Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance)/Archive 8
This page contains discussions that have been archived from Village pump (assistance). Please do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to revive any of these discussions, either start a new thread or use the talk page associated with that topic.
< Older discussions · Archives: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S · 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12
Protected Title Question
Mornin' folks. Just wondered if anyone knows why Bloodstained Memoirs is a protected title and how to request it be unprotected? Thanks. – ukexpat (talk) 14:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Looking at the log, it appears to have been protected because it kept getting created and wasn't notable enough for an article. Wikipedia:Protection policy#Protected titles says to ask an administrator or seek deletion review. I really don't understand why it was protected nine months after the last creation though. • Anakin (talk) 15:08, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- It was protected shortly after the new system was implemented. It was originally protected using the old Wikipedia:Protected titles system and was just switched over 3 months ago. Mr.Z-man 22:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi all, I'm somewhat new to Wiki. Would somebody please be able to list the relevant admin I must contact to have the title changed to just "Bloodstained Memoirs". Thank You Commoncase (talk) 17:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Given that the article was deleted and salted because it was repeatedly created, in a manner that did not assert the notability (and in one case acted as an advertisement) of the documentary, it would probably be best to seek a decision from deletion review, as suggested by Anakin101 above. I would also suggest working on a version of the article on a user subpage (something like User:Commoncase/sandbox) and present it during the deletion review discussion, as it would demonstrate the viability of allowing the article to be recreated. I must stress that the policies of WP:NOTE (specifically focusing on Wikipedia:Notability (films)), WP:V, and WP:NPOV must be strictly adhered to if you want the article to be successful. Good luck. Parsecboy (talk) 17:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
Sockpuppets
I suspect that these four editors are the same person ie: sockpuppets: User:Working terriers, User:NationalTerriersClub, User:PuppetMasterKnls, User:Rascal43. Chessy999 (talk) 01:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Sockpuppet reports should go here: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 17:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Vidipedia.org
Pages like this one have, at the bottom, "Vidipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity", as well the words "Wikimedia Foundation" and a link to http://wikimediafoundation.org/.
Would someone with some experience with copyright violation issues and misleading claims want to deal with this? -- John Broughton (♫♫) 15:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- I think the first step should be to contact them. They might have just taken Wikipedia's layout and forgotten to change that piece of text. Take a look at their about page it's basically Wikipedia's about page they're itself, but with all the instances of the word "Wikipedia" replaced with "Vipedia". They even have a screenshot of Wikipedia.org with the caption "The wikipedia.org website, Vidipedia's homepage for all languages." Weird.
I'd drop a note on whatever they use instead of a village pump, but my browser is having serious issues with that website (or the website is just poorly designed)-if I click the "Contact us" button it loads the main page instead. And that isn't exactly great, because that's full of thumbnails and videos-something my internet connect can't take. So if anyone could find their community discussion page-I'd be thankful.
I don't think they're intentionally deceiving anyone, it just seems to be a carelessly made site. Puchiko (Talk-email) 20:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I recently reworked the Deep packet inspection article. It was marked with an NPOV flag, but there was no entry explaining what the complaint was in the discussion. Can someone please take a look at the article and see if there are any obvious POV problems. If not, please clear the flag. I thank you in advance.Kgrr (talk) 21:05, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- In general, I suggest that when (a) there is no talk page explanation for a flag/tag of this type at the top of an article, and (b) you've edited the article so that you think such a flag/tag doesn't [any longer] apply, you remove it yourself. If you do this as a separate edit, you can put, in the edit summary, something like "Removing NPOV tag/template; feel free to put it back AFTER you explain why it's appropriate, on the article talk/discussion page". [And sometimes I add to such edit summaries "(We're not mind-readers here.)"]
- It's really incumbent on the tagger to explain, not for other editors to figure out why a tag like NPOV or "disputed" is in place. The best way to get a dialog going in such cases is to be bold and remove it after you've done anything needed to make it (as far as you can see) non-applicable. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 23:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
University project in two Wikipedias
When I started a university project at the Portuguese Wikipedia I hoped to achieve some degree of success before writing about it. Some fellow wikipedians spotted my pages and blew my cover in the pt:wiki Village pump. Then two students from Greece registered for the course and I decided to run the project also here in the English Wikipedia.
Let me digress here for a moment. These two students are at the university under the ERASMUS program. ERASMUS is one of the cheapest things the European Commission has ever done. First they give a pittance to the students for their living expenses. Unless they or their families are wealthy, they can’t afford to go anywhere. If you are poor, forget about ERASMUS. Then, the students “parachute” into your course without much advanced notice and no information whatsoever about them. The language used in school is the country’s official language, which most other European engineering students simply don’t know. All of a sudden you find yourself teaching a bilingual course, at no further cost to the European Commission and, of course, no extra income for you.
Adding insult to injury, you have to listen to politicians from the EU and every country, left and right, brag about "one of the best-known Community actions" "that has reached the status of a social and cultural phenomenon". It feels really nice to hear that, knowing that it is done at your expense. Let me tell you: ERASMUS sells better then snake oil!
Being a good sport, my project has expanded from developing a Portuguese version of Wikipedia:School and university projects to running a university project here in the English Wikipedia. So far no other school and university projects have been identified in the Portuguese Wikipedia. If you know of any such project please let it be known so that it may be listed in the Portuguese version of Wikipedia:School and university projects.
All this being new to me, both I and my English speaking students can use all the help we can get. They need tutors whose assistance is greatly appreciated. Please remember that the students are expected to do the work, but they are entitled to ask for help. Many thanks to all those who are willing to offer their advice.
Please direct the students to articles or sections where answers can be found to the many questions that are bound to arise. Let the students draw their own conclusions and apply what is being explained to them the best way they can. Always demand perfection and when they get it or get close enough, don’t forget to give them a pat in the back. When something goes or is done wrong I expect that you’ll let it be known, and use the tools at your disposal in Wikipedia to correct the situation.
I could use some help in designing a proper evaluation system. Any suggestions are very welcome.
Once more, many thanks to you all.
vapmachado talk.cw 01:50, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- The English Wikipedia has extensive documentation - see Help:Contents and Wikipedia:Editor's index to Wikipedia for starting points. It also already has a system in place for editors to be "adopted" - you'll find that in the index. Plus lots of places to ask for help when a person has a specific question.
- You could also suggest that the students pool their money and buy (full disclosure: I'm the author) one copy of the only "how to edit Wikipedia" book published to date - for example, from amazon.co.uk, and then share it. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Image licence question
User:Smileywebmonkey has uploaded three images on the St Leonards-on-Sea article, which do not seem to have licence statements. I added the Nld template to all three. The user has removed the template from one of them (Image:St leonards on sea.jpg) and made some other changes which appear to be concerned with the copyright, but seem to have had no visible effect. He's done nothing about the other two images. All three are stated as created by someone called Bob Mazzer, which perhaps may be an alias for the user. The images are rather striking, and it might be a pity to lose them, but I suspect he doesn't understand licensing issues, and I think it would be helpful for someone who understands these things (better than I do!) to get involved. --rossb (talk) 07:19, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- The standard templates say "If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. I think that is sufficient. I suggest that you put the template back, if appropriate, with a note to the editor pointing again to the copyright questions page. And a note that the changes to the other two files don't suffice would also be helpful. But if the editor can't or won't follow the link to ask a question, there isn't much that can be done.
- Also, repeated removal of appropriate templates (should that happen) is disruptive editing, and merits increasing levels of warnings. Hopefully it won't come to that, but the stick here is that unwillingness or inability to follow rules gets an editor blocked, while the carrot is the pointer to a page to help answer questions. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:48, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Hi, im having trouble with this article. When i first stumbled across it, the last section was called "lessons learned", the section doesnt give any lessons which have been learned through the Betamax/VHS war, so i changed it to "Similar format wars". User:Theaveng has been changing it and reverting back to "Lessons Learned". I asked him why, but he has stated reasons in the talk page, which were not in the article. He states he is reverting it taking out unnecessary points, but has infact added something about DivX. If you look at his talk page, he has obviously upset a lot of people. Not sure what to do with him. I think that he is reverting this stuff, knowing that he is causing a row, but is it vandalism? Should i warn him about that? Any help? Thanks ← κεηηε∂γ (talk) (contribs) 09:39, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- If the problem continues, I suggest trying Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts. But there are a wide range of options - see WP:EIW#Dispute. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Problem with Infobox template and Wikimedia Commons image
I am editing the page for Edwin Feulner, president of the Heritage Foundation, and I have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons an image from the Flickr page of a Heritage official (the image has been released under the proper share-alike Creative Commons license) and I have imported it to the page. However, every time I do it shows my brackets, the word "Image:" and "225px" at the bottom, even though I have entered "250px" in the infobox. But if I try removing the brackets, it won't show the picture. I can't find a happy medium. Can anyone help? --Stargat (talk) 20:07, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
- Fixed now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tagishsimon (talk • contribs) 20:10, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello
Hy! I am from Romania and i love greyhound dogs.How i get know..where from can i buy a dog...or what is the price.I also want to adoppt a greyhound.Don't forget me please.I hope i get an answer.My e-mail adress is <email removed> With respect,Rodin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.122.221.82 (talk) 12:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Rodin. This page is generally about assistance with using Wikipedia, rather than general knowledge questions. Your question is better placed at the Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous where maybe someone from your region of the world who has knowledge about greyhounds can assist you. In any event, while your question is here, I have located for you the website of the Romanian Kennel Club. Maybe giving them a call will put you on the right track.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Conflicting information in 3 articles
I have posted comments at Talk:Fort Hill (Clemson) concerning conflicting information in that article, the article on Thomas Green Clemson, and the article I created on Floride Calhoun, relating to the ownership of Fort Hill following John C. Calhoun's death in 1850. I have posted messages on the Talk pages of User:Bubbazen and User:KudzuVine, who were both major contributors to the Fort Hill and Thomas Green Clemson articles asking for their assistance in resolving this issue. I have yet to recieve a response from either of them. Any assistance in resolving this matter would be most appreciated. --TommyBoy (talk) 22:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Need a little help with expanding a stub...
Good morning:
I am working with Sprint on their Xohm campaign, and we would like to expand the current stub about Xohm. I have a proposed expanded entry, but I wanted to make sure that it jived with the rules/guidelines/etiquette for a corporate wiki entry.
Anyway, any help or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. We want to make sure we do this the right way, and I figured we would check to see if this is structured and/or worded correctly.
Thanks so much
Below is the proposed entry:
== '''XOHM''' ==
XOHM (pronounced “zoam”) is a business unit of the Sprint Nextel Corporation, headquartered in Herndon, VA. XOHM is also the brand name of the mobile broadband Internet service the company will be launching in 2008. Xohm is high speed wireless broadband Internet that is designed to work as fast on- the-go as it does at home. XOHM utilizes WiMAX, a wireless Internet technology designed to provide reliable, high-speed connectivity over large areas, releasing people from wires and hotspots.
History
In August 2006, Sprint announced it would invest nearly $5 billion to use its 2.5GHz spectrum holdings to build a nationwide WiMAX network. Their holdings cover 85 percent of the households in the top 100 U.S. markets, the most of any wireless carrier in any single spectrum band.
In August 2007, Sprint announced that its WiMAX service would be marketed under the XOHM brand name.
Executives
Barry West, Chief Technology Officer, Sprint, and President, XOHM
Atish Gude, Senior Vice President, Business Operations Oversees sales, product, marketing and customer experience
Rebecca Hanson, Vice President, Strategy and Planning Oversees strategy, corporate development, legal and finance
Doug Smith, Chief Technical Operations Officer Oversees technology and network development, deployment and operations
XOHM Partners
Xohm is heading a strategic alliance of technology companies, working together to realize the promise of mobile broadband Up to 50 million WiMAX-enabled devices are expected to be commercially available by 2010.
Building the Network & Infrastructure
Motorola, Nokia Siemens Networks, Samsung, Alcatel-Lucent and Ericsson
Manufacturing Subscriber Devices
Xohm is working with Intel and PC OEMs, Samsung, Nokia, ZyXEL, ZTE, and Trellia to introduce XOHM-ready devices including notebooks, workstations, ultra-mobile PCs, mobile Internet devices, cameras, portable music players and portable gaming devices.
Delivering Service Applications & Content
XOHM is teaming with Sprint, IBM and Google to offer local and location-centric services, music, movies, TV, gaming, video chat, blogging, mobile conferencing, remote surveillance, home, corporate and "in the field."
XOHM Rollout
XOHM mobile broadband will be launching in Spring 2008 in Chicago, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C.
Awards
The XOHM WiMAX mobile Internet initiative earned the Best of WiMAX World 2007 Award for Industry Innovation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.240.189.126 (talk) 17:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
- This is an advertisement for a new service without any particular reason to be here. In addition, by your own admission you have a severe conflict of interest and should not be creating such an article. Until and unless this service becomes notable in its own right, it is nothing but a footnote to the Sprint article. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:14, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks Orange Mike, good point about the citations. I will locate them, revise the article and then return and ask for more help. I understand your point, but I am not trying to advertise, I am simply trying to add information about a service that I believe I can demonstrate is notable.
--ClausClavia (talk) 15:06, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia logo
OK, somewhere on someone's userpage, I saw a Wikipedia's logo, only it was bouncing up and down. I tried searching for it, but couldn't find it. Does anyone know where it is? DiligentTerrier and friends 23:27, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Is it Image:Bouncywikilogo.gif? Tra (Talk) 23:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! DiligentTerrier and friends 12:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Strange spam links
Trying to edit Talk:Charles Fort gives a notice about spam links to a poker site. The root of the problem seems to be on the talk page itself. You can find the apparently offending material by editing the talk page and searching for the word 'poker'. I don't know what to do to fix it. If somebody fixes it, please let me know so I can make my post there. Lou Sander (talk) 13:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Assistance is needed in updating the sourcing for the above list. Until recently, this list was titled simply "List of massacres"... and the various events were sourced to demonstrate that some reliable source discribes the event as being a massacre. However, due to the result of a recent AfD, the list has had to change its name and focus. With this change has come new inclusion criteria. It is now supposed to be a list of events for which multiple reliable sources establish that the word "massacre" is used as part of an accepted name for the event (as in: "The XXX Massacre", "The Massacre of XXX" or some variation thereof). Most of the events listed, therefore, need to be re-sourced to reflect this new criteria. We could use some help. Thanks. Blueboar (talk) 15:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
- Before I do any more, are my last two edits to the article what you are looking for?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- First, thanks for the help. I can not really say if the sources you provided are what we are looking for or not ... I assume good faith that they do ... but since they are print sources, it will take a bit of effort to double check. I could probably tell you for sure if you would provide a short quote (at the list's talk page) from the books to show usage. Blueboar (talk) 13:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- Please see my detailed response to you on my talk page. In short, I was inquiring whether what you wanted was references right after the names listed in the table, as I had placed them. The sources do indeed provide usage of the exact names and come from Google book searches and are easily done,which I have described how to duplicate.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:35, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
New Sustainability Wiki needs help
Hi, I'm Paul. I'm launching a new Wiki effort to assist the growth of knowledge, technology and skills that support Sustainable living. I'm not sure how to connect with experienced Wikimedians, so if there's a more appropriate place for this posting, please let me know. I'm looking for experienced admins and bureaucrats to help coax a new wiki baby into life. Specifically we need help migrating basic science pages from Wikipedia and developing guidelines and processes to allow for the cohabitation of non-promotional descriptions of non-profit and commercial knowledge, people, technologies and companies. ZeroNEXT.org Tools for the Green Revolution. wikihelp@zeronext.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.12.241.33 (talk) 00:45, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Help with dealing with vandalism
I know this isn't necessary the best place but having looked at the help sections, I am still confused as to how to correctly warn obvious Vandals before reporting them. Seems they must be warned before being reported . Could someone with more experience of the correct process please take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RapidShare eg nonsense dates and other obvious vandlaism is being made over the last two weeks at least. Please help prevent this if you can. Rrose Selavy (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 17:05, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- It appears to me that the most recent vandal has been adequately warned, and has in fact been blocked once already in March. For that person I would consider using {{subst:uw-vandalism4|PageName}} ~~~~ (last warning) or {{subst:uw-delete4|PageName}} ~~~~ (last warning for removing content), or just go ahead and report them at WP:AIV if they vandalize again. PKT (talk) 19:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, It's just that I don't know how to use the various shortcuts or templates etcs that are provided. I can do some basic editing when I can but the myriad of Wiki "policies" and technical procedures often overwhelms me. I'm glad someone is on the case. Rrose Selavy (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:55, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- WP:WARN gives you a list of acceptable templates to use in certain circumstances - use them with care, but be WP:BOLD. Also, it may help to employ the use of WP:TWINKLE. Wisdom89 (T / C) 19:32, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks but as I said, it all very well pointing out these things exist but the actual practical process of using templates currently baffles me and I will leave TWINKLE well alone for now as well. Simple editing of articles is one thing, I'm mostly very tech minded but in my opinion Wiki isn't that user friendly for the more casual editor. Rrose Selavy (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 00:21, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
- Sorry for just pointing to some links and running. To be more specific, under WP:WARN, on the left is a brief description of the template - with the different levels of severity going 1 through 4 going horizontally left to right. You just simply cut and paste the entire template (brackets and all) onto the talk page of the user you wish to notify/warn. Click preview to check you've done it correctly, and then hit save. Wisdom89 (T / C) 00:31, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your response. My initial impression was that it was more than a simple copy and paste but certain variables also had to be changed. I obviously didn't want to invalidate any warning with mistakes, till I was sure what was required. I'll hopefully have another look later. Rrose Selavy (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 17:11, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Images pushing [edit] button around
The [edit] button for a sub-section is shoved down sometimes into the middle of the section or even into the subsequent section. This seems to be caused by the images in the sub-section with the skewed [edit] button. For example, in Composting toilet#Types the [edit] button is in the middle of the Commercial systems sub-section. Also, in the 'DIY' Systems sub-section, the [edit] button for :DIY systems appears along with the next sections [edit] button if my browser is wide. If you narrow your browser to four (4) inches or so, then widen it, you can see that the [edit] button is forced to follow the image that is defined in the :DIY systems section. I had no success in the WP:sandbox when I tried moving the image definition to the top of the section, or including a line-break. I don't even know how I'd solve a similar problem if I was using HTML, but I'd expect there'd be some wiki-way to correct the "wandering [edit] button" problem.Daven brown (talk) 21:25, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- See WP:BUNCH. Algebraist 02:33, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Account Recovery
This is a rather odd situation.
A few months (well, more like a year) ago I signed up on Wikipedia as AK-17, then drifted away gradually. My problem is I'm trying to get back in, but the e-mail to which my password reminders are sent is now defunct and doesn't work.
I'm requesting to get the password for User:AK-17 sent to my new e-mail address so I can get back on. The account hasn't been accessed in quite a while, as you might notice, and all the edits are done either from my home IP or from one registered to Hopkins High School, which is where I attend. That's the proof that it's me, and I'd like to get back in.
I wasn't sure where to put this, but if anyone can help me they can contact me at [email removed]. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.45.237.42 (talk) 14:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- I don't believe that anything can be done. Theoretically, developers can do what you are asking, but they do not, as a rule. The only time they appear to make an exception is when an admin or other user with special privileges loses control of an account and can subsequently prove that they have regained control. You'll have to either keep guessing at a password or start a new account. - BanyanTree 13:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
- Note: the AK-17 useraccount had less than 250 edits. It looks like the owner of that account has accepted the situation and started a new registered account. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 13:56, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Creation of a New Wiki site -- issues with branding
I am pretty new to Wikipedia (just made my first addition to a page today!), but I strongly believe in the power of mass collaboration. Here is the question. I work for a non-profit, the Financial Planning Association. I have been talking to leadership about the creation of a wiki platform within our Web site so that we can start building a core body of knowledge both for financial planners and consumers on the financial planning process.
Some people are excited about this, but many are concerned about the risk of opening up posting abilities to anyone. There is an anxiety about how bad quality posts might impact our brand. Is there a talk area where others gather to discuss how they are making this leap to embracing a Wiki model? I want to get my ducks in a row before I really start making a pitch to my association on this.
thanks.
Laura —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurabrook (talk • contribs) 15:44, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Are you using the wiki for internal collaboration or for external input? If the former, you could always restrict content changes to registered users for tracking purposes.—RJH (talk) 22:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- Another possibility is to try it out under a different brand, under terms which would allow later use/adoption/inclusion/buyout. Set it up at arm's length under a different name. -- SEWilco (talk) 23:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
thanks for these thoughts! The vision I currently have is that this would be as open as Wikipedia. In that way, members, non-members, academics, students -- anyone with a passion for financial planning could contribute to this body of knowledge. Do you all know of any support groups or chat areas to share experiences about the growing pains of creating such a thing?Laurabrook (talk) 14:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
- I don't think there are a lot of examples of organizations allowing anyone to edit their own content (wiki). You'd be better off, I think, starting with one that had a more restrictive set of editors - limited to members and those that request editing rights (academics, for instance). Otherwise, you're asking to be the target of spammers, who will be adding links to their particular financial products (or to just about anything else). Wikipedia does as well as it does at fighting vandalism and spam because of the commitment of editors to a high-quality encyclopedia; I really doubt that many financial planners see their role as doing ongoing cleanup on something (your wiki) that doesn't benefit them personally, at all.
- I also suspect that you'd be better off trying to recruit a group (say, 100 people) who would commit to spending a couple of hours per week doing wiki work, and that you don't "launch" until you have several hundred articles (even just brief, but well written) form a good core. Otherwise, you've got a chicken-and-egg problem: no one wants to contribute to something that may just be a waste of time because no one reads it.
- You also might want to play around with giving credit, up front, to those who have written and/or are responsible for maintaining quality of articles. (I'm thinking of a box, within an article, that says "This article was created by XXX. Major contributors have included YYY and ZZZ. It is currently monitored by AAA and BBB.
- And finally, if you do want input from non-members, consider protecting all articles so they can only be edited by registered editors, but allow article talk pages to be edited by non-registered people; that way, anyone can make suggestions or ask questions about an article. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 13:50, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
"Too fast deletion"
ResolvedMessage to Zsinj, without answer at the moment:
|
Realkyhick wrote this in my discution; so I was writing: I think that they are joking with me, you request for me to give reasons, and then delete the article while attempt to do it. You they would have to be more cautious, as we are it in the Wikipedia in Spanish. Specially because I am not an inexperienced nor anonymous user. |
I know something of English (I understand it perfectly), but have difficulties to express me to people. For that reason it is possible that there is some errors.
He didn't revert the deletion, nor responded to me.
- The article in question, High Voltage Software, (a) now (still?) exists, and (b) has no CSD tag on it. So it appears that this is resolved. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 13:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Usernames which are e-mail addresses - inappropriate or not?
I always thought that such usernames were inappropriate on their face, just as we remove e-mail addresses from talk pages, etc. to prevent harvesting and spamming. I recently blocked one such name, and another editor called me on it. Am I mistaken? Is this in fact permissible? I'm trying to do the right thing here. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- For new usernames, it's a non-issue, since they can't contain '@'. For old names, there's nothing at WP:U, though there used to be. Ancient discussions in the archive seem to suggest (past) consensus that they should be left alone. Algebraist 15:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
- It's a daft thing for a user to do because of, as you say, harvesting. But there's lots of daft things that users can do without being blocked. A username that suggests a role account - wikieditors@example.com , or a "promotional username" - sales@example.com, could be problematic. Username policy is being gently tweaked, so it might be best for things which are not flagrant breaches of username policy to go for discussion. Dan Beale-Cocks 12:50, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Image spam in Causes of World War II
Someone has somehow replaced a map of Japan's holdings during world war II with a spyware removal ad and apparently other ads. Somehow they did this without overwriting the original map image. I don't know how to fix it; someone should take a look at this. --Hrodulf (talk) 15:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I fixed the page by reuploading the map, but Image:Japanese_Empire2.png is still corrupted and displays ads that lead to off site links, this may be a problem with other pages also and may be difficult to detect or fix. When you look at the image on its own page it looks fine, but when inserted into a wikipedia article it generates ad spam. Very annoying! --Hrodulf (talk) 19:41, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- First, a friendly reminder that new topics go at the bottom of the page. As to your question, I don't see what you're talking about. Image:Japanese Empire2.png appears perfectly fine to me, and I don't see any evidence of tampering with the file at its location on Commons. Perhaps you could provide some specific links? Parsecboy (talk) 19:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- Lol, sorry about the protocol breach re posting at the top. I never posted here before. And you didn't see the problem because I fixed it by cloning the image (and got in trouble with the cloned image not being tagged, but that's another issue).
- Look at Xenu. That's another one I didn't touch. Just scroll down to the first image. It's a banner ad. With an external link.
- Seriously, people are inserting banner ads into your images somehow. Who knows how many of these there are.
- If you still can't see it, maybe it's my browser or my computer is infected. Let me know. I could have a virus. Of course if there's a virus that specifically targets wikipedia, you would want to know about that also.
- I will post a screenshot so you know I'm not making this up.
- Check this out:
- Termites are gnawing away at wikipedia as we speak
- Nothing wrong with the Xenu page images (using Firefox) - suspect your browser or computer has a problem. MilborneOne (talk) 22:10, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah I figured that was a possibility. So there's a virus out there that turns wikipedia images into banner ads. And some of them were, shall we say, disreputable banner ads.
- Yours ! MilborneOne (talk) 22:21, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
I would recommend taking your dilemma to the reference desk. Someone there who is more computer could illuminate what is going on with your browser. Wisdom89 (T / C) 22:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- You probably have some kind of spyware/adware that's inserting ads into websites as displayed on your computer. Is it happening on any other sites besides Wikipedia? Have you tried a different browser? *Dan T.* (talk) 12:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
- You're right, it's happened on other sites. I first noticed it on wikipedia so I assumed it was a wikipedia issue. Sorry for the misunderstanding. I tried running an ad aware scan but it didn't get rid of it. I will have to research how to fix this. Aside from the ads it's making the internet load more slowly also :P (and I tried two different browsers, and I get the ads with both of them) --Hrodulf (talk) 19:42, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Balsa Wood Bridge
Hello i need some help. Theres been extended vandalism on the balsa wood bridge but i dont want to break the 3RR can some one block the user:69.202.113.14 or protect the page? --Benitoisbackagain (talk) 21:14, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Attack article against business
The article on Intown Suites is taken up mainly with criticism of this discount motel chain. If it was about an individual it could be reported on the BLP notice board. Does anyone know where this kind of thing can be reported? I already tagged it for POV. Steve Dufour (talk) 14:03, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- I went ahead and removed the problem material. Not sure what the reaction is going to be. Steve Dufour (talk) 14:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
- Hey, Steve. Thanks for the look out. I removed the criticism sections yet again, it seems the IP has been doing this for a couple weeks. Additionally, the IP is located in Minneapolis and so are many of the criticism sources. Seems like someone has an axe to grind. I left a note for the IP to read up on Wikipedia:Criticism and WP:NPOV. Keegantalk 03:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
- I just removed the section again. Some people don't get the concept that WP is an encyclopedia, not a consumer complaint forum. There are other sites to go to to post that kind of thing. Steve Dufour (talk) 04:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I saw that the IP removed it again. The IP seems unwilling to communicate, I may block them eventually. I'll run it by WP:AN for review if this happens again tomorrow. The IP isn't frequent enough to break the 3RR, but I am certain they would if they watched the article close enough. Looks like daily frequents. I'll keep a good watch. Keegantalk 05:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- There seem to be enough editors involved at the moment, such at WP:AN isn't needed. At worst (which doesn't seem to be the case now), if there were multiple IPs involved, semi-protecting the page for a bit would probably be the best solution. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 15:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yeah, I saw that the IP removed it again. The IP seems unwilling to communicate, I may block them eventually. I'll run it by WP:AN for review if this happens again tomorrow. The IP isn't frequent enough to break the 3RR, but I am certain they would if they watched the article close enough. Looks like daily frequents. I'll keep a good watch. Keegantalk 05:45, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- I just removed the section again. Some people don't get the concept that WP is an encyclopedia, not a consumer complaint forum. There are other sites to go to to post that kind of thing. Steve Dufour (talk) 04:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
- Hey, Steve. Thanks for the look out. I removed the criticism sections yet again, it seems the IP has been doing this for a couple weeks. Additionally, the IP is located in Minneapolis and so are many of the criticism sources. Seems like someone has an axe to grind. I left a note for the IP to read up on Wikipedia:Criticism and WP:NPOV. Keegantalk 03:03, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
How do I delete all my uploaded images?
I uploaded some pictures taken by myself and appended licensing information. Then I get all these copyright bot messages telling me that my pics may not be free. Fine. Now please allow me to delete all my images once and for all so I am not going to see these bot messages ever again. I mean it. I want to delete all my previous images. Thank you. -- Toytoy (talk) 02:59, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- I'm going to give you a legalistic response, so brace yourself. They're not your images, in the sense that you can decide what to do with them. Uploaders are generally considered responsible for the maintenance of the images they upload, which is why they get those automatic messages.
- What you can do is go through all your images that are suspect - e.g. photos of copyrighted images or logos - and pre-emptively ask for them to be speedy deleted with a notice like {{db|I uploaded this image without knowing the relevant copyright policies. I believe this is a copyright violation so please speedy it. - ~~~~}}. An admin will eventually wander by to evaluate your reasoning. Similarly, you can remove images you have uploaded under fair use from articles and tag it with {{db|I uploaded this fair use image but realize that it is not needed. Please delete it. - ~~~~}}. This is unorthodox and your mileage will vary with this approach, but some admins will take any halfway decent excuse to annihilate fair use images. As for images that are unproblematic, you are most likely out of luck - release of images under a free license is irrevocable and, unless some existing copyright problem is pointed out, attempts to revoke such a given license will probably be ignored. - BanyanTree 05:33, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Prejudice against Non-Admins in AfD Closures
I am a Wikipedian who has been an user in Wikipedia for over one and a half years and made over 5,000 edits. Of late, I've been closing deletion discussions in Wikipedia by virtue of my fairly good knowledge of Wikipedia's principles and policies. However, two of my AfD closures have been conteptuously discarded by a couple of admins who have undone my edits despite the fact that the closures have been 'Keep' results arrived at by virtue of decisions arrivced at by general consensus.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vortis (Doctor Who)
The reason was given that the closure has been premature. However, you might observe thatb the stipulated time of 5 days had elapsed and that the decision arrived at was Keep as per general consensus. However, any person caring to have a glimpse at the history of the article will observe that another admin has closed the discussion with the same result a few hours after I had closed the discussion.
Here is another instance when a closure was conteptuously undone by someone who demanded that the discussion be closed by an admin. However, a few edits later an admin has closed the discussion with the same results.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of minor characters in Xena: Warrior Princess
I dont understand this p[rejudice with regard to non-admins closing discussions. If this is the case, then I recommend that the Non-Admin closure rule itself be annuled and such a closure prohibited by the rules of Wikipedia.-Ravichandar 12:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
- The Xena list discussion is gently troublesome. Did you try talking to Collectonian and asking why she thought your closure was wrong? I note that some other editors reverted her "un-close", so it seems you're not being treated with contempt.
May I ask: What do you want an admin to do?Dan Beale-Cocks 12:57, 18 March 2008 (UTC)- I close deletion discussions, and I'm not an administrator. (I've only closed about a dozen or so.) I would not have touched the Xena discussion. Too much discussion and controversy, people on both sides of the question. See Wikipedia:Deletion process#Non-administrators closing discussions. Sure, you were right, but Collectonian had a right to have an admin close a discussion that was fought that hard.
- Regarding the Vortis closure, you should have contacted Edoktor on his talk page after he rolled back your second closure. Rollback should not be used to revert edits that are not vandalism, and he should have provided an edit summary, if I'm reading this correctly. I will inform him of this discussion.
- It seems like an extreme measure that you advocate, taking away the ability for other editors to close discussions because of your experiences. I like closing AfDs, it feels like a useful thing to do for the project. Darkspots (talk) 17:27, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
- You're right, technically, I shouldn't have used rollback. And the term has been changed to 5 days only recently. However, I reverted him once before, with summary. And his second closure was done using multiple edits, so I coudn't undo (I wish rollback had an edit summary). Afterwards, I told Ravichandar why I undid the closure on his talk page.
- I have no problem with non-admin closures, but they are subject to some very strict rules. One of which is that closure must be non-controversial, and require no admin tools. I think the Vortis close was not uncontoversial, as consensus clearly leaned toward a merge. Also the blanket rational "as per general consensus" really didn't cover the discussion. What Ravichandar should remember is that anyone can contest non-admin closure for whatever reason, even if it is likely to have the same outcome. One should defenitely not close it again once it has been contested, as that does border on disruptive editing. — Edokter • Talk • 18:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, I admit that I had closed the discussion a few hours premature. And Edokter had responded by reverting my edit giving the summary as "pre-mature closure" and specifying that there remains one more day before the discussion could be closed ..
- Hence, in accordance with Edokter's reasoning provided in his 'Edit Summary', I waited a day and closed the AfD the next day. However the indivudal contested the deletion and reverted it telling me in my talk page that "AfDs should not be closed for as much as seven days".
- As far as "merger" is concerned, there were contrasting opinions expressed in the discussion regading the article with which the AfD should be merged. There wasnt any unanimous consensus on merger with a particular article and hence Merge could not be specified as the result of the debate.-Ravichandar 14:10, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
Request for Entries for Wimba, Respondus, and Softchalk
I would like to request the start of entries on some products such as Wimba, Respondus, and Softchalk because of their widespread use in educational technology. Wikipedia is currently lacking any information on a number of major products and tools used across the nation in educational technology from k-12 to higher education such as Wimba, Respondus, and Softchalk.
Help with situation
I had a problem wih an editor reverting my edits. I tried to template him but I did it wrong, as I do not know how to do it. I tried to enter 3RR complaint but I am unable to do it correctly, even after asking for assistance. I do not know how to get help here, even after over 40,000 edits and two years on Wikipedia. So I am trying here.
Please help me with another problem related to my failures above. Because of the above problems and the reverts that proceeded it, the article in question has been looked down for five days. I thought that would be five days of peace. However User:Redthoreau has been posting what I consider personal attacks and I have no defense. I do not know how to template.
Here are examples:
I also notified an admin who said he would help me but he has done nothing about the situation
What should I do, or am I being over sensitive. He has been making regular post like this about me for weeks now (only not as extreme as these). Also, it was a bureaucrat who said he was a sockpuppet, not me. He only knows about that remark because he follows all my postings and posts demeaning answer to my posts on other editors pages. He even answered other peoples posts on my own talk page.
Please give me advice. I will follow it. Sincerely, Mattisse (Talk) 01:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- I would cut and paste this entire message to WP:ANI to notify administrators. Someone there will surely help you. Wisdom89 (T / C) 02:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- I did. No help there. He did not do anything to stop it, nor contact the editor who is doing it. He gave me a long message about the basics, assuming I was a newbie and did not know anything -- sort if a first grade lecture about "Don't Template the Regulars". Perhaps the best way to make it around here is to be mean. It seems like the mean ones are treated better. I have see Admins say "oh, he is always obscene and makes personal attacks! What do you expect. Don't templae the regulars. Mattisse (Talk) 02:25, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
User Signature, Editing, Making a user page
I'm not sure how you do these things (mentioned in the title) and I need help. Something not mentioned yet- do you get credit for writing or editing articles? Please get back to me!!
Di-Gata Connexion (talk) 16:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- You have already edited several pages, including this one, so I'm not sure what help you want on that front. You can sign your posts on talk pages with four tildes: ~~~~, as you presumably did when asking this question. If you want to know how to change your signature, that's at Special:Preferences, which you can also reach by clicking 'my preferences' at the top of the screen. To create your userpage, go to User:Di-Gata Connexion and start writing. I'm not sure what you mean by credit, but records are kept of every edit made, with details of which account made it, and you keep copyright over anything you write on Wikipedia. If you mean 'will my good work be recognised', then see Wikipedia:Barnstars. If you have more questions, feel free to ask them here or on my talk page. Algebraist 18:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Created Pages
Is there a way to see an automated list of articles I (or any user) has created? Cosprings (talk) 16:43, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- Yes. (You can find various tools like this at WP:WPEC) Algebraist 18:44, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- Careful though. The tool seems to be intermittent. Simply south (talk) 23:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
Renaming WSMR map
How do you rename an image? I was thinking of renaming Image:WSMR route trial pic.png to either Image:WSMR trial route map.png, Image:Wrexham & Shropshire trial route map.png or Image:Wrexham, Shropshire and Marylebone trial route map.png. Or should this be left as it is? Btw, i created and uploaded the image. Simply south (talk) 23:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
- See WP:MOVE. Images can't be renamed, you have to reupload with the new name then get the old deleted as a duplicate. Algebraist 01:26, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Whose User Talk Page is it anway?
I have recently encountered an editor who is in the habit of immediately reverting any kind of negative feedback – no matter how civil - left on his user talk page. When I asked him to explain his actions, he replied that it was HIS user talk page to do with as he saw fit (or words to that effect).
This does not seem at all right to me. Surely, a user talk page is a community resource for communicating with an editor and inappropriately premature deletion of its content should be regarded as vandalism.
Am I right on this. I cannot find a Wikipedia policy to back up the above claim.Gaius Cornelius (talk) 18:10, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- WP:TALK#User talk pages. Not a policy but a guideline. In short, users may remove any comments from their user talk pages although archiving is preferred. x42bn6 Talk Mess 18:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- And remember that deleting text from a user talk page doesn't remove all traces - the information is still available via the history tab (prior versions of the page). That's why it's a good idea to use the history tab when deciding on the level of a warning to issue (or if you want to report the matter elsewhere, such as at WP:AIV - because you want to look at every recent edit by the page owner, to see what (if anything) was deleted. (The byte counts gives a quick indication of where deletions probably happened.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 21:38, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- This is all very well, but Wikipedia's vandalism policy/guidelines require that a past history of warnings is reviewed before any action such as blocking takes place. It is that sort of negative feedback that users are deleting. If admins cannot quickly assess the history of a user's warnings, it is difficult to take the correct action. Gaius Cornelius (talk) 22:40, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- A note/comment along with a report at WP:AIV that a currently active vandal has received warnings, yet blanking the talk page, is sufficient. Remember with IP users, it can be a different person each time and not all templates, messages, and warnings will apply to them. They have the right to remove stale messages. Wisdom89 (T / C) 22:44, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- I believe that the policy changed from an explicit prohibition to a cautionary guideline a couple years back, but don't quote me on that. Still, removing messages is considered antisocial by many users. I, for one, will never !vote at RFA for a user who blanks messages. In cases of spree vandals removing warnings, I have no problem with reverting and adding warnings not to remove messages, ramping up to a block with associated user talk page temporary protection. If the rules keep you from improving and maintaining the wiki... - BanyanTree 00:58, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- It seems clear to me that some more detailed guidance is required. Users should be discouraged from removing negative feedback from their user talk pages and should instead acknowledge it and deal with the issue. In particular, users should be forbidder to remove warning templates in less than a reasonable period (except in cases where they are clearly being posted by a vandal) so that others can immediately review the users history of abusing Wikipedia. Perhaps user templates can be updated to include a "do not delete" message. Currently a blocked user can continue to edit his own user talk page, this too is regularly abused and under some circumstances it may be desirable to block this. I am not sure how to get the ball rolling on such a proposal... Gaius Cornelius (talk) 14:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- There are times when users place these templates in bad faith but not necessarily vandalism. A user can edit their talk page when blocked to discuss the block - abuse of it results in protection of that talk page. x42bn6 Talk Mess 18:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- If admins cannot quickly assess the history of a user's warnings, it is difficult to take the correct action' Admins need to check the history tab when evaluating whether to block. Period. They can't depend upon either a guideline (and there is none, now) or vigilant editors to prevent or revert the deletion of warnings.
- This issue has come up repeatedly; please have some faith that the present situation is acceptable to admins. One reason - not yet mentioned, I think - is that false warnings - from upset vandals or trolls or whatever - get posted to the user talk pages of good editors - admins, for example. Should they be able to remove them? (It's kind of irritating to have to keep glancing at what are lies.) And if "yes", "good editors" should be able to remove false warnings, then who decides what is and isn't a "false warning". In short, the ability to remove warnings is something that benefits good editors", not just something that bad editors use to (they hope) evade blocks. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:15, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- There are times when users place these templates in bad faith but not necessarily vandalism. A user can edit their talk page when blocked to discuss the block - abuse of it results in protection of that talk page. x42bn6 Talk Mess 18:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)