text:
Wikipedia:Help desk/Archive 8

"Standard" skin?
Various Help comments refer to a "standard skin", yet when one looks at the skin options in preferences none is labelled "standard" -- so what is going on here?

The reason I was looking at preferences in the first place is that, unless I am just imagining things, the elegant Verdana typeface which was formerly used seems to have been changed at some point in the last few days -- and without so much as a "by your leave" -- to thin and nasty Ariel, and it seems there's not a darned thing I can do about it. :-(  -- Picapica 14:47, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Classic has been called standard for some time, please change Standard into Classic in help pages.--Patrick 21:32, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * You can create or edit your personal style sheet at User:Picapica/monobook.css. See m:Help:User style for more details on how.  If you copy this text into that file, it should give you Verdana as first preference:

font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; }
 * 1) content {
 * You may need to clear your cache and/or hard-refresh (CTRL-F5) to see the changes. --Catherine | talk 21:03, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC) (anyone else feel free to edit the css code if it's not right.)

 * Way to go, Catherine! I've been whimpering silently for weeks about the Arial font in articles, gurgling "Verdana...Vardana..." Your advice works and my eyes thank you.NathanHawking 22:15, 2004 Sep 30 (UTC)

How to link to Wikibooks?
I want to link to a Cookbook entry on Wikibooks from Wikipedia. How do I accomplish that? Only through the full URI, or is there a namespace? --Cluster 05:24, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * See m:help:interwiki linking.--Patrick 08:25, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Auto-external linking of RFC names
While editing the delta encoding article I discovered that the double square brackets around an RFC name are ignored, which makes for an ugly page. Here's an example: RFC 1. The RFC name is automatically linked to the actual RFC text on the IETF website, which was suprising for me as I didn't realize Wikipedia did any automatic linking like this. Actually, after some searching of the help pages, I could find no list of automatic links, not even a mention of the RFC auto-linking. Can anyone point me to more info on this? --Jarsyl 06:20, 2004 Sep 6 (UTC)

 * I have added it to m:Help:Editing.--Patrick 08:22, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * If you want to make a link to the wikipedia page called RFC 1, put it inside nowiki tags, like this: RFC 1  that is, <nowiki>RFC 1</nowiki> --Goplat 15:40, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * This links to the edit page even if the page exists; easier and without this problem is putting an underscore: RFC_1--Patrick 02:00, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * As far as I know, the only other auto-link is for ISBNs. "ISBN" followed by a number will auto-link to our book-source page. -- Cyrius|✎ 17:00, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * See Help:Link --169.232.246.195 (talk) 20:49, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Copyright question
I am terribly confused. I want to use an article (specifically the article on "kleptocracy") in a book I am writing. The article is absolutely perfect for my needs.

I certainly want to give credit where credit is due, but I'm afraid I do not understand the conditions in the "GNU Free Documentation License".

Can I acknowledge the source of this article with a standard bibliographic entry, or am I actually required to post the entire license somewhere in my work?

If that's the requirement, I'm afraid the value of that short article won't be worth the trouble of adding such an incredibly long license document.

Someone please give me some good news! Thanks ahead.

 * Standard disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and Wikipedia does not give legal advice. With any luck, your publisher will have a lawyer they can contact about matters like this, and I'd recommend that you have them do so.  That said, I'll see if I can help shed any light on the subject, and hopefully I won't misinterpret the law too badly.

 * If you want to use only a part of the article, it may be considered fair use, in which case you could quote and cite it as you would any other excerpt from a copyrighted work, and not have to worry about the GFDL. If, on the other hand, you are copying the entire article, things become a little more problematic.

 * It seems like you would be printing a verbatim copy of the article, and that you would indeed be required to include the full text of the GFDL. See Verbatim_copying for a more thorough explanation.  Compared to the length of an entire book, I don't think the GFDL is all that large, but that's your decision.

 * You should also keep in mind that, depending on various factors including the nature of your use of the article, it's possible that some lawyers would consider your book a "derivative work" based upon the article, which would mean that your entire book would have to be licensed under the terms of the GFDL as well. This might seem strange to you and I, but it's not our opinions that matter—again I would urge you to obtain professional legal advice.

 * Hope this helps —Triskaideka 17:38, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Stub query
In particular with Richard Blumenthal... I personally still think it's a stub as it only covers a mere fraction of the man's career and what you could talk about. I'd like to put it back and have people expand it... should I do this? - Ta bu shi da yu 11:58, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * You mean put the tag back?  I don't think it deserves one; there's no way an article that long (and that good) is a "stub" according to the definition on Find or fix a stub.  A stub is a mere placeholder for what will eventually become a real article; Richard Blumenthal is a real article, just one that could be elaborated on (like many of our other real articles).  People are still encouraged to expand articles even in the absence of any tags that indicate they're in critical need of attention.  If you want to try to draw attention to it, you could mention it on your User page or list it on Peer review.    —Triskaideka 15:04, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Also try listing the article Requests for expansion, and/or add the Category:Requests for expansion tag. Good luck!  Catherine | talk 21:38, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Government website copyrights
Government websites such as georgia.gov generally do not have copyright notices on them anywhere; how are such copyrights generally treated? ~ Booyabazooka 18:17, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * That's a state government website. Material published by all states except California is under copyright unless explicitly disclaimed. -- Cyrius|✎ 21:23, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * However, state court decisions and enacted laws are public domain. - Mateo SA 14:54, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

Two tables overlapping
I noted that the Leo von Caprivi page has two tables overlapping (at least it does in my browser). My complete lack of technical knowhow means I would rather not attempt to fix it without advice on how to do so. Any ideas? --Roisterer 04:50, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * By inserting

above the second table, as I have done. HTH HAND --Phil | Talk 10:19, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

Where's the default text on the blank pages?
What's going on that the blank pages don't have that table with links to wikitionary and page editing anymore?

Only "(There is currently no text in this page)" makes Wikipedia look horrible and void   — Kieff | Talk 11:31, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

 * This is an ongoing problem with the way messages are handled. Sometimes the MediaWiki: namespace messages (e.g. MediaWiki:Newarticletext) are not used, and the software defaults are used instead (which is this case is "There is currently no text in this page"). Angela. (adapted from Kate's response on WP:VP) 20:40, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

Counting number of contributions
How can one count the number of contributions made by self or others (short of making an SQL query)? I always see people making comments on how many edits a particular person or themselves did, and never could figure out how they got those numbers. On a related note, would it not be more useful if the list in user contribution pages was numbered? I guess I'll make a feature request. ato 20:27, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * The only way is to go to the contribution list, set the # per page to 500, and count the number of pages, then lowering the # per page as you approach the end. Sorry, [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 20:31, 2004 Sep 7 (UTC)

Once your contributions get high (over a couple thousand), thumbing through them even by 500 at a time becomes quite inefficient. If you can estimate your contribution count, there's a faster way that helps minimize the number of page views required to count them:

 * Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Contributions&limit=100&offset=RoughEditCount&target=YourUserName (replacing YourUserName with your Wikipedia username, and RoughEditCount with a guesstimate of your contribution count +/- a few hundred)
 * Thumb through the results by pressing "Next 100", gradually lowering the number per page as you approach the end (as Meelar said)

As my contrib count increases, I find this technique increasingly more valuable. Your mileage may vary. --Diberri | Talk 04:30, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)

 * If your contribution are "over a couple thousand" then you're probably listed here: List of Wikipedians by number of edits. Paul August 17:24, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

Redirecting to an anchor
Is it "legal" to set up a redirection to an anchor on a page? For instance, could Carth onasi be redirected to Minor_characters_in_Star_Wars ? ~ Booyabazooka 03:16, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * nevermind - apparently yes. should have read the discussion page first. ~ Booyabazooka 03:17, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm the owner and author of a web page but I can not put a small article
reference informatoin about: Ted Wong

Hello,

My name is Albert Grajales and I'm the owner and author of the web page

http://www.geocities.com/junfanjeetkunedo_puertorico

A day ago I was writing about my teacher Ted Wong in Wikipedia and it appears on your advice notice that it can not be posted because it is copyright to my own web page. I took my information from my web page that is

http://www.geocities.com/junfanjeetkunedo_puertorico/JFJKD_PUERTORICO_BRUCELEE_TEDWONG_SIFU.html

and of course I modified it with more data. My question is how can I post my data again or HOw can I authorize myself to post the article about Ted Wong? I'm not to avid in computers so please explain me carefuly.

just in case:

Me Albert Grajales authorize wikipedia to use my information from my web page: http://www.geocities.com/junfanjeetkunedo_puertorico

specialy part of the page:

http://www.geocities.com/junfanjeetkunedo_puertorico/JFJKD_PUERTORICO_BRUCELEE_TEDWONG_SIFU.html

Albert Grajales PO Box 1068 Aguadilla PR 00605-1068

email: jeetkunedo@prtc.net

Thank your help on this matter.

Albert

 * You are of course allowed to post your own text on Wikipedia, but if you don't say that you're the copyright owner, other editors may assume that you're some third party who's using the copyrighted content without permission. You've already done what you need to by posting your permission to use the text on Talk:Ted wong.  I've added a note to Copyright_problems to draw attention to your permission.  A sysop should fix the article within a few days.    —Triskaideka 15:48, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

and __EDITSECTION__
The directive prevents an [edit] link from being placed on a section. Is there anything like an __EDITSECTION__, to produce an edit link? -- 05:31, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Use of
The following two sections use. Are both of these correct? -- 05:31, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

broken examples removed

 * is a page-level flag. Placing it anywhere on a page removes all edit section links, which is why I removed your examples. There is no flag that will remove the edit links for a single section. -- Cyrius|✎

How can I e-mail a user?
How can I send e-mail to users. I can not find the E-mail this user link mentioned in Preference AnyFile 18:18, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * In most skins, when you go to a user page, e.g. User:Triskaideka or User:AnyFile, the "E-mail this user" link will be in one of the menus on the left side of the page. In the "Monobook" skin it appears under "toolbox".  You type your e-mail into that web page, and it gets sent to their e-mail address.  I don't know what happens if they haven't provided a valid e-mail address.    —Triskaideka 18:35, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Do registered user's email addresses ever get displayed?
I'm very interested in registering to participate in Wikipedia, but I've just got a new email address that I don't want displayed anywhere on the web (for anti-spam purposes). On my own site I use a contact form to keep the address on the server. I've searched the FAQ's and can't find any mention of policies regarding the display or non-display of email addresses of users.

No your email adress is kept private. If I as a wikipedian want to send you an email I can do so by clicking email this user, but even then I don't get to see what it is. (But you get to see mine). What's more you don't even have to fill in the email field when you regidter if you don't want to. Get an account 90,000 registered users can't be wrong! Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 22:02, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Linux
Does anyone know how to install a wiki using Linux? Every time I search for info on the subject I find a page about Linux in the wikipedia. Any help would be tremendous!! Thanks. :v) {re-posted on behalf of Anon User:66.168.237.136}
 * If you want to install MediaWiki, the wiki software which Wikipedia uses, first download it at SourceForge. The only official install instructions I can find are available at Installation, though it doesn't appear they are very good. That page links to Running MediaWiki on Linux and three distro-specific guides, Running MediaWiki on Slackware Linux, Running MediaWiki on Gentoo Linux, and Running MediaWiki on Debian GNU/Linux. Hope this helps. Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 03:42, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

references to external web pages via Internet Archive?
I think that references to external web pages should, where possible, be made to the Internet Archive. I have some questions.
 * is this the right place to ask these questions ?
 * where should I discuss this idea with contributors ?
 * is there a bot checking that references to external web pages have not become broken, maybe even fixing the references automatically to the Internet Archive ? PeterGrecian 11:06, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * You could ask at Wikipedia talk:external links. If you don't get much response there, you could advertise the discussion on the Village pump. I don't know of any bots checking external links. Angela. 02:53, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks Angela, I'll look around try a few things out. PeterGrecian 10:55, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

chemical formula editor
Hi. I'm Paginazero, an Italian "rookie" contributor to it.wiki. Has wikipedia ever considered to set up a tool like ChemTex (or similar) which is based on the same Tex technology currently in use for writing math formulas? That would help for creating a common standard and would save space (code vs. images). Thank you for your kind attention. --195.75.15.2 12:42, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC) (Paginazero on it.wiki)
 * Try looking at WikiTeX currently in testing. --Phil | Talk 10:21, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

Corrected "Wikitex" link. Larry (talk) 08:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Copyright on images
Advice please. I'd like to add a much improved image to M51. I have the permission of the copyright owner for its use in Wikipedia. Is this enough? He merely requests an acknowledgement, but would remain the copyright holder. Given the 'free content' nature of Wikipedia should I use it?

Thanks, Arcturus 19:31, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes. This is perfectly compatible with GFDL which is the license for Wikipedia. GFDL keeps the copyright and requires attribution. No one is required to waive copyright to make a contribution, only to licence the work. ato 20:23, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Redirect from article with an image
I'd like to make the article Chucky a redirect to Child's Play, but Chucky has an image. How does that affect the procedure? Joyous 02:29, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * If you think the image is worthwhile, then add it to the Child's Play article. —Stormie 05:06, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

 * Simply replace the Chucky text with #REDIRECT Child's Play and move the relevant content by hand, though it doesn't look very substantial. Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 00:52, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

How to get tables to stay in their sections
Take a look at User:Pyrop/Table example. How do i get the tables to not do that, and stay in their sections? Pyrop 16:26, Sep 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * You can use

]] 16:34, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * If you don't like either formatting solution, try other editing solutions. Without knowing which article/subject is vexing you, this has to be general:
 * First (and perhaps ideally), fill the section with an attractive (!) amount of text by finding more to write about the subject! Describe the meaning of the tabular data, what distinguishes it from tables in other sections, provide sources, discuss historical significance -- make it an encyclopedia article that is more than just a collection of reference tables.
 * Alternately, don't use sections at all: include an extra row at top or bottom of the table as a caption, containing the text which is currently under the section header.  (Search for "rowspan" in the table markup help pages to make the caption row stretch across all columns -- I don't know how to do this in the new table markup.)  There may be a way to display the tables side-by-side, in this case (short of enclosing them in another table, which is dang ugly code-wise).
 * Good luck! Catherine | talk 23:23, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

"New messages" link to external site
I recently got the standard orange box indicating that I have new messages, only the link, oddly enough, sent me to this site. I am baffled as to how this happened. Any explanations? Livajo 00:09, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * No idea, but note to others: don't follow the link, it displays "you are an idiot" in blinking lights, along with a song. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 00:11, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)

 * It was a vandal. He copied the format of the new message box and put it on recent changes. Grunt blocked him milLiseconds before I could. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 00:26, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Aha. I didn't think the Recent Changes page could be edited. Oh well, glad to see justice served. Thanks. Livajo 03:22, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * To edid recent changes go here Recentchanges. The page needs to be updated every few days as requested articles become fulfilled. If you ever see a blue one, replace it with a new one from Requested articles. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 17:35, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Creative Commons licenses and Wikipedia
What's the deal with incorporating content licensed under various creative commons licenses, and images in particular, into Wikipedia? — Matt 22:37, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * As far as I know Creative Commons ShareAlike is incompatible with GFDL whether noncommercial or not since it requires releasing the derivative works under the same license. Public domain is fair game of course, so do works whose copyright have expired due to licensor's choice of limited time (e.g., framer's) copyright. -- at0 17:01, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Images under Creative Commons licenses are allowed under the GFDL's aggregation clause (or at least the Wikipedia interpretation of it). Non-commercial is discouraged as it limits our ability to redistribute. No-derivs is frowned upon, but I think it's tolerated. -- Cyrius|✎

How do you find your number of posts?
Hey everyone. I've looked all over for a way to find an exact number for your number of contributions. The my contributions page doesn't seem to give one. I'm interested to find out how many edits I've made, so I'd appriciate it if anyone enlightened me. --pie4all88 01:43, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Go to your contributions page, then select "500" as the limit. Count the number of pages until you get to the last one, then set the limit to 100 and repeat. Do this until you get a working number. Hope this helps, [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 06:32, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)

 * I've gathered from IRC discussions that this is very hard on the database and that the developers would like everyone to stop doing it. -- Cyrius|✎ 15:14, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Ok, thanks for the help. I wish there was a more convenient way of doing it, though. :) --pie4all88 23:25, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Just so's you know, the reason an easier method hasn't been added is because there are worries that this would lead to undue importance being placed on the number of edits a user has made, as opposed to more accurate measures of their contribution to the project. Not having the feature creates a technical problem, as people try to find out manually, but having it might create a social problem, because it would be too easy to put importance on it. - IMSoP 19:25, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree that emphasizing the importance of number of edits is a bad idea, but as long as number of edits is a factor in evaluating, for example, Requests for adminship, people are going to keep doing this. Perhaps updating List of Wikipedians by number of edits more frequently, say once a week, would help? (Maybe this suggestion belongs somewhere else, but I don't know where.)   —Triskaideka 19:42, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, that criterion for adminship is exactly the kind of controversial reliance on numbers that the developers are trying to discourage by making it harder. I'm pretty sure there has been some very heated debate regarding how strictly that rule should be applied. Not that that means it's wrong, of course... - IMSoP 19:58, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * There's always the CSV, an unformatted list of all contribs to all wikipedias, updated weekly (more often than List of Wikipedians by number of edits). See here for a list of what each column means. Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 23:08, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hurricanes Ivan
Why when I click on the link for Hurricane Ivan, I get a very gross and sick photo of a girl in the bath tub, I have no idea who to contact about this or how ones gets the right photo ther, Please clean this up before a child see it!!!!!!!!

 * Someone vandalized the article. Has been fixed. Click "reload" if your browser still shows it. Andris 21:04, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)

page is hard to reach.
Someone put up a page about my programming language called SuperCollider. The page is here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercollider_%28programming_language%29

However searches for "SuperCollider" "SuperCollider programming language" do not find the page. links to SuperCollider (programming language) don't work.

The page is nearly inaccessible and unfindable for these reasons. How to fix it?

 * I created a redirect to fix the red link. The other problems were because there was only a small 'c' on 'Collider'.  [[User:Noisy|Noisy | Talk]] 11:10, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Category creation
I have posted the following at the Wikipedia talk:Tutorial (Namespaces), where such questions are encouraged, but no one seems to be home... Can any one explain to me:

''How to create a Category, to add or edit an existing category is not covered, or I can not find this informaton...Please expand on this topic. Faedra 09:26, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC). please also drop a note on my talk page if this is done so I can read it!... All the best.''

Further research revealeda bit of helpful info, so I added it to my question, thus:

NB: Found this:

I want to create a new category at the bottom of a page. How do I activate a new category and what are the criteria for addition?

First check to see if an appropriate or very similar category already exists (just click on the Categories link in any article for a full list). (This seems untrue all I get is some inane list of numbers and dates and info on some irrelivant pop band, whats going on here?)

If not, you can create the category just by adding the category link,.

That's all there is to it--you've created a category. After saving the article, you can click on the category link and enter a description and some information about the category.

Still uncertain about adding to existing categories and what categories should be limited to Please specify and clarify, if at all possible.... Faedra. Thank you.

Category:Test Category
 * Sounds like you found the List of Categories all right. Some one went through and made categories for dates and "irrelevant pop bands". More useful might be the Browse by category Rmhermen 12:31, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)

Inter-project image linking
Can wikipedia images be used in sister projects? For example, can I directly use a Wikipedia image in a Wikibook, or do I have to save it and upload it again under Wikibooks? ~ Booyabazooka 03:04, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * You have to upload it again. Wikipedia Commons is being set up to do this in the future though. Rmhermen 14:04, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Does this apply to interlanguage image links as well? I'd like to link to some images in the Japanese version of Wikipedia from the corresponding English version of the same article, but I tried various syntaxes (ja:image, :ja:image, even ja:画像 and none of them worked.) -- Che Fox 18:01, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

photo mess
Sorry to say, I have just made a mess, and I worry that trying to fix it will make things worse. I uploaded the wrong picture as "Aktobe's coat of arms", I tried to upload the right one but I won't work.....I see a discussion about this type of problem but the technical talk in that discussion is right above my head. To add insult to injury trying to replace it I made another mistake and I uploaded the right picture as "Aktobe coat" (not my day today, I promise I am stopping right now), can we delete that page entirely. The problem is I am not computer savvy and I cannot find a picture unless there is a link to it in a page, so I can't even get to it right now! Sorry for the work I just created, but can somebody please help...tell me what to do in none "....cache.....server..." terms. 04:36, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * You can get to an Image page by prefixing the picture filename with "Image:" and typing it in the Search toolbar at the left (in the default skin). For example, Image:Wiki.png. Alternately, you can go to your contributions list by clicking "my contributions" at the top of the page. The Image pages that you created will be there.

 * Now then, if you've accidentally uploaded duplicate pictures, it's not a problem. List the duplicate at Images for deletion, and an administrator can delete it. --Slowking Man 06:00, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you. I asked to have both deleted and will load the right one CAREFULLY with the right name etc. Obvioulsy I am new around here. Carole a 06:53, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * No big deal - you'll get the hang of it. Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 23:16, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

reciprocal link
Hi

I have a real estate business on Russell Island (a small island off the coast of Brisbane, Australia). Is it possible to set up a reciprocal link with you. My web sit is www.brisbanebayislands.com.au.

Thank You

Dominic Alberth

 * Hello Dominic. Welcome to Wikipedia. Unfortunately reciprocal links with your site would not be appropriate content for Wikipedia. This site is not just a collection of links. Please read a summary of our site and what it is not. --Jarsyl 09:36, 2004 Sep 15 (UTC)

 * Is this what Friends of Wikipedia is for? — Matt 13:13, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes --Hemanshu 03:47, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

20000 quotations for you..
Hi,

I have a database with nearly 20000 English quotations (19920 exact) quote +author. I have created this database with the help of a small bot which I coded myself. I don't know if you could do anything with it (is copyright a problem?), but I would like to send it in csv format to you (if you want to have it), let me know..

 * That sounds like an impressive collection. Wikipedia does not collect many quotations, but our sibling project Wikiquote (http://www.wikiquote.org/) may be interested. Wikiquote:Village pump is probably the place to ask.   —Triskaideka 20:19, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * But note that yes, copyright may well be a problem - you say you got these quotes with a bot, so where exactly did you get them from? I mean, a website of quotations probably won't be too happy with you trawling through their pages and copying all the quotations so that you can go offering them to their rivals... - IMSoP 20:36, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

If it's a quotation then surely the copyright lies with the quoted people? How can any website have a copyright on what other people said? Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 05:47, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Theresa is quite correct. A collection of non-creative information is not copyrightable in the US (as a result of Feist v Rural). Also, quotations are a very, very, very well establish form of fair use recognized explicetely by the Bern treaty. James and I wrote this all into Copyright FAQ - go there for further discussion. →Raul654 05:55, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * But could the selection of these particular quotes represent a creative work? [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 06:00, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, in theory, it could qualify for the same protections that an anthology does. However, if they were gathered with a bot, on its face, that would seem to negate the 'creative' element. →Raul654 06:02, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Even if the collection does constitute a copyrightable creative work, it appears that the owner of that copyright is offering the collection to us, so No Problem. -- Derek Ross | Talk 06:07, 2004 Sep 17 (UTC)

 * No, you both miss the point: if they were gathered by a bot, they have been gathered from somewhere. My guess is that they have been gathered from somebody else's collection: probably another website (note that this is a "small bot"; not "an advanced piece of software capable of extracting notable quotations from the Internet at large"). If I'm right, that other website may well argue that it is publishing a "creative work" or somesuch, and challenge our right to simply extract their content (NB: IANAL, this just seems fair enough). If this person (who I only now notice left no means of contact, so we no only that they were using IP:83.116.124.128) clarifies where the quotations came from, we can work out whether they are, in fact, usable.

 * Meanwhile, is there anywhere on Wikiquote yet that deals with copyright issues? I mean, can one just blatantly rip off other people's quotation databases? Is the only thing stopping this being done that it is hard to verify the quality of them? And what about a bot that used OCR to process all the quotations in the Oxford Dictionary of Quotations? OK, maybe I'll shut up now. - IMSoP 16:18, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Boilerplate request for permission
To whom should the replies to an emailed Boilerplate request for permission be addressed if the recipient wishes to discuss the request or has questions about copyright and so forth? -- 23:26, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, I'm not 100% sure, but I think you should just continue the discussion yourself. If they ask for more details about the site, you can point them to the appropriate parts of the site, or perhaps to the mailing lists - the "Foundation-L" list covers legal matters, I believe, so that might be a good place to take the discussion if you find yourself out of your depth with copyright clarifications. Best bet, though, is to knock their socks off with how great the project is, and you won't have to worry about it! ;) -- IMSoP 00:05, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Referral to a mailing list seems impolite, somehow. I'm concerned that most users do not have the legal authority to discuss Wikipedia's use of the GFDL or possible alternatives.  --[[User:Eequor|η [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ υωρ]]] 00:31, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * What you are describing is called "unauthorized practice of law" - see Practice of law. In general, as long as you do not present your statements as legal advice, or present yourself as a lawyer, you are on safe ground - hence, the commonplace IANAL disclaimer. As far as the GFDL, James and I wrote Copyright FAQ to give people a basic idea about copyright. That should help answer most basic questions. →Raul654 02:06, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

crew of the Prince of Wales.
My father in law was rescued off the Prince of Wales during WW2. I don't believe it was part of the Pearl Harbour event. Can you tell me if there is a list of the crew of the Prince of Wales so that I can pass it on to my grandson, Robert Andrew Murley. His great-grandfather was Officer Leonard Seymour Murley. There was a newspaper photo in existence that showed him being hoisted from one ship to another. Yours truly Sylvia M Murley

 * Hello, Sylvia. It looks like our article on the HMS Prince of Wales (1939) is still somewhat incomplete.  However, after a quick Google search, I did discover  this fairly extensive list, which may be what you're looking for.  (Click the links with the groups of letters near the top to see crew members whose last names start with those letters.)  I hope that helps.

 * FYI, for the future, reference questions like this one should be posted at Reference desk.   —Triskaideka 15:50, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Innocence Project
I've found that both Innocence Project and Innocence project seem to be about the same organization. The latter is more complete and has numerous contributors, while the properly named one has only one contributor and has very little content. Could someone delete the Innocence Project article and move Innocence project into its place? Thanks. - MattTM 04:02, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * I have merged Innocence project into the proper article and made it a redirect. Duplicate pages with usable information should not be deleted, as the edit history is necessary for compliance with the GNU Free Documentation License. --Slowking Man 05:17, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Actually, there is an even better way, which I see someone has now done: an admin can delete a page, move something to its location, and then undelete the original, thus merging the two edit histories. This is mainly useful for copy-and-paste moves, where the history begins in one place and then contines in the other, but I guess it makes sense here too. - IMSoP 16:29, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Screenshots
What format do I use for screenshots, and would it be a bad idea to use Paint to convert to that format? --Sgeo | Talk 13:23, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * I would say PNG (that is not lossy), without size reduction. Yes, you can use Paint.--Patrick 13:32, 2004 Sep 17 (UTC)

French "Droit de citation"
Apparently France has some sort of fair use legislation. See fr:Droit de citation. Can anyone tell me what this page says? I'm kind of wondering whether we could get this translated into English also. It'd be helpful for pages like Tintin where we need to clarify the license of French images from the books. - Ta bu shi da yu 15:31, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC) P.S. how do I link to the French article?
 * Add a colon to the front of the link (as I have done above). Incidentally there is also a French article on fair use which seems to tie the two concepts together. HTH HAND --Phil | Talk 16:11, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)
 * Cheers :-) The French article (when I passed it through a translator) appears to talk about American fair use law. I'm interested in French fair use. - Ta bu shi da yu 16:19, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

images
I'm accessing Wikipedia from a different machine, and none of the images display. This computer uses XP instead of 98SE, but there are no other changes that a computer illiterate like me is aware of. I have Zone Alarm security suite and SpybotSD. Any ideas how I can make the images visible again? jimfbleak 15:34, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Some web browsers allow you to turn off display of images. Any chance that that's what happened?  Also, glancing at the source code, it looks like CSS and JavaScript are used to display images.  Could support for either of those be lacking or turned off?  What browser and version are you using?   —Triskaideka 16:10, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I wouldn't be surprised if this was actually a badly configured Zone Alarm: in my experience personal firewalls will limit the number of successive connections made by an "unknown" piece of software, and browsers fetching images tend to do so in a whole burst of connections. The same thing happens if a page has multiple frames: some of them will mysteriously be unavailable. If this is your problem, you need to go into the settings of Zone Alarm (which I've never used, I'm afraid) and find some way of telling it that whatever browser you're using is "trusted", or just that it exists (it may well have automatic settings you can tell it to apply, and even an option to search for 'net-enabled apps; I know Norton has both). Good luck! - IMSoP 16:36, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * My ISP is AOL 9.0, which I assume uses IE (as I said, I know nothing about computing). images on a couple of other sites I've used seem to display, and one of the media links to a larger image worked, although not one jpg in an article will display. I'll play around, but from my position of ignorance, I'm not hopeful. jimfbleak 05:26, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I've had this problem too. Going to ZoneAlarm - Privacy - Ad Blocking and turning off the blocking of banner ads fixed it for me. --Cavrdg 18:13, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Help with move over page (Tintin)
Could an admin help us move Tintin to The Adventures of Tintin? - Ta bu shi da yu 01:20, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Has this been discussed anywhere? It seems a bad idea considering most pages link to Tintin, not to The Adventures of Tintin. Angela. 06:55, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I did not check to see if it had been discussed or a consensus reached -- I've already deleted and moved. I was coming here to confirm it was done and ask the requestor to fix all links at Special:Whatlinkshere/The_Adventures_of_Tintin -- if need be, I will undo the changes in the morning, if another admin has not yet done so.  -- Up too late in California, Catherine | talk 07:05, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Can we just setup a redirect? The article is about the Adventures of Tintin, not about Tintin himself. - Ta bu shi da yu 14:59, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I agree, the article is about the Adventures; that's why I didn't hesitate before moving. I also see that the article is a Featured Article candidate, and those should definitely reside at the proper title.

The redirect was created when I moved the page, so it's already in place. However, you should still go to the What links here page and check every article that was linked to "Tintin" and is now linked to "Adventures" through the redirect. Anything that is referring to the "Adventures" should have the link manually fixed to point directly to that article, rather than redirecting -- rewrite the sentence so it can use The Adventures of Tintin directly, or change Tintin to Tintin. This is cleaner and reduces the chances of users accidentally creating double redirects.

This is a also lot of work, but that's the responsibility you take when you move or request that a page be moved. It's important to clean up after yourself! (There are probably a number of organizational changes that might be worthwhile, but keep getting deferred because they would be too much work for one person to take on comfortably....)

In addition, if it seems that a good number of the articles that link to Tintin are actually about the character and not the book series (a subtle distinction at times), it might be worthwhile to change the current REDIRECT at "Tintin" into an article on the character, comparable to the articles on other characters in the series. This should of course have a prominent disambiguation block at the top, pointing to the "Adventures" article.

I will not be on for much of the day, but I'll try to pitch in later if I can; I have a soft spot for the little guy as well.... -- Catherine | talk 15:55, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I'll check for double redirects, but I can't see the point of worrying about those articles that point to the character Tintin. The story contains more than enough information about Tintin himself. - Ta bu shi da yu 13:25, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

To make things more complicated, there's also an article Tintin (character) about the character. Maybe links about the character should be changed to this article? [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 12:22, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

Images of book covers ok to use?
Are images of book covers ok to use. Can you copy them from Amazon say, under "fair use"? Paul August 05:01, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

Or, in a related thought, if you can't use Amazon, could you scan them yourself? Rhymeless 05:29, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * In general, it's OK to use the book cover on an article about the book - that's pretty squarely fair use (see Copyright FAQ - I wrote the US fair use criteria in there). About using it from amazon - I suspect it would be the same as scanning it yourself, but I'm not sure (so don't quote me on that). →Raul654 06:32, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * Take this as you will -- here's what their Conditions of Use page says, in part:
 * All content included on this site, such as text, graphics, logos, button icons, images, [...] is the property of Amazon.com or its content suppliers and protected by United States and international copyright laws.

 * Amazon.com grants you a limited license to access and make personal use of this site and not to download (other than page caching) or modify it, or any portion of it, except with express written consent of Amazon.com. This license does not include [...] any derivative use of this site or its contents [...].  This site or any portion of this site may not be reproduced, duplicated, copied, sold, resold, visited, or otherwise exploited for any commercial purpose without express written consent of Amazon.com.

new punctuation; punctuation combinations
I am curious about new punctuation usage, mostly in e-mail and Web site pages. I have searched on Google but have had no success finding any definitive meanings for the following punctuation symbols:  and (.:) I am interested to know if anyone in this community has researched this topic. thanks >> bartlett@b-creative.com -- User:Jrbartlettjr

 * Try IPv6, particularly the section on Notation. --Catherine | talk 07:13, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Also see the C++ programming language, where is used as a namespace operator. Dmeranda 03:04, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Also used in ratios e.g. 2:3::4:6 Rich Farmbrough 22:11, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Other language Wikipedias
Is it possible to log in to other language Wikipedias using my English Wikipedia User name or do I need to register as a new User in each language? -- DanBlackham 07:46, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * You need to register in each language. A unified login proposal has been floated, though, so maybe in the future there will be single logins. Rmhermen 14:24, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * See Single login and the more recent Single signon transition for discussion on this. That page seems to imply it could be available soon. Angela. 22:42, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * How are they going to deal with the inevitable name conflict? Salasks 23:22, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * That is in fact the main topic of discussion on Single login (the two pages referenced above having been merged and expanded), it being the largest single stumbling block to making the change. Take a look, and feel free to add any comments that come into your head, either within the page or on its talk page. - IMSoP 23:27, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Corsica
The image of the Coat of Arms of Corsica is blank in the Corsica article. The is in the French Wikipedia. Where should I post a message asking for help to import the image from the French Wikipedia for use in the English article? -- DanBlackham 08:17, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * You don't need help. Just save the image (right click and go to "save as") and then reupload it to the english wikipedia. Make sure to say where you got it from and tag it (In this case, with ). (User:Raul654 03:20, 18 Sep 2004)
 * Done -- Chris 73 Talk 04:17, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

Two tables overlap
In the article Military of the United Kingdom the two tables don't display right when saved although they do display correctly when you hit preview. What is the problem here? Rmhermen 15:32, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * When I first looked, the tables seemed to be lined up fine, but looking at the source, I saw this was because you'd put some blank lines in. The overlap was caused by the first paragraph being shorter than the first table - the problem being that on different people's screens, this difference will vary; I guess it might also vary from skin to skin, and be effected with extra bits from the preview screen, etc.

 * To solve it, I replaced the blank lines with the somewhat magical <br clear="all" />, which I'd seen other people use. This ensures that however much or little of the screen is taken up by the first paragraph, the second table will always line up to the right of the first subheading. - IMSoP 16:22, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * There were actually two problems. IMSoP fixed one of them.  The other problem is that <table align="right"> does not prevent the table from overlapping with other text.  To prevent overlap, you should use style="float:right".  Almost all uses of align=right in Wikipedia should use float:right instead.  The difference between IMSoP's version and my version is visible only when you view the page in a very narrow window, or with a very large font.  —AlanBarrett 16:52, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Actually, your version behaves exactly the same for me, but maybe that's a difference between browsers (I use Moz). Still, seems to me that your style attributes are just CSS versions of the HTML attributes that were there in the first place / in "my" version. But what do I know, eh? - IMSoP 17:24, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, <br style="clear:both"/> is just the CSS equivalent of <br clear="all"/>, and either would work equally well. But align="right" and style="float:right" behave differently for me in Opera, if I make the window so narrow that there's enough horizontal space for the table and a few letters of other text (but not enough space for complete words of the main text).  I suppose the ugly way the text overlaps the table with align="right" could be an Opera bug, but it could also be that align="right" is not as well specified as style="float:right".  —AlanBarrett 18:09, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Do colons break wiki links on 3rd party sites?
It seems that using a colon within a wiki link causes that text to be supressed on third party sites.

Example: The entry for Haven Kimmel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haven_Kimmel) has four books listed under the 'Works' heading. On a third-party site such as TheFreeDictionary.com (http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Haven%20Kimmel), the two titles with colons are suppressed.

Is this a known issue? Would using the ASCII code for the colon fix this? -- Metabolome 18:50, 2004 Sep 18 (UTC)

 * Hmm, that's interesting. It certainly seems to work as you describe.  Probably the third-party site is mistaking links containing colons for interwiki links, links to other namespaces, or category links, and it doesn't want to display those.  However, Naming_conventions suggests that colons in article titles are okay, as long as the part before the colon doesn't coincide with a namespace or language code.

 * My experimenting suggests that using Unicode escape sequences in wikilinks doesn't work, so I think we've got to stick to typing them from the keyboard as usual and live with the fact that they display wrong on third-party sites. Anyway, the real problem here is bad code at the third-party site, and I don't think we should go out of our way to compensate for their problems.  You could contact the site administrator and draw their attention to the problem if you wanted to.    —Triskaideka 19:48, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree, particularly with this site. If TheFreeDictionary.com chooses to employ aggressive filtering to remove references to Wikipedia and even wiki, I see no reason why Wikipedia should be expected to accommodate bugs they may have introduced.  --[[User:Eequor|η [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ υωρ]]] 20:18, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

A couple observations after more research: Thanks for the replies. -- Metabolome 00:13, 2004 Sep 19 (UTC)
 * Other 3rd party sites (e.g., SmartPedia and WordIQ don't seem to have a problem parsing links with colons, whether they use the full Wikipedia implementation or a stripped-down version without links.
 * Other Wikipedia entries that contain links with colons use piped aliases, and these seem to transfer intact to TheFreeDictionary.com. See e.g. Neil Postman (Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business) and Neal Stephenson (The Diamond Age: or A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer).
 * I agree with both of you that it's not a Wikipedia problem, but I still want the entries to be as complete as possible on the site of whoever uses the content.

Creating new anchors
Is there any way to create an anchor on a Wiki page that is not a part of a section or subsection? I would like to use the syntax in order to link from footnotes in the text to a corresponding footnote in the References section. Instead of having footnotes refer to a manually numbered list (with the instrinsic problem of having to renumber each pair of footnotes whenever a footnote is added or deleted), I would have each footnote in the text refer to an anchor in the References section. For instance, if I had "Henry Ford created the automobile" in the text, I would then have an entry in the References section with the appropriate reference, say (I'm making this up) "Smith, R. Automotive Weekly, 1988. page 69." The anchor that I would use would have a shortened name of the reference, like #SmithR, or #Smith1988, or whatever is needed to avoid ambiguity. I'd then place a footnote after the text with a reference to the anchor in the References. This system allows one to have an extensive References list but avoids the problem of having to renumber footnotes. This could be accomplished with the use of HTML anchor tags, but the  tags are disabled by Wiki. Is there any other way to place anchors in the text that I'm not aware of? I realize that each subsection is an anchor, but I don't want the References section to have each entry as a subsection, as that would make the text look messy. Also, I would like the tags to be invisible rather than a part of the text. (In other words, I don't want "[Smith1988] or whatever to appear in the text of the bibliography.) Any suggestions?   —Brim 21:56, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * Nope. Improved footnote handling has been on the various wishlists for quite a while, but no one's gotten around to implementing it. -- Cyrius|✎ 22:25, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * See the comments on this at 192 where "Forest" has created some patches that might address this feature request. There is also some discussion of it at Footnotes. Angela. 22:39, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

I found a system that works okay. If I put the References in a Template, then it will hide those sections from the Table of Contents, so the TOC won't appear so messy from all of the references being seen as subsections. It's a little cumbersome having to edit two documents (article and the template), but it's a temporary solution, until a better system gets implemented. —Brim 22:52, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * There is also a low limit on the number of times a template can be used in an article - five I think. Rmhermen 22:58, Sep 18, 2004 (UTC)

Yes, it is possible, make an anchor with  or add id=".." to the start tag of any existing element, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk#test and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_area#neth --Patrick 02:15, 2004 Sep 19 (UTC)

 * Thank you! That is exactly what I was looking for, and it works great for my system of footnotes.  (Actually I had just found the answer posted on Talk:How to edit a page by Merriam, and I was just coming here to post about it here). —Brim 18:54, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)

Internal link style seems to work sometimes, not always: Help_desk and List_of_countries_by_area --Patrick 02:22, 2004 Sep 19 (UTC)

Template rendering problem with "liberal party"
On the page New Patriotic Party there appears to be a strange template rendering problem. I don't know much about templates or I'd try to fix it. Part of the template markup is appearing in the body of the text, as shown here: |--- |align=center|This text is part of the Liberalism series (III) |- |

 * Not sure why it's happening, but separating both template texts ( and  ) putting them in different lines solves it. The problem is, then the div's will float wrong in the middle of the text, since both tables are set to be at right. Check the entry again, I "fixed" the way I could.    — Kieff | Talk 03:17, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * The table syntax requires the "{|" to appear at the start of the line. If you have two tables defined in two templates without a newline between the template references, then the "{|" of the second table will not start on a new line.  The parser used in the MediaWiki software is quite bad at recovering from syntax errors, so you often get weird stuff happening quite far away from the true location of the erroR.  —AlanBarrett 08:11, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I see. Is there anything we can do about the two tables being at the right? It looks really ugly like that. I'd suggest if we made the template for these sort tables with variable position (we just use on where there should be "right" or "left") so we define, for each article, which position is more suitable. What you think?    — Kieff | Talk 08:40, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

What is this?
I just found this out: Imdb:tt0094721

It generates links to Internet Movie Database. Now, it seems to be a namespace, but I couldn't find anything about it.

I wanna know because I've created Template:imdb title and Template:imdb name for this purpose, and I wanna be aware of any previous projects regarding imdb links.

In anycase, templates seem to be better for this purpose than this is   — Kieff | Talk 02:55, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * See Interwiki map. →Raul654 02:59, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * I see. Thanks.   — Kieff | Talk 03:12, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

Article moving
Could someone move Thomas Hamilton, spree killer to the proper disambig title of Thomas Hamilton (spree killer) (currently a redirect to the former)?

Also, a while ago I changed all instances of G4TechTV in articles to G4techTV, as it's the proper name for the television channel, but G4techTV still redirects G4TechTV. Could someone fix this as well (make G4TechTV redirect to G4techTV)? The current setup gives people the wrong impression of which name is correct.

Thanks! - MattTM 10:02, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * Done Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 14:56, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Rewritten article to replace copyvio text now orphaned
I noticed that the Netfilter article had been on the copyvio list for quite a while and decided to write a new replacement article Netfilter/Temp from scratch. After I saved it I then noticed that the original Netfilter page is now completely gone and there is no reference to the copyvio problem, it's history, or any link to my replacement Temp article. In addition the original Netfilter article is no longer listed on the Copyright problems page. Is this the way things normally work here, or did I happen to write the new article at the same time that the old one was finally deleted? And if so how long does it normally take before my temp article gets put in place for the real one? -- Dmeranda 04:52, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, this was deleted while I was writing the replacement page. Found the entry in the deletion log, "03:39, 21 Sep 2004 Delirium deleted "Netfilter" (copyright violation, reported Sept. 10)". What's the correct way to move the Temp page to be the main page now? -- Dmeranda 06:05, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Okay, I moved the temp article to the main article myself. It is clear that this has escaped the administrators attention because they were deleting the article at the same time I was writing the replacement.  However this has left the temp article as a redirect to the main article rather than deleting the temp article outright. -- Dmeranda 06:17, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I have deleted it.--Patrick 11:36, 2004 Sep 21 (UTC)

indication when "discussion" is not empty
Dear friends,

Maybe it is a good idea to have an indication when "discission" is not empty.

What about showing "discussion+"?

 * No need for special text, just make the css for "li.new a" the same as for "a.new". For myself I do that, perhaps that should be in the default css also.--Patrick 11:53, 2004 Sep 21 (UTC)
 * I just checked: the default already shows whether the page is empty.--Patrick 12:14, 2004 Sep 21 (UTC)

Regards

When italicizing quoted text, should we italicize the quotes as well? I mean, should it be like "this" or like "this"? — Kieff | Talk 05:41, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

Italicizing quotes
When italicizing quoted text, should we italicize the quotes as well? I mean, should it be like "this" or like "this"? — Kieff | Talk 05:42, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * For what it's worth, both of those look the same on my computer. Anyway, I'd say that you should not italicize the quotes unless they're part of the quoted text.  Think of it this way: if only the first word(s) of the quote were italicized, you wouldn't italicize the opening quote marks but not the closing ones, right?  Similarly if only the last word(s) of the quote were italicized?  So why make a special case for when the whole quote is italicized?

 * Hmm..I'm not sure about this argument. These types of formatting are used for different purposes, so I'm not sure if you can reason by example from one to the other. Usually if you italicise one or two words, it's for emphasis of those words (or because the quote emphasises them); if you italicise the entire quote, it's to indicate that it's a quote. — Matt 16:28, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * If you're italicizing a quote to indicate that it's a quote, then why would you also be using quotation marks? One or the other method is sufficient—the policy I cited below says as much, and prescribes the use of quotation marks.  It also says that for especially long quotes, indentation can be used in addition to the quotation marks.  So italics shouldn't be used to indicate a quotation.   —Triskaideka 17:16, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * You could raise the issue at Wikipedia_talk:Manual of Style if you wanted to get a definite consensus. Note, however, that Manual of Style says that "Since quotations are already marked by quotation marks or indentations, they need not be italicized." Are you sure that the words inside the quote marks need to be italicized?  Or alternately, are you sure that the italicized words need to be quoted?   —Triskaideka 16:13, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

How to move a page to its redirect
The article African language is about African languages and language families. On its discussion page I proposed a move to African languages (plural) since that seems to be the more appropriate name. (According to the naming conventions and/or the WikiProject Linguistics, an article titled African language would be about the African language, by analogy with Swahili language and the like; however, 'the African language' does not exist.)

Coming to my point. Currently African languages is a redirect to African language. How do I move African language to its plural counterpart now? I understand that just copy/pasting is not the best thing to do because of losing the page history. Thanks in advance for the help! - Strangeloop (talk)  10:29, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Only an admin can do this i'm afraid :-( I've done it for you. In case any admins don't know how to do this, you have to delete the redirect page (african languages) move the page to the old redirect page, then undeleted the page you just deleted to get the history back. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 10:37, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Thank you! Strangeloop (talk)

Self-created images & copyright / CC-by-2.0
(copyright question) - Strangeloop (talk)  11:12, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Never mind, I see that CC-by-2.0 is included in the list of 'Free licenses' and I guess that's what I was looking for. - Strangeloop (talk)  20:31, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wire Measurements
moved to the Reference Desk

Special:Linkedfrom
Is there any simple way to produce a list of articles which are linked from a specific article? Something of the sort ought to be available; the server already does this automatically when any page is saved. -- 19:44, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Actually, I'm not sure there is specifically a page for listing links from an article - probably not often needed/wanted. The closest I can think of is Special:Recentchangeslinked, which is like a watchlist only for the articles linked from a particular page. What were you hoping to use it for? - IMSoP 20:11, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * This is such a list if large parameters are used, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Recentchangeslinked&target=Wikipedia:Help_desk&hideminor=0&days=3000&limit=1000, just not alphabetic, and not including interwiki links.--Patrick 00:03, 2004 Sep 22 (UTC)

 * To my knowledge, there's no such function built-in to the Wikipedia, and there likely won't be any time soon because the developers have much more pressing concerns on their plates. OTOH, it might be a good idea to submit a feature request at Sourceforge, if there isn't one already. Thanks to Patrick for pointing out the Recentchangeslinked trick. It's not formatted nicely, though, so I'm glad the script that I wrote didn't end up being a complete waste of time:

 * I do agree that this functionality would be very useful, though. I've written a Python script to accomplish this at User:Benc/Scripts/what links out.py. It should be very simple to use: you just copy the page source into the script and execute it using a Python interpreter. It still has a few rough edges, and it's certainly not the most user-friendly solution, but it's a start. • Benc • 23:26, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

What links here from other xx.wikipedia.org sites
Halló!

Redacting in different languages it would be helpfull to see the links from other xx.wikipedia.org sites too.

Is this possible so far?

Regards Reinhardt

 * Unfortunately, this isn't currently possible. You could try using Google (Google:link:http%3A//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk) or submit this as a feature request at . Angela. 01:41, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)

Users defacing pages
Hi - I've been led in circles trying to find out how to start a discussion about banning a person with the IP 62.171.194.11, as they have been defacing pages since May of 2003 (albeit infrequently). So this is a joint request to 1) start a discussion to ban this user and 2) make it easier to create discussions on people (i.e. have a "Report this user" on the user's profile). Thanks! FranksValli 07:34, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Vandalism in progress would be a good place to start. -- Cyrius|✎ 11:56, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Edit made to page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web#Beyond_text
Hi,

I corrected the myth that the first CERN web browser was text only. I was intimately involved in the creation of the Web at CERN from 1990 to 1997. In addition to the edit, I uploaded a screenshot that I made using the original web server (which I still run from time to time, and which is located at CERN in our visitor centre).

However, I was unable to fill in the details about the image (WWWonNeXTScreen.jpg) despite clicking on it and exploring the various guidelines. What did I do wrong?

Second, there is a book by James Gillies (that also carries myself as author unfortunately) which relates in detail the creation of the web. Can a reference to that book be made?

Thank you for your answer.

Robert Cailliau

 * It seems reasonable to add a reference to that book, even though you were co-author. I don't think anyone would consider it self aggrandisment! Rich Farmbrough 22:24, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Agreed, don't worry about it. Our concern on potential conflict-of-interest cases like this is that we don't trust people to tell us how important they themselves are, or how notable their own achievements and creations are.  In this case, however, I don't think that anyone will question the relevance of a book coauthored by someone who was part of the project. Isomorphic 22:38, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * As to the first problem I couldn't reproduce it. Double clicking on the article brought me to the picture page, then clicking on the "Edit this page" link brought up the edit window. Perhaps a transient problem? Rmhermen 22:42, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)

That's so cool... I don't suppose there's a chance you could upload the full-sized version of that screenshot? We have automagic code for making a smaller thumbnail version built into the software (see Help:Images and other uploaded files), and it would be good to click on the shrunk version and get to see it in a bit more detail. - IMSoP 23:01, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Misnamed (typo) image found
I need to move to  (or .png even), but the standard move doesn't work. Any advice? Rich Farmbrough 22:15, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Just re-upload the image under the new name, make sure the old one is orphaned and then list it for speedy deletion. (You don't need to go through  WP:IFD if it's an exact (bitwise) copy). - 22:39, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC) Lee   (talk)

State Copyright / Public Domain Question???
My question relates to whether or not information published by an individual state is classified as public domain. I know federal government publications are, but what about states (WV specifically). I am particularly interested in information published on a state university website that I would like to use as part of a research project. --ScottyBoy900Q ∞ 01:38, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * See the section Government website copyrights on this page. Mateo SA 01:41, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Ok, so if its copyrighted it can't be used as public domain?--ScottyBoy900Q ∞ 01:43, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes. "Public domain" means that a publication is not under copyright. If something is under copyright, it can't be used without the permission of the owner of the copyright. Mateo SA 04:42, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * James and I wrote the Copyright FAQ to answer basic questions like yours. Go read :) →Raul654 04:53, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)

Full Wikipedia syntax
Moved from Reference desk by Trilobite (Talk) 13:30, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

As a new user, I read the tutorial, but was dismayed to not be able to find a full syntax listing. Is there one available, or did I miss it? - Alphax 10:32, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)

 * If by syntax you mean the wiki markup used to create bold or italic text, headings, links, images, tables, etc. then details can be found on How to edit a page, specifically this section. — Trilobite (Talk) 13:27, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Thought so. Thanks. Alphax 14:29, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)

Help with Firefox 1.0PR and editing
Hi -- while editing an article with Firefox 1.0PR, if I click on the editing field and hit ctrl-F for Find and type some string of text that is present, the Firefox find bar at the bottom of the screen claims the text isn't found. It finds it fine when reading the article. For example, when reading this Help Desk article, if I search for angela then it jumps right to the text. But when editing the article, searching for angela doesn't find it.

Previous versions of Firefox used a dialog box that popped up (as IE does) and it always worked fine. Tempshill 17:29, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Never used Firefox, but in IE, sometimes you have to search backwards to find the word.  — Frecklefoot | Talk 17:49, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Neither button ("Find Next" and "Find Previous") works, and in Firefox 1.0PR, you don't actually have to use the buttons; the browser just jumps to the first instance as you type. This doesn't work, either, for the editable text.  Tempshill 17:59, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * You can't search for text in a text box (i.e. the edit box) - only in the body of an article. If you hit "preview" and then search it should be OK (unless I misunderstood your question). Ðåñηÿßôý | Talk 19:21, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * As an aside, I'd sure love to be able to search the edit box. Paul August 05:38, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Get yourself firefox 0.9.3 works fine. It seems daft to me that a later version can't do what an ealier one could. Theresa Knott (The torn steak) 05:44, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Theresa, are you saying you can search for text in the edit box (contrary to what Ðåñηÿßôý said above? Paul August 05:51, Oct 5, 2004 (UTC)

Dr Stephen Ward/Profumo
I was going to take up the invitation on the page - http://www.fact-index.com/s/st/stephen_ward.html - to furnish more biographical information for that entry. Following the directions I can find no 'edit' button on the page. I have some biographical notes prepared. Just though they might be useful. Any clues on how to go about uploading? Dennis

 * In this case, that's because you were using one of the many wikipedia mirrors that copy its articles and combine them with some ads. The fact-index.com articles have a "see live article" at the top that leads to the original wikipedia entry, and that's the one that can be edited. Personally, I don't quite see the point of using ad-ridden mirrors when the original Wikipedia is such a fine place to hang out, but maybe that's just me :P -- Ferkelparade π 18:31, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Dennis just edit our article here. You' find it at Stephen Ward. Click the edit tab at the top of the article to edit (Just like you did to edit the help desk. Oh and welcome to Wikipedia! Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 20:23, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you Theresa. I guess I need to spend some more time on this to get a handle on things. At least this is a start.

Edits while not logged in
I've accidentally made many edits while not being logged in today, and a few in the past under user:66.30.119.190 I believe I've read of a way to have these edits attributed to me. Can someone tell me how? Paul August 18:57, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)

 * See Changing attribution for an edit -- Cyrius|✎ 19:09, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Paul August 19:36, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)
 * Be aware, however, that the developers are overworked and regret having ever created that page. It might take a long time for them to get around to reattributing anything. Isomorphic 20:47, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Too bad it requires the developers - I won't bother them with this, let them concentrate on more important things;-) Paul August 17:16, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

Specific Pages,,,
Is it possible to see all User talk: pages that haven't been edited for over 6 months? Specifically anon IP's? I want to do a little janitorial work there  —  Ilγαηερ   (Tαlκ)  00:44, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I thought anon pages were automatically blanked after some time period. A year? Rmhermen 13:15, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * A year is really not enough for things like AOL proxies.  —  Ilγαηερ   (Tαlκ)  22:38, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

URL not displaying properly
For some reason, I can't get this url to display properly: http://www.apple.com/hardware/ads/1984 / It appears that the number at the end is incorrectly handled. This is from 1984 (television commercial) pstudier 02:52, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * When I look at, that link looks and works fine for me, and the page that it points to seems to work fine as well. What's happening on your end that makes it look wrong?  And what browser are you using?   —Triskaideka 05:14, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I use Windows XP and have tried both Windows Internet Explorer and Netscape. I see 4 bullets under External links, but the third bullet is blank.  pstudier 05:36, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Check it now, is that better? --Phil | Talk 11:07, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * I think you just changed it back to the format that wasn't working for him, Phil. Unfortunately, I don't have any more bright ideas.  I've looked at it with IE6 on Win98SE, and with IE6, Opera 7, Mozilla 1.2.1, and Netscapes 4.7 and 7 on Win2k, and in all of them that link and its target display perfectly normally for me.    —Triskaideka 15:39, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * The version that I altered had a  tag stuck in the middle of it; can't see how I could have made it worse :-) --Phil | Talk 17:13, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * You made it look right again for me. My point was just that if you look at the history and the diffs, you'll see that pstudier "fixed" a link that wasn't working for him by putting in the  , and you "fixed" it by taking it back out, so it's back to how it was .  :)    —Triskaideka 17:20, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I am really perplexed. It is broken for me in both Explorer 6.0, SP2 and Netscape 7.1.  It works with Mozilla 1.7.2 under Linux.  Since it seems to work for others, I am inclined to leave it.  By the way, if I delete the trailing 1984, then it works but obviously points to the wrong place. pstudier 18:51, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * I would bet cold hard cash that it's an ad-blocker stripping the link out at a proxy. —Rory ☺ 14:16, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

 * You are absolutely right, it is the ad blocker! Thank you very much.  pstudier 20:11, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This page is n kylobites long
Hey everyone. Great to be here.

Okay. I'm working on my User page, Bobo192, and I come across the note, "This page is.. approaching 32 Kb, please cut it down".

I know what some people do is move their previous work to another page so to retain their previous writings, and hyperlink to the other page. I'm just wondering how I go about doing this, hyperlinking to a page which doesn't yet exist, and creating a second page for which to write.

Or am I just being greedy..?

I know I haven't worded this as best I could, but I hope someone can help me out.

Bobo192
 * What you can do, working with a  page, is add sub-pages and transclude them. For example carve out your   section and stick it in  . Then add   to your main user page at the appropriate point. Do this for each section and you're laughing, particularly since the software now allows section editing to jump through a transclusion to the correct article. HTH HAND --Phil | Talk 11:05, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)

 * The thing to remember about the 32Kb "limit" is that it's purpose is to allow people with really old browsers to still be able to edit a page (see Page size and Browser page size limits). However, since it's "your" userpage, it should really only be you editing it anyway, so as long as you personally don't have any troubles editing long pages, I wouldn't worry too much about it. - 16:04, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC) Lee   (talk)

Thank you for the advice, Lee. What I think I'll do for now is to keep it as it is, because, just like you say, I'm going to hopefully be the only one editing it. So I think I'll just keep on adding to it.

(But, having only done a diary for the last eleven days and it already being impossibly long, is rather worrying..!)

I'll give what you suggested a shot, but if I find it too tricky, I'll give up and just keep it as it is.

Thank you again. Matt

 * A personal diary is not appropriate content for a user page, see user page for user page guidelines, specifically note the section what should I avoid?. Paul August 16:45, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

Editing before sections
I find the "edit section" option very useful, since I allows me to edit certain big pages without problems due to my slow connection. The thing is, sometimes I must edit the text at the start of the article, before any section started, and so the only way of doing this is editing the whole page.

Is there any way to edit only the "pre-section" text at the start? If not, is that some feature we'd likely to add in the future? Where can I suggest such feature to Wikipedia?

Thanks   — Kieff | Talk 14:34, Sep 24, 2004 (UTC)

 * It is possible, but unfortunately the [edit] link to actually do it is not provided on the page (it used to be). If you look at the  URL when you section edit, you'll see "&section=XX" at the end,  (this section is currently 68, for example); the number for the pre-section is 0, so if you select a different section to edit and then replace the last number with 0, it'll work. - 15:26, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC) Lee   (talk)

 * There is a way of doing this and it's not altogether obvious, but makes sense and is helpful once you've been told about it. When you click on a section edit link you will be sent to a URL that looks something like http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=68 . The edit link next to the first subheading of an article will take you to an edit screen for section number 1, second section's URL has number 2, etc., so all you have to do is manually change the number at the end to 0 and you will find yourself at an edit screen for the introduction. It's rather unfortunate that this simple task has to be achieved in a way that requires explanation each time someone wants to know how to do it, but maybe the developers will come up with a way of making editing the introduction more intuitive. — Trilobite (Talk) 15:32, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * My apologies Lee you appear to have beaten me to it! — Trilobite (Talk) 15:33, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

If the large page in question is not in the main article namespace, you can also add a wikilink to accomplish what Lee and Trilobite explained above: appears as: Obviously, this is too distracting to appear on articles themselves, but for lengthy talk pages and the like, it's useful. • Benc • 20:54, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * [ edit]
 * PS - or use, which I just created. :-) • Benc • 20:58, 24 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks everyone. The template or wikilinks weren't really needed, but still, thanks anyway :P   — Kieff | Talk 03:38, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

Images & Copyrights
Hello, I wish to add images to articles pertaining to Star Trek. How do I determine if an image is of a wikipedia approved copyright? I have seen Star Trek images (i.e.: Deep Space 9) that seem to be mere photos released by Paramount or screen captures of shows. So.. if I find an image on the official site, can I assume it's OK to use?

I appreciate any and all help as I am anxious to improve my Star Trek articles. EDGE 03:02, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't know if people would say that's copyrighted or fair use? You'll have to wait for someone else to answer.  —  Ilγαηερ   (Tαlκ)  03:16, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Assume they're copyrighted - they almost certainly are. Check the Copyright FAQ (that James and I wrote) to see what the criteria for fair use are. →Raul654 03:25, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * I have read the Copyright FAQ and it seems that these two statements concerning fairuse apply:
 * The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes Is it a for profit competitor or not? Is it for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research? Is the use transformative (of a different nature to the original publication)?
 * Does this use hurt or help the original author's ability to sell it? Did they intend to or were they trying to make the work widely republished (as with a press release)? Are you making it easy to find and buy the work if a viewer is interested in doing so?
 * These would seem to support the fairuse designation of a screen capture. If not, what of all the images of artists, musicians, actors, politicians that are released by companies and such? How about the images on 50 Cent or Deep Space 9? Fairuse seems to apply to all of them. EDGE 04:09, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * You have to consider all 4 of the criteria -- None of these factors alone is sufficient to make a use fair or not fair - all of them must be considered and weighed.. In such cases, it's hard to speak in general terms - you have to decide each image on a case by case basis. →Raul654 04:15, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * I must say that it is difficult to make such decisions given the high degree of personal judgement involved. I believe that usage of this image is within the fairuse clause. I am especially convinced given the high level of precedence available on Wikipedia, notably in articles dealing with television series, music artists, and movies. Thank you for your insights. EDGE 04:22, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * In the articles on Sisko or Garak - almost certainly; in the article on Star Trek, maybe. In an article on Alien, probably not. →Raul654 04:26, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

If this image has peaked your curiousity, you are all invited to view the episode's article at In the Pale Moonlight EDGE 04:29, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * I remember that episode - it was one of my favorites :) →Raul654 04:31, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

 * Please DO NOT use anything from the official Star Trek site. If you click Terms and Conditions at the bottom of each page, you'll find this:
 * 3. TM & COPYRIGHT 1996-2004 BY PARAMOUNT PICTURES CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. STAR TREK and related marks are trademarks of Paramount Pictures Corporation. This Web Site and all of the content it contains, or may in the future contain, including, but not limited to, articles, opinions, other text, directories, guides, photographs, illustrations, images, video and audio clips and advertising copy, as well as the trademarks, logos, domain names, trade names, service marks and any and all copyrightable material (including source and object code) and/or any other form of intellectual property (collectively, the "Material") are owned by PDE, Paramount Pictures Corporation or other third parties, and are protected from unauthorized use, copying and dissemination by copyright, trademark, publicity and other laws and by international treaties. Nothing contained in these Terms or on the Web Site should be construed as granting, by implication, estoppel or otherwise, any license or right to use any Material in any manner without the prior written consent of PDE or such third party that may own the Material or intellectual property displayed on the Web Site. UNAUTHORIZED USE, COPYING, REPRODUCTION, MODIFICATION, REPUBLISHING, UPLOADING, DOWNLOADING, POSTING, TRANSMITTING, DISTRIBUTING OR DUPLICATING OR ANY OTHER MISUSE OF ANY OF THE MATERIAL IS PROHIBITED. As a user of the Web Site, you agree not to use the Material for any unlawful purposes and not to violate PDE's rights or the rights of others. PDE may add, change, discontinue, remove or suspend any of the Material at any time, without notice and without liability. --Catherine | talk 15:55, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Fairuse laws in the United States grant permission to use copyrighted works (no matter how harshly the note is worded) under certain conditions. I believe these conditiosn apply to the image in question. EDGE 23:51, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * This was covered earlier when I said Assume they're copyrighted - they almost certainly are. ;) →Raul654 19:08, Sep 25, 2004 (UTC)

Be bold. Upload under fair use anything you like, regardless of copyright, and then discuss each image individually on the proper page for discussing "fair use" claims. -- 18:52, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Stop trolling. That's behavior we want people to stop. -- Cyrius|✎ 20:25, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * If you seriously see that as a problem, you should probably do something to ensure users will stop, rather than uselessly whining about mythical creatures such as trolls. --[[User:Eequor| η  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ υωρ ]]] 02:16, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I did do something. I tried to correct the bad advice you should have known better than to give. -- Cyrius|✎ 02:20, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Usage statistics
The Webalizer URL statistics collect monthly statistics for pages visited in individual Wikimedia projects (en, fi, meta, etc.).

 * 1) Is there a similar compilation for the entire wikipedia.org domain?
 * 2) Is there a yearly version?
 * 3) Are there compressed versions of these pages?
 * 4) Are there versions which use HTML entities rather than raw UTF8?

-- 18:34, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia:Help desk/Archive 8


text: User talk:24.208.221.222

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:24.208.221.222


text:
Comptroller of the Household

The Comptroller of the Household is an ancient position in the British royal household, nominally the second-ranking member of the Lord Steward's department after the Treasurer of the Household. The Comptroller was an ex officio member of the Board of Green Cloth, until that body was abolished in the reform of local government licensing in 2004. In recent times, a senior government whip has invariably occupied the office. On state occasions the Comptroller (in common with certain other senior officers of the Household) carries a white staff of office, as often seen in portraits.

"Comptroller" is an alternative spelling of "controller", recorded since around 1500 in a number of British titles, and later also in the United States. The variant in spelling results from the influence of French compte "account".

History

The office of Comptroller of the Household derives from the medieval Household office of Controller of the Wardrobe, who was deputy to the Keeper (or Treasurer) of the Wardrobe, as well as an important official in his own right as keeper of the Privy Seal. Later, both these offices became high-ranking political appointments.

Modern role
In modern times, the Comptroller has become a less prominent position in British politics. The holder is the third-most senior Government whips in the House of Commons and is responsible for the day-to-day activity in the House. Their responsibilities for the Royal Household are now largely ceremonial, such as serving as an usher at royal garden parties. The role has been occupied by Rebecca Harris since 2022.

15th century

 * 1399–1400: Sir Robert Litton
 * 1402–1413: John Spencer
 * after 1413: Sir Robert Babthorpe
 * 1432–c1450: Thomas Stanley, 1st Baron Stanley
 * 1460: Thomas Charlton
 * 1461–?1470: Sir John Scott
 * 1471–1475: Sir William Parr
 * 1475–1481: Sir Robert Wingfield
 * 1481–1483: Sir William Parr
 * 1483–1485: Sir Robert Percy of Scotton
 * 1485–1489: Sir Richard Edgecumbe
 * 1489?–1492: Sir Roger Tocotes
 * 1492–1494: vacant
 * 1494–1506: Sir Richard Guildford

16th century

 * 1507–1509: Sir John Hussey
 * 1509–1519: Sir Edward Poynings
 * Sir Thomas Parr
 * 1519–1521: Sir Thomas Boleyn
 * 1521–1532: Sir Henry Guildford
 * 1532–1537: Sir William Paulet
 * 1537–1539: Sir John Russell
 * 1539–1540: Sir William Kingston
 * 1540–1547: Sir John Gage
 * 1547–1550: Sir William Paget
 * 1550–1552: Sir Richard Wingfield
 * 1552–1553: Sir Richard Cotton
 * 1553–1557: Sir Robert Rochester
 * 1557–1558: Sir Thomas Cornwallis
 * 1558–1559: Sir Thomas Parry
 * 1559–1568: Sir Edward Rogers
 * 1568: Anthony Crane
 * 1568–1570: vacant
 * 1570–1590: Sir James Croft
 * 1590–1596: vacant
 * 1596–1602: William Knollys, 1st Earl of Banbury

17th century

 * 1602–1604: Sir Edward Wotton
 * c1604: William Pitt
 * 1616–1618: Sir Thomas Edmonds
 * 1618–1622: Sir Henry Cary (so created 1620)
 * 1622–1627: Sir John Suckling
 * 1627–1629: Sir John Savile, created a baron in 1628.
 * 1629–1639: Henry Vane the Elder
 * 1639–1641: Sir Thomas Jermyn
 * 1641–1643: Sir Peter Wyche
 * 1643–1646: Christopher Hatton, 1st Baron Hatton
 * 1660–1662: Sir Charles Berkeley
 * 1662–1666: Sir Hugh Pollard, 2nd Baronet
 * 1666–1668: Sir Thomas Clifford
 * 1668–1672: Francis Newport, 2nd Baron Newport
 * 1672–1687: William Maynard, 2nd Baron Maynard
 * 1687–1688: Henry Waldegrave, 1st Baron Waldegrave
 * 1689–1702: Thomas Wharton, 5th Baron Wharton

18th century

 * 1702–1704: Sir Edward Seymour, Bt
 * 1704–1708: Sir Thomas Mansell, Bt
 * 1708: The Earl of Cholmondeley
 * 1708–1709: Sir Thomas Felton, Bt
 * 1709–1711: Sir John Holland, Bt
 * 1711–1712: The Lord Lansdowne
 * 1713–1714: Sir John Stonhouse, Bt
 * 1714–1720: Hugh Boscawen
 * 1720–1725: Paul Methuen
 * 1725–1730: Lord Finch
 * 1730–1754: Sir Conyers Darcy
 * 1754–1756: The Earl of Hillsborough
 * 1756: Lord Hobart
 * 1756–1761: The Lord Edgcumbe
 * 1761: The Earl of Powis
 * 1761–1762: Lord George Cavendish
 * 1762–1763: Humphry Morice
 * 1763–1765: Lord Charles Spencer
 * 1765–1774: Thomas Pelham
 * 1774–1777: Sir William Meredith, Bt
 * 1777–1779: The Lord Onslow
 * 1779–1782: Sir Richard Worsley, Bt
 * 1782–1784: The Earl Ludlow
 * 1784–1787: The Viscount Galway
 * 1787–1790: Hon. John Villiers
 * 1790–1791: Hon. Dudley Ryder
 * 1791–1797: The Earl of Macclesfield
 * 1797–1804: Lord Charles Somerset

19th century

 * 1804–1812: Lord George Thynne
 * 1812–1830: Lord George Beresford
 * 1830–1834: Lord Robert Grosvenor
 * 1834–1835: Hon. Henry Lowry-Corry
 * 1835–1841: Hon. George Byng
 * 1841: Lord Marcus Hill
 * 1841–1846: Hon. George Dawson-Damer
 * 1846–1847: Lord Marcus Hill
 * 1847–1851: Hon. William Lascelles
 * 1851–1852: Earl of Mulgrave
 * 1852: Hon. George Weld-Forester
 * 1853–1856: Viscount Drumlanrig
 * 1856–1858: Viscount Castlerosse
 * 1858–1859: Hon. George Weld-Forester
 * 1859–1866: Lord Proby
 * 1866–1868: Viscount Royston
 * 1868–1874: Lord Otho FitzGerald
 * 1874–1879: Lord Henry Somerset
 * 1879–1880: Earl of Yarmouth
 * 1880–1885: The Lord Kensington
 * 1885–1886: Lord Arthur Hill
 * 1886: Edward Marjoribanks
 * 1886–1892: Lord Arthur Hill
 * 1892–1895: George Leveson-Gower
 * 1895–1898: Lord Arthur Hill
 * 1898–1905: The Viscount Valentia

20th century

 * 1905–1909: Master of Elibank
 * 1909–1912: The Earl of Liverpool
 * 1912–1915: The Lord Saye and Sele
 * 1915–1916: Charles Henry Roberts
 * 1916–1919: Sir Edwin Cornwall
 * 1919–1921: George Frederick Stanley
 * 1921–1924: Harry Barnston
 * 1924: John Allen Parkinson
 * 1924–1928: Sir Harry Barnston
 * 1928–1929: Sir William Cope
 * 1929–1931: Thomas Henderson
 * 1931: Goronwy Owen
 * 1931–1932: Walter Rea
 * 1932–1935: Sir Frederick Penny, Bt
 * 1935: Sir Victor Warrender, Bt
 * 1935: George Bowyer
 * 1935–1937: Sir Lambert Ward
 * 1937: Sir George Frederick Davies
 * 1937–1939: Charles Waterhouse
 * 1939–1940: Charles Kerr
 * 1940–1942: William Whiteley
 * 1942–1945: William John
 * 1945: George Mathers
 * 1945: Leslie Pym
 * 1945–1946: Arthur Pearson
 * 1946: Michael Stewart
 * 1946–1951: Frank Collindridge
 * 1951–1954: Roger Conant
 * 1954–1955: Tam Galbraith
 * 1955–1957: Hendrie Oakshott
 * 1957–1958: Gerald Wills
 * 1958–1959: Edward Wakefield
 * 1959–1961: Harwood Harrison
 * 1961–1964: Robin Chichester-Clark
 * 1964–1966: Charles Grey
 * 1966–1967: William Whitlock
 * 1967–1968: William Howie
 * 1968–1970: Ioan Evans
 * 1970: Walter Elliot
 * 1970–1972: Reginald Eyre
 * 1972–1973: Bernard Weatherill
 * 1973–1974: Walter Clegg
 * 1974–1978: Joseph Harper
 * 1978–1979: James Hamilton
 * 1979–1981: Spencer le Marchant
 * 1981–1983: Anthony Berry
 * 1983–1986: Carol Mather
 * 1986–1988: Robert Boscawen
 * 1988–1989: Tristan Garel-Jones
 * 1989–1990: Alastair Goodlad
 * 1990: Sir George Young, 6th Baronet
 * 1990–1995: David Lightbown
 * 1995–1997: Timothy Wood
 * 1997–2008: Tommy McAvoy

21st century

 * 2008–2010: John Spellar
 * 2010–2013: Alistair Carmichael
 * 2013–2015: Don Foster
 * 2015–2016: Gavin Barwell
 * 2016–2017: Mel Stride
 * 2017: Christopher Pincher
 * 2018: Christopher Heaton-Harris
 * 2018–2019: Mark Spencer
 * 2019: Jeremy Quin
 * 2019–2021: Mike Freer
 * 2021–2022: Marcus Jones
 * 2022–2024: Rebecca Harris
 * 2024–present: Chris Elmore

title: Comptroller of the Household


text: Category:Aquatic plants

title: Category:Aquatic plants


text: User talk:67.77.145.113

title: User talk:67.77.145.113


text:
Talk:Sesquiquartum

How is this term logical??
Please read very slowly and carefully:

 * About half a year ago, Louis Epstein showed me the proposed terms "quasquicentenarian" and "sesquicentenarian" for someone alive at age 125 and age 150, respectively. I have been wondering how these terms are logical using dictionaries and Internet sites. By studying dictionary.com, I looked up sesqui- and it means "and a half", from semi-, which I already knew meant half, and "qui" meaning "and". Thus, "sesquicentenarian" properly implies 100 + (100/2) = 100 + 50 = 150 years. Similarly, quasqui- can mean "and a quarter", coming from quarter- and the same "qui" element. Several dictionaries have the sesqui- prefix in them, but no dictionary has the quasqui- prefix. However, there is one dictionary mentioning a quasqui word as well as several sesqui words, showing me how logical it is. Thus, by mid-August to early-September, I've come to agree with Louis that these terms are logical.

However, how about this word, sesquiquartum?? "Sesquialterum" is a term for 1 1/2, which makes sense to me using the above logic, but this is not the correct equivalent for 1 1/4. How was this word, as opposed to the equally-logical "quasquialterum", chosen, to be exact?? (Feel free to mention any Internet site that tells the history of this word.) 66.245.107.78 01:51, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Who said languages are logical? :-D The element "sesqui-" etymologically means "and a half", but its use was particularized to mean "one and a half" (for "two and a half" the Romans coined the term "sestertius", from semis tertius, which has a parallel in Danish halvtreds, both meaning "half [way between the second and] the third"). From "one and a half" it then ended up being used with the meaning "one and [some other fraction]", so the "sesqui" in "sesquiquartum" means "one and" instead of "and a half" and the "quartum" part specifies the fraction added to that "one and". Etymologically the neologism "quasqui-" (from quadrans + -que) is more logical to refer to "1 1/4", and "sesquiquartum" would make more sense if it meant "3/8" (one quarter plus half a quarter). 213.37.6.106 05:12, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sesquiquartum


text:
User talk:203.177.36.83

July 2017
Hello, I'm Donner60. Your recent edit to Lapu-Lapu appears to have added incorrect information, so I removed it for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Donner60 (talk) 04:12, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

July 2019
Hello, I'm Carl Tristan Orense. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Maranao people have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Thanks. Carl Tristan Orense 04:28, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Maranao people. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Carl Tristan Orense 04:29, 26 July 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

February 2020
Hello, I'm Materialscientist. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Capitoline Wolf have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. Materialscientist (talk) 07:03, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

title: User talk:203.177.36.83


text:
User talk:Abaris~enwiki

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]]

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Abaris. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Abaris~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 21:35, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 10:09, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Abaris~enwiki