, which hasn't been edited in months (so I did not revert to an old version)

Any other ideas on helping me to use my mouseover feature for refs.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 16:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure, but I think the preview you are after was generated by Lupin's popups script. You seem to have popups installed (though i would advise loading scripts with importScript instead of document.writes ). I'm not sure if the ref system used to be different HTML, but it seems that the link is now not preview compatible with popups. I will make a note of the breakage, and try to fix it myself, since Lupin seems to have pretty much left Wikipedia. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 20:41, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I think I have found the problem. I have requested an edit to be made to the Gadgets version of popups. You are using the personal version of popups from Lupin, which will probably not be updated for a while. I suggest you switch to the Gadget version and remove the document.write for Lupin's version. --TheDJ (talk • contribs) 14:15, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think I know how to do what you suggest.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 14:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I have got the mouseover link functionality back, but it is also giving a big header as well on the mouseover.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Make template contents searchable on including page?
I'd like to include a template in my article, and have search terms that match the template return the including page as a result.

I've tried   and   , but in both of these cases, searches will not find the master (including) page.

Anybody know how to accomplish what I want? Thanks! dpotter (talk) 20:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If I understand, why not just search using a unique series of word in quotes that the template expands to? By the way, Google searches Wikipedia far better than Wikipedia's search function does. You can use Google custom, or just specify in the search site:en.wikipedia.org. You can also limit the search to particular namespaces. For example en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry if I wasn't being clear. If I include on my page of reptiles, I'd like a wiki search for "Python" to show my reptile page in the results. Currently, it doesn't because the word "Python" only appears in the template. dpotter (talk) 21:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Navbar problem
My navbar (see user:Nothing444/N444 menu) isn't working. It says 50px, but the images won't go at 50px. Can anyone help me? <font face="High Tower Text" size="3px"> Not hing  4  44  21:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please see Village pump (technical). The upshot, if I understand it fully, is that a recent change in the software makes "px" place automatically. So when one specifies a number followed by "px", the software interprets that as "pxpx". Since this is nonsense code, the specified sizing breaks and it expands to the default size of the image as if you hadn't specified a size at all. To fix it one just removes all instances of px but keeps the desired number. I have made the change to your page and it appears to have cleared up the issue.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:50, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Just moments ago an announcement of the large scale problems this bug is causing was added as a popup to watchlists, and a page was created to explain the issue. See ClickFix.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

how to cite this site?
how do you cite this website?
 * Details about citing wikipedia can be found here. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:07, 25 March 2008 (UTC)