Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2009 July 14

= July 14 =

recent Edit not visible
If I edit the last section of Talk:Apollo_program_missing_tapes, it shows a paragraph that was added a few hours ago ("truth be told...") but it does not show up when I view the page. I've tried two computers and three browsers with the same result. I've refreshed the page too. Why can't I see the new addition? Bubba73 (talk), 00:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I added the bit to the URL to purge the cache, and it showed up. OK, that fixed it, but why is it necessary to do it?  Bubba73 (talk), 00:33, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think a purge was necessary, you just to bypass your cache. Algebraist 00:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Why would three browsers and two computers fail to show the change? Bubba73 (talk), 00:49, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * It might have been a server hiccup or maybe your ISP cached the page outside your control. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Free image clutter
Is there a tag I can use like... non-free But for free images?  • S • C  • A • R  • C • E •   01:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * How about Cleanup-gallery? (I've tl'd your template and mine to avoid adding the Help Desk into maintenance categories(!) BencherliteTalk 01:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Too many photos might work too, I suppose it depends if they're in a gallery or not. Alexius  Horatius  01:49, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

question regarding different layouts of viewing
is there any way to increase the size of the font when viewing a page? i use firefox and zoom both the entire page and the text size, but when i get the text to where i want it the frames leave only enough room for something like 8 words per line, if there isn't a massive subsection on the right, in which case it'll often be something like 4 or 5. I've tried the layouts offered, but they don't particularly work to my liking, some are nice except for the massive list of language links at the top etc. Optimally, i'd like to remove the left subsection entirely and blow up the major text of the body of the article without enlarging anything in the right subsection when viewing articles. Is there a way to do this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.29.73.93 (talk) 01:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * If you have a scroll wheel on your mouse try while scrolling. – ukexpat (talk) 02:17, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * You posted without being logged in and I'm not sure what you refer to with different layouts but in case you don't know, logged in users can choose between different skins in their preferences. The Chick skin has no sidebar and language links are at the bottom. Firefox has a zoom only text option under View -> Zoom. It doesn't zoom images but it does zoom text in boxes. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:42, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Policy discussion
I've been editing Wikipedia for a few months now mostly new page patrolling and anti-vandalism work. I have started to branch out into other areas, and one of them that interests me is the various policies on Wikipedia. I am interested in the discussions which shape them, and I would possibly like to add my opinion to them. Where would be a good place to start where I can get my feet wet and not have to worry about saying something dumb that will come back to haunt me someday? Thank you in advance for your help. Wperdue (talk) 02:08, 14 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue


 * The policy section of the Village Pump is one place. – ukexpat (talk) 02:15, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * WP:CENT lists current/ongoing policy debates, as well as providing some information on the system. Don't worry about drowning, as long as you aren't making blatantly idiotic and unconstructive comments/edits, nobody is going to hold a grudge. -  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  04:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the helpful links. Wperdue (talk) 17:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue

Is it appropriate for me to give this IP a 'final warning', or is that something only for admins to do?
69.23.100.207 hit my radar a few days ago, after putting some false information into one of the articles I watch (listing a Virtual Console game on the DSiWare game list), and after I checked out their other contribs I found quite a few other articles that same IP had inserted false dates into (mainly video game and TV series articles). I warned them twice during the course of going back and forth with them that night through a slew of Kirby and other random articles where they only changed date information (sometimes changing the same releases to different dates!), and they only stopped that night when another user stepped in with a vandalism template...

... until today, when they started again. I assumed good faith and let them know why I had reverted their recent edits on their talk page, but again there has been no discussion from their end and just now I had to revert yet another unsourced date from them in I Wanna Hold Your Hand (film). I have checked these dates via Google and turned up nothing, requesting that IP cite their own sources (if they're taking some of these dates from books or something) has turned up nothing, and yet since I'm the only one really getting vocal on their talk page, I'm not sure if a 'final warning' should come from me or from someone less involved, or even if that's something only an admin-type person is supposed to do -- i don't want to overstep my bounds as a user. Plz advise? :/ -- Khisanth (talk) 02:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If you can't find anything to support the user's edits, then obviously, there is a verifiability problem. If they won't respond to messages, then there is a communication issue. If they persist beyond your final warning (which is appropriate for any user to give, assuming the circumstances warrant it), then you can report the IP to the admin noticeboard to request a block. TN X Man  02:32, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * thank you. :) -- Khisanth (talk) 02:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

i have introduced an article months ago and it is not "taking"
today, I edited a man's article about The Wow Factor, which is an expression I created/invented; but your site ]?] does not like my editing. IT says I have written a new article. Or that I should edit correctly and prove stuff. I did that. But i do not have 120 hours to read the myriad of ephemeral minutea on how to do things correctly at Wiki........

so, h e l p —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkemper1 (talk • contribs) 02:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * It was speedily deleted per this criterion of the speedy deletion criteria. – ukexpat (talk) 03:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Here are the CliffsNotes: A phrase you coined yourself does not warrant a stand-alone article on Wikipedia unless it has received significant coverage in reliable third-party publications independent of yourself. See WP:GNG. Regards, decltype (talk) 03:53, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Please also see WP:COI and stop inserting it and your name into articles. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 09:41, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Also, Wikipedia is not for things made up one day.  hmwith  τ   14:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Template acting strange
I'm sure this issue has arisen before, but I'm not sure how to search it out. I recently created a template for the City of Kawartha Lakes (At template:City of Kawartha Lakes). When I initially created it, I used the US county template since it seemed designed just for this purpose. However, a day later I am realising that the lakes would also make a good addition, and as such have switched it to the navbox template (Which I just discovered). I have made the changes between the templates so that almost everything appears the same... Except one thing. A quick look at the template and you can see that in the middle two rows, the first and last items in the list are on their own lines.

I changed nothing in the lists when switching templates, beside renaming the commands as "list(x) =" and "group(x) =", but yet have this strange result. I know I can manually fix it by placing the no-wrap tag around each line of entries, but that would only appear correctly on the same sized browser window. What am I screwing up? --  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  03:56, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Finding anon user contribs
I normally find user contribs on the article history page; recently I found an anon IP with several edits, but with no contrib. history shown on that page. Is that the case for all anon IPs? Curiosity leads me to ask where else contribs might easily be found. Thanks, CasualObserver&#39;48 (talk) 04:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Special:Contributions/Username can be used with IP addresses as well. In the history of articles, the contribs link is not shown because you can simply click on the IP address to bring up their contributions (Since IP's generally do not have user pages). Hope I'm answering what you were actually asking :p Cheers,  ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ  τ ¢  04:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that answers the question. Please mark resolved.  CasualObserver&#39;48 (talk) 08:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Opening MIDI files in Wikipedia
Why when I go to a MIDI file in Wikipedia, all I see is just an image of a music note on a rectangle with a checkered background. What is happening and how do I fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikespedia (talk • contribs) 06:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * See Media help (MIDI).  The left orium  09:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Autoreview
When I looked at my preferences, the thingy called 'Autoreviewer' was next to 'autoconfirmed'. I clicked on the link and learnt what it means. But I've never applied for it! Why would this happen? Kayau  Jane Eyre  PRIDE AND PREJUDICE  les miserables 08:25, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Even stranger, it turns out I've been made autoreviewer on the third of sep. 2006. Now, if I remember correctly, I opened my account on oct. 2006. Even if I did create my account before sep. 3 2006, I had made too few edits - as this user once said, I have only been a serious contributor for four months. What's happening? Kayau  Jane Eyre  PRIDE AND PREJUDICE  les miserables 08:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You have created your account on 01:50:44 AM 3 September 2006 UTC. Someone must have granted you that right! -- Srinivas  →  08:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * MBisanz made you a autoreviewer on 5th July, 2009 and not 3rd september 2006. -- Srinivas  →  08:52, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, stupid mistake I made. Kayau  Jane Eyre  PRIDE AND PREJUDICE  les miserables 10:06, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Some admins assigned this new right to certain users they trusted with this without applying to smooth out the general process of new page patrolling and save those users from having to request it formally. If I were you, I'd take it as a sign of trust by a respected admin. Regards  So Why  08:58, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks. (Wow, this solved a mystery too - why my aricles don't get highlighted in yellow in Special:NewPages.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kayau (talk • contribs)

In-N-Out Burger article
I went to the article on In-N-Out Burger, found it was vandalized, tried to revert it to the previous unvandalized version of the page, and now it looks like a disaster. It looks like it needs an infobox, but I'm stuck as to how to do that. DandyDan2007 (talk) 09:56, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Fixed. Kayau  Jane Eyre  PRIDE AND PREJUDICE  les miserables 10:32, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * It looks like you copy-pasted a former version from a diff page. Diff pages are good to find the unvandalized version but see Help:Reverting for the right way to revert to a former version. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:48, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Page size
Hi, As of yesterday my Wikipedia page size is large, oversized, which I find annoying. How can I re-set it to 100%. Thanks,, Trenchblood (talk) 13:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It sounds like you accidentally zoomed in. If you hold down the Ctrl key and roll your mousewheel backwards, does this fix the problem? TN X Man  13:02, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

white space at top of article because of pictures
At the article Bastille Day the two images starting precede the start of the text. Normally I'd just move the images to get the flow better but is there a template you can just add that sets flow to a better layout? RJFJR (talk) 13:31, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Huh. I don't see any whitespace at the top. The two images do appear one after the other on the right hand side. Perhaps it would work better if the second picture was moved to the left side? TN X Man  13:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've just amended the article so that the text is besides the picture... it makes a change for me to be able to do something before you get there, Tnxman!  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 13:36, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Not only that, I learned something new, as I had never seen before. Thanks, Phantomsteve.  TN X Man  13:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Mobile
Why is my iPhone redirected to the mobile site of wikipedia just after loading a page? This is a feature I do not like! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.0.138.220 (talk) 13:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * What? This is probably something to do with your phone's settings. How in the world can we redirect browsers of other peoples' phones to Wikipedia??? ≈ Chamal  talk 14:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, Wikipedia could redirect based on the web browser's user agent string - when I browse using my Android phone, I don't get redirected to the mobile site, but I do get informed about the mobile site, so there is some browser identification occurring. I'd be surprised if iPhones were redirected, while other mobile browsers were simply advised of the site, however. Cheers, TFOWR</b>This flag once was red 14:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Aaaahhh!!! Teh internetz is controlling us! :P ≈ Chamal  talk 14:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * If we detect a mobile device, then the page redirects to the mobile version of Wikipedia. You can then choose to "view on our regular site", which sets a cookie. The default setting on the iPhone is to disallow cross-domain cookies, which causes you to dump back to the mobile version. This is being investigated. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 22:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

stubs
how an earth do you expand a stub into a full article in simple language? The Wikipedia discussion of this is gobbledygook to a non-techie like me- no wonder there are so many articles still in stub form on wikipedia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alanredux (talk • contribs) 14:06, 14 July 2009
 * You should read WP:DEV. There're no technical terms there at all and you should be able to understand at least the basic idea; which is just "click the 'edit' tab at the top of the page and start editing". You need to be conscious of WP:NPOV & WP:V while editing though. You need to get familiar with those main policies if you want to edit Wikipedia. ≈ Chamal  talk 14:13, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * And WP:RS, WP:CITE. – ukexpat (talk) 14:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of the best articles have started out as useless stubs. You just need to keep working at it bit by bit, gradually building it up and as it gets more notable more contributors will come to help you. If you think it has the potential to reach GA or even FA then go for it! You'll be pleased with yourself if you have made significant contributions to a Good/Featured article! Ha rle m 675  15:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * "The Wikipedia discussion of this is gobbledygook to a non-techie like me" - this is a problem we need to fix. Wikipedia's manuals must be understandable to Wikipedia's users, many of whom are just like you. If you are reading a manual, and you don't understand something, don't just give up. Instead, tell us what you find unclear. Then other Wikipedia users can examine the confusing passage and clarify it. The users who write Wikipedia's manuals tend to be highly experienced at editing here, and thus they may use a lot of Wikipedia jargon without defining it (or linking it to pages that define it). To someone who is seeing a lot of Wikipedia jargon for the first time, the large number of unfamiliar terms overloads his or her short term memory, causing confusion and anxiety. Learning Wikipedia is like learning anything else - the student must work to push many new concepts into long term memory, which results in understanding (we "understand" something when we have pushed its ontology into our long term memory). However, Wikipedia can make the student's job simpler by clearly defining every new concept. When you see a new concept in context, with no clear definition of it, that is not very helpful. You may want to read WP:TMM, a book that explains the basics of how to edit on Wikipedia in a logical order. --Teratornis (talk) 18:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I deal with "confused" users every day. It is rare that the instructions are confusing.  The usual problem is that the rules are too verbose.  The users don't care about why they need to do something.  They only care about what they need to do.  "Click here" is the length of their attention span.  "Use the mouse to click on the blue icon" is far too many words.  The Wikipedia instructions are similarly far too verbose.  Users want, at most, one sentence.  If possible, just two words.  It is an impossible goal to achieve, but attempting to get the instructions down to a single two word sentence will obviously reduce the verbosity. --  k a i n a w &trade; 18:55, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Instructions tend to be verbose when they are general, that is when one manual page has to address many different cases. For example, we have a page about reliable sources which tries to give general principles that would allow someone to evaluate the reliability of an incredible variety of sources. If we know what conditional branch a particular user is on, we could write instructions specific for that user. If we knew exactly what that user wants to do, we could reduce that user's task to a "click here." WikiProject members often write instructions and style guides that are specific to articles in a particular topic area. This might seem to be instruction creep, but it isn't, because users would have to figure out specific instruction from the general instructions anyway. Instead, by writing specific instructions to cover every possible situation that every possible user might face, we can reduce the problem of editing on Wikipedia to nothing more than finding the specific instruction page to cover a given user's situation. This might seem difficult but actually it is easy enough, as long as we have users who know a lot about the manuals and can tell less knowledgeable users what to read. Search engine technology keeps improving too, and might someday become as good as a human expert at looking stuff up. --Teratornis (talk) 03:01, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It might be interesting to use Whiteboarding to let experienced users provide live editing assistance to new users. --Teratornis (talk) 03:16, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Fullscreen mode in Opera
Right now, when viewing Wikipedia in fullscreen under Opera (F11), the page is displayed with the @print CSS style (I think), which makes it look hideously ugly. I doubt this is the intended behaviour as it does not happen in Firefox, nor did it use to happen before. 90.230.54.138 (talk) 14:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 22:09, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Requested article.
I requested an article back in 2008; what do I need to do for it to become available? It is about Aldo Muzzarelli, a living artist who has had many mentions and awards in his home country of Venezuela. Please let me know. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marvigno (talk • contribs) 14:23, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Since there is a huge backlog at WP:RA, it may take quite a long time before someone creates the article. Why don't you do it yourself? Here's what you have to do:
 * Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.
 * Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.


 * Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.


 * If you still think an article is appropriate, see Help:Starting a new page. You might also look at Your first article and How to write a great article for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. ≈  Chamal  talk 14:29, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * It's still on the request list at Requested articles/Biographies. You could take matters into your own hands and create it yourself, in a user sandbox first would probably be best. I created a sandbox for you at User:Marvigno/Sandbox. Read some of the other artist articles first, then read WP:YFA, WP:BIO, WP:RS. Also, if there is an article about him on your native language Wikipedia, you could translate it into English and use that as the basis for an article. – ukexpat (talk) 14:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Number of pages in a given namespace
Is there a way to know the number of pages in a given namespace? -- Basilicofresco (msg) 16:07, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Special:Statistics is close, I suppose. There is a magic word for this in the Mediawiki software, but it's disabled here so it won't be much help for you. ≈ Chamal  talk 17:05, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

No emails from my watchlist
I setup my preferences to get E-mail when a page on my watchlist is changed. But I don’t get changes emailed. How do I get changes emailed? Mschribr (talk) 17:33, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That feature is disabled and will be removed from preferences. See Village pump (technical)/Archive 62. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a useful feature. Why is it disabled? Mschribr (talk) 18:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * See 19468. It is expected that this will be fixed in time. All the best SpitfireTally-ho! 18:38, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Any guess how long this feature “emails from the watch list” might take to fix? What is the problem with this feature “emails from the watch list” that needs to be fixed? Mschribr (talk) 19:27, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It is my understanding that the feature is permanently disabled on the English Wikipedia and the bug is to display the feature in preferences. I have added "(disabled)" to the description in preferences. I don't have access to remove the box but that should happen later with a software update. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:18, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a useful feature. Why permanently disabled? Mschribr (talk) 13:51, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm guessing that on the English Wikipedia, there'd be too many e-mails to send out! Other, smaller, Wikipedias could cope with this, but with the number of users on the English one who would want to use this feature, it would get out of hand!  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 14:05, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Need Help linking page to imdb...also do not want my page to be deleted
Hello,

I am an intern for Cass Warner and I just set up a page for her company called Warner Sisters Productions, Inc. This is not a page to just advertise for her company, we just have not had the chance to fully create the appropriate article with the write format, so I would ask please if someone can "untag" it from automatic deletion, we are trying to get the content filled out as soon as possible.

Also, Cass would like her page Warner Sisters Production's Inc. to link to her www.imdb.com page http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2064300/ Is this only possible by placing it under an external links category? If so can you please help me do and show me how? That way I can provide more credible sources to your organization to prove that we are setting up a legitimate article about the company and her families contribution to the film industry, which was a great one.

I would appreciate your help.

Warnersis (talk) 17:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * In order to create an article that will not be deleted, you need to show that the subject is Notable and that it is well sourced. You also would have a conflict of interest. I would suggest you place your information on the Articles Requested page.  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 18:03, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Or create it in a user subpage first. Warner Sisters Productions Inc has been deleted and as it stands the short piece on you user page is promotional in tone, even if that is not your intention. Your user name violates the user name policy.  – ukexpat (talk) 18:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Rating
I came across a page requiring a rating of importance and quality but am not sure how to rate it. Could someone please explain how I could. MasteroftheWord (talk) 18:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Which article are you referring to? The various Wikipedia projects have their own assessment criteria. – ukexpat (talk) 18:17, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

The Epilogue page. It is of low quality for such a fundamental literary device, and is at least of moderate importance. It's listed as unrated for both quality and importance however, and I thought adding a rating may help bring some attention to it. I also planned on trying to improve on it myself. MasteroftheWord (talk) 18:21, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * That is part of WikiProject Literature. As it says on Talk:Epilogue, "Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article." - see WikiProject Literature/Assessment for how the WikiProject assess the ratings.  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 18:30, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I already know all of that... how exactly do I go about rating it? MasteroftheWord (talk) 18:33, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * If you edit the page, you'll see at the top ... just alter it to:
 * with the relevant rating, and then leave a message on the indicated talk page to justify it!  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 18:51, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * (am aware that Phantomsteve has mainly answered this, kudos to him) Assess what stage the article is at, then go to the talk page, click edit, and at the top of the page you should fine a template that looks something like this: if you wanted to rate the articles quality, change   to  . The same principal for rating the articles importance, this time you use expressions like high/low/etc. Hope this makes sense, if not just ask, all the best SpitfireTally-ho! 18:56, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

dispute process
Hello. A wikipedia user named Brotherj has capriciously deleted what I'd written on the talk page of the Sotomayor article. Since he seems to have the personality type to unilaterally appoint himself as censor, I assume he will delete my words again. Can someone be good enough to tell me where to look to find the process that should develop from here? I find it unbelievable that a single person would be allowed to strike out anything he chooses, just by arbitarily (and unfairly) labeling it as against guidelines, and without any explanation. That would be quite a gimmick to stifle contrary opinions to his own. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.181.242.155 (talk) 19:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit follows] sorry, I suppose that I should have given a reference to the posts in dispute, though my question pertains to the process and not to the facts of this instance. Anyway, the points were titled "the part that's really missing" AND "choice of words is very revealing of article bias" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.181.242.155 (talk) 19:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, the information and point of view you were promoting were unsourced. If you would like to claim that the nomination of Sotomayor is racially/genderly (is that a word?) motivated, the burden is on you to provide a reliable source that supports it. Unfounded claims are (rightly) removed. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  19:49, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I may be missing something, but proper sourcing is needed for material added to article pages, not talk pages. Material on article pages without proper sourcing can be summarily removed, but I wouldn't think that material on talk pages should be removed so capriciously. I realize this isn't a soapbox, but I would expect warnings if that is the issue, not wholesale removal.-- SPhilbrick  T  20:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't call it wholesale removal. The unsigned items deleted were in fact the traditional assertion of political opinions without any sourcing, and accusation that Wikipedia is as biased as the eviallll "mainstream media." No contribution to the actual article was offered, nor any sources for the assertions of bias (the article is biased, according to this IP, because it doesn't assert a particular political motivation to Obama's choice of Sotomayor as nominee). -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:54, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I disagree. I don't want to argue that the comments were a model of excellence, but there were valid questions asked. The very principle of BOLD suggests they should be added to the article - if they were, I'd advocate removing them, but they were brought up in the talk page - the exact place to discuss why there is virtually no discussion in the article of the possibility that she wasn't selected by looking for the best possible candidate as opposed to looking for a candidate within predetermined criteria. OP is right that the press has discussed this in great detail - so it is a fair question to ask why it receives zero coverage in the article. It is equally fair that any such discussion requires decent sourcing, but I would think the right response would be to point that out, not erase the comment.-- SPhilbrick  T  21:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Please see WP:BLP. Discussions of living persons must have sources for all contentious edits in all spaces, not just articles.  You can't make claims on a Talk page without providing sources.  Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 03:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

User Committed Identity
Hello, I would like some help creating a User Commited Identity. Due to the amount of hacking that goes on, I think this is a neccessary step to ensure I can get my account back if such an event arose. However, I'm finding it very complicated to understand how to create this committed identity so if somebody could explain as simply as possible that would be great! (Somebody who has already got a committed identy would be preferable). Ha rle m 675 19:35, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the template page explains it pretty well. First, think of a secret phrase. It has to be something attackers will have great difficulty guessing, and you have to either remember it perfectly (character for character) or note it down somewhere. Then find a hash function provider, such as here, select SHA-512, and (carefully!) enter your secret phrase, and copy the resulting hash. Then add to your userpage. Algebraist 21:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The above editor types faster than me, but here is what I was going to put. :) First you pick a secret string.  Check out this for advice on picking one.  You then choose a "method".  I'd use what the template suggests and choose a SHA-512 "method".  You can then go to a website like this one and enter your secret string.  You scroll down and find the SHA-512 result and either write it down, or you can copy/paste the result.  You can then put that info in the template.  For example the text to be inserted would look like:




 * If you have any more questions, ask.--Rockfang (talk) 21:28, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, Thanks for the help. Ha rle m 675  22:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

maps?
is there currently, or are there plans to ever have, a wikimaps section?64.92.13.157 (talk) 20:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes. It can be found here. Wperdue (talk) 20:47, 14 July 2009 (UTC)wperdue


 * But note WikiMapia and this discussion on Jimbo's talk page. – ukexpat (talk) 21:04, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Archiving a talk page
I have tried to archive the Talk:Gordon Brown and I have almost got it, just having a problem adding the template to add my link to the Archive 1, 2...mine is the 3 that is not quite in the correct spot, please help and tell me what is wrong. (Off2riorob (talk) 21:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC))
 * Think I fixed it. The name of the page should have been Talk:Gordon Brown/Archive 3.  You had it as Talk:Gordon Brown/Talk:Gordon Brown Archive 3--Rockfang (talk) 21:37, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * To clarify, I just moved it.--Rockfang (talk) 21:39, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Edit conflict, thats clear.
 * Yes thank you, close but no cigar (for me) Thanks Rockfang. (Off2riorob (talk) 21:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC))

I cannot use the 'Compare selected revisions' tab in history
When I click 'Compare selected revisions' button in history page after selecting two revisions I do not get desired result. My download manager pops up and tells me to download a php file.

I think the problem is not related to my browser because if I log in with other account in the same browser I do not face the problem. I think the problem is in my account or in some account setting that I do not know. Please help me to solve the problem. MåhmüÐ 21:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MahmudAlam (talk • contribs)
 * Is 'Use external diff by default (for experts only, needs special settings on your computer)' turned on in the editing section of your preferences? If yes, turn it off. Algebraist 21:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

It worked! Thanks. MåhmüÐ 06:15, 15 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MahmudAlam (talk • contribs)

Page about myself
Dear Sir/Madam:

I wrote a page about myself a few months ago. I pasted my book's title and my photos too. I wrote what was verifiable. But after a short while, the page was firstly redirected to probably Answers.com and then was completely removed from Wikipedia.

And now, I can't find that page in Wikipedia or any other website.

Kindly guide me as to how could I put information (verifiable) at Wikipedia?

Thanks

Hammad —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamhammad (talk • contribs) 22:16, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Please read Autobiography. —teb728 t c 22:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If it will help, it wasn't really redirected to Answers.com. That site uses Wikipedia as a source for answers. So your page existed in Wikipedia for soem time, long enough to get copied by answers. com. When someone took a look at your article, they realized it didn't belong here, so removed it. Eventually, it would then disappear from Answers.com.-- SPhilbrick  T  23:12, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Template names
I created a template.

If you search templates, you'll find it at Template:Big East Women's Basketball Player of the Year Inside the template, the parameter has the value Big East Conference Women's Basketball POY, while the title is Big East Conference Women's Basketball Player of the Year

Three different values - which is creating a problem. I think the name of the template has to match the name inside the template, while the title can be different. If I'm right, I either have to change the name inside the template, to match the name of the template, or move this to a template matching the name inside. Is that right? I suspect many here could do it faster than they can tell me, but I'd like to learn, so if you can tell me what i should do, I'd appreciate it.-- SPhilbrick  T  23:09, 14 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, the "name" parameter of the template has to be the name of the template for the v:d:e: links to work. I think it's fixed now. BencherliteTalk 23:18, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Does wikipedia ever delete anything? ever?
I was curious on something. Wikipedia seems to save EVERYTHING. every old change to new. even this help desk the first entry was 17:59, 30 March 2004. That was 5 years ago! although it is mostly text being saved which is like kb or mb of data, wouldnt it be more ethical for wiki to delete data more then 5 years old? Even if they ran one script to delete data 5 years old or more they could save TB of space!

Do they ever plan on deleting anything? Ivtv (talk) 23:26, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * A great deal of inappropriate stuff of various sorts is 'deleted' and removed from public view, but I don't believe any text is ever actually deleted from the servers (images are deleted, I think). All the text, including all history, is still only a dozen or so terabytes, and storage space is cheap. Algebraist 23:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
 * A variation on Moore's law, called Kryder's law, says that the areal density of magnetic disk storage doubles each year. Obviously this cannot continue forever, but at least recently hard disk storage capacity has been increasing faster than Wikipedia has been growing. However, it is still a hassle to install new disk farms. It's too bad our existing disks aren't doubling in capacity each year, transparently to the user. That would be pretty nice. I would also like to become twice as good-looking each year. In just a few decades I might then be presentable. --Teratornis (talk) 02:42, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Isn't oversighted stuff irretrievably deleted? – ukexpat (talk) 02:54, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It can be recovered by developers. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 02:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Deleted text and images, oversighted information, etc, is all kept. Nothing is ever really deleted. The sysadmins say that material marked as 'deleted' is liable to be removed (permanently) at any time. However, this has never happened, so, for all practical purposes nothing is truly deleted. Prodego  <sup style="color:darkgreen;">talk  02:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * We live and learn. Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 03:02, 15 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Except when the database hiccups and we loose stuff; happened to the image server a while back when a dev made a boo-boo. ---— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk 11:11, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Writing an article
I want to write an article on my exboyfriends life. He was a well known dancer and choreographer who passed away at the young age of 37. how do I submit an article to Wikipedia? is there a strict regimen for citing references?

23:40, 14 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.102.123.39 (talk)


 * In order to create an article that will not be deleted, you need to show that the subject is Notable and that it is well sourced. You also would have a conflict of interest. I would suggest you place your information on the Articles Requested page.  Phantom Steve  ( Contact Me, My Contribs ) 23:48, 14 July 2009 (UTC)