This page contains discussions that have been archived from Village pump (miscellaneous). 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, T, U, V, W, X · 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79
Sorry for the late message but Happy New Year for to all Wikipedians and visitors. Let's hope in 2009 there are no edit wars, no POV pushers, no sockpuppetry, no trolls, no vandals...Oooh well it was a good hope while it lasted [1]. Nil Einne ( talk) 00:33, 1 January 2009 (NZDT, UTC+13)
What would be the proper place to verify the interwiki links at Dalet School? The article seems to have quite a few, let's just say enthusiastic users, who inserted a couple of interwiki links there. One was to sv:Elementary school which I removed as clearly inappropriate, but I'm wondering about the others. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 02:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
The discussion on the implementation of a 'trial' configuration of FlaggedRevisions on en.wiki has now reached the 'straw poll' stage. All editors are invited to read the proposal and discussion and to participate in the straw poll. Happy‑ melon 17:53, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
I am taking a survey about Wikipedia. The question is:
How many minutes per day, on average, do you spend on Wikipedia?
If you don't know exactly, give your best estimate. As always, please answer honestly. Thank you for answering this question!
Death glean er 04:13, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics/Article titles about multiples and submultiples of units. -- Army1987 – Deeds, not words. 18:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Just a suggestion. I think Interesting! I cant find it in Wikipedia.
CHINESE TYPING
One types in, phonetically, the word you want, let's say "Ma" or "Hu" or "Min", in Latin letters - M A or H U or M I N. On the screen then appear all the words that consist of these sounds, no matter what the tonality and thus the meaning of the said word might be. The writer gets a choice of Chinese written signs, and clicks the one he wants, which then appear in the text. Works best with a split screen, I imagine. Some people can do thid really fast. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jroider ( talk • contribs) 16:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Is my memory shot or did the link at the top left of article and article talk pages used to read "article", not "page"? Either way, I like it better the other way. "Article" is more encyclopedic and more accurate: everything here is a page, but only certain pages contain articles. Rivertorch ( talk) 00:03, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Hmm. I'm not entirely clear about the rationale for the change—when the word "developer" enters the picture, I suddenly feel extraordinarily dense—but I think the result is unfortunate and have commented at MediaWiki talk:Nstab-main#Proposed change. Rivertorch ( talk) 05:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
To the doubters, the goal was met... :D-- Cerejota ( talk) 16:28, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I'm of the ca:viquipèdia and we have a problem. Excuse my english. In my wikipedia there are a discussion about the conveniency of category:African American. I consider it's its a category necessary and convenient, but there are people what explain it'snt convenient because it's racist. I consider that african american are an human group with his own history and peculiarities. I've put the exemple of wikipedia in english, and other wikipedias. I'like very much if there are some specialist in history or culture african american come in catalan wikipedia and help us. The lind its: ca:categoria:Afroamericans. In the page of discussion. It's in catalan language, but if you read spanish, italian or portugues, you can understand it well. There are too the embassy, where you can talk in english: ca:Viquipèdia:Ambaixada. Thank you. -- Pitxiquin ( talk) 22:34, 5 January 2009 (UTC). The lind its in [http//www.viquipedia.cat/catalan wikipedia]-- Pitxiquin ( talk) 22:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC) [3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pitxiquin ( talk • contribs) 22:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Can people stop using pointless redirects?
Here's an example:
So, from that, can anyone tell me what Kre'fey is? Not really, eh? Given that the term isn't mentioned at all within the linked to article. What's the reader to think? That the term is perhaps a synonym for the book series?
This really needs to be a guideline. A redirect that leads to a page that does not even mention the subject does nothing but frustrate the reader. AFDs that result in the article being changed into a redirection should imply (a) a check of the target, (b) a merge, however minor, if necessary, (c) a removal of potential self-redirects, and (d) the redirection itself.
Because do it in any other order, and people will forget about the other steps and indeed the whole business and someone coming back afterwards to fix things wouldn't even have the original article to refer to figure out what exactly is missing.
Anyways, rant over.-- Fangz ( talk) 03:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Has anyone noticed the change in the name of the main namespace? Look at this cache of a deleted article.-- Ipatrol ( talk) 14:31, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
This is a notification to all interested parties that I have accepted a nomination to join the Bot Approvals Group - the above link should take you to the discussion. APologies for the delay getting this notice out, but I've been busy over the holidays etc. Best wishes, Fritzpoll ( talk) 10:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
<moved to WP:HD#need information> flaming lawye r c 23:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I put the article on Vrillon into the category of hoaxes, based on the idea that it is a likely hoax (either that or a message from an alien race!) only for it to be removed as pushing my own opinion. Am I right in thinking that it's not unreasonable to put this into the hoaxes category, or is the fact that it can't be 100% proved with certainty that this isn't a message from an alien race, it doesn't fit in the hoaxes category? I'm loath to get into an edit war, but this does seem like a common sense categorisation... Richard Hock ( talk) 12:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Max Cream is an American who has played for both American and Irish football/soccer clubs. Should the word be "football" or "soccer" in his article? An anonymous user just made an incivil edit to switch soccer to football, and I've reverted, but I'm not sure which way it should be. AnyPerson ( talk) 05:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
What can be done about editors who discuss something in bad faith? For example, someone says A is true, then someone proves that it is not true. The original person then comes back and says "A is true and no one has refuted it." This is only an example. 80.126.66.106 ( talk) 15:32, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
This page appears to have targeted by the same single vandal or group of vandals 63 times since its creation more than five years ago in October 2003. Is that a record for keeping up the same puerile vandalism over the longest period of time, or is that not something that gets recorded on here? -- role player 16:19, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Yesterday while researching I came across a topic discussing at length a proprietary process, namely Confidence-based learning. I wonder is this sort of thing OK. How do we prevent marketing? I am fairly new (few months) so have not met this issue till now. I've have had a quick search for past posts but found nothing in discussions, so will raise it here.-- AlotToLearn ( talk) 00:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Can anyone add the name of the ship in English?
Or, even better, add the IMO number of the ship? -- Stunteltje ( talk) 07:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Can any one confirm if Sharon is still alive. I think of him so often especially as his country is going through such r=terrible times and would like to know if he is at peace. Margaret —Preceding unsigned comment added by M.CIANNI ( talk • contribs) 15:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm just interested in people's views on this really? Domesday 1986 was a schools project managed by the BBC in the mid-1980s to create a national survey of the UK to celebrate the 900th anniversary of the original Domesday survey. There is relatively little consistency in the formation of each 'article' about any given area of the nation, and of course, most of it was written by schoolchildren. Would users consider this to be a reliable source on its own? I'd quite happily use it as supporting evidence to back up another more formal source, but how do people feel about this? For reference, the data can be found at the Domesday1986 website
Tafkam ( talk) 14:43, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes, seriously. Is it considerably less reliable than the locally-published book of local history by the local schoolteacher? There is relatively little historical reference, but a considerable amount of contemporary description and comment - much like the Domesday survey itself. And of course, the project will have been locally managed by teachers as well as nationally managed by the BBC. Tafkam ( talk) 15:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I found an article that I believe lacks credible sources for surprising claims. I do not mention which article here, because it's irrelevant to the questions. My first question is, what constitutes a credible source? Surely the credibility of the source must go up as the claims get more 'surprising'? My second question is, which tag would be appropriate to add to an article that I believe lacks credible sources? My third question is, is there a list of such tags somewhere that I can browse, for future reference? 71.231.102.197 ( talk) 22:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I meant that you should raise the issue on the Talk page before you put down a tag. Once a tag exists it tends to linger far beyond its useful life, so try to solve problems first; if that doesn't succeed, then a tag is appropriate. (This is particularly the case with all those "cleanup" tags, which usually deal with subjective opinions about appearance and organization, rather than serious content issues that readers need to be warned about). - DavidWBrooks ( talk) 14:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
In inline referencing templates, it is possible to take a selection of material as a quote which is displayed for a reference. This is done with the {{cite whatever|quote=Quote goes here}} syntax. I just discovered it recently, and have found that it may save time for people double-checking references. Do many other people use this feature? The only two possible shortcomings I can think of is a lack of context (without reading the entire work), and potentially increasing the page size considerably if done on a page with a good number of references. ← Spidern → 16:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
I discovered by chance that Special:BlockMe existed. Right now it says, "This function is disabled". Does anyone know what the page was for? A way for administrators to give themselves wikibreaks by blocking themselves? 140.247.249.150 ( talk) 06:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible to edit the formatting of page name of a wiki? For example, changing "Kiefer sutherland" to "Kiefer Sutherland". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Callthecoroner ( talk • contribs) 17:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Could something similar to the 'Random Plot Generator' (see web) be set up under a variety of headings (history, science, sport...) - and categories (Wikify, stub etc): might generate more activity and development. Jackiespeel ( talk) 15:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I meant for Wikipedia, to go in the 'Open tasks' area or similar: so a group of 'articles to be improved' are called up - and thus encourage people to resolve some of the pages needing development. (The library computer was timing out.) Jackiespeel ( talk) 23:58, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I am not quite sure where to post this. [6] This is the worst vandal I have seen. Please advise.-- Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 03:35, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I have a question: Anybody knows abut a company in Japan which do a certifications?, like RIAA in USA?. Thanks a lot. -- 190.222.81.90 ( talk) 18:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
My article was deleted on said day of 2:11 Pm on this day of 6th January 2008. The sources I embedded are accurate, and are in my username, and email account possession. They are valid 100%, why was my article deleted. I posted this article, because when I die someday, I doubt they'll write books on me, these are all accurate facts of me, I was born April 5th, 1984, but because birth certificates are copyrighted, I can't post that up here. I'd like to know 8 reasons why my article was deleted. I edited the text, I checked for typos, the content is very mature, and the article stubs are accurate and about me, no one has helped me create the sections this article comprises of, and no one will. I asked Wikipedia and they didn't tell me this or that, I searched numerous times on article deletion. I believe my article was deleted out of unfairness in that, I worked for like 29-35 hours on it rewriting it 100s of times til I got it refined, My mother, father, friends, bandmates, ex bandmates, and family can testify that this article is 100% real, genuine, and accurately sourced, I deserve to know why it was deleted. It didn't ramble, it got the point, and all facts can be proven in court, through documents that my mother and father have, and actual links. I followed many guidelines, the sources still exist. I did nothing wrong, seriously you had no right to delete something I worked hard on. That's cruel, selfish, I want all my bandmates, and friends, and family to see this so that someday when I die, they will know the truth, I don't want any books written on my life, this is good enough, there is nothing wrong with creating a biography, no one else in my family or life will help with this task, so I'm doing it myself. Again, everything is sourced accurately. You're fortunate I saved this as a template etc in my programs, however you have no valid and proven reasons to delete this, It met all guidelines. and was submitted correctly. I edited my userpage once I figured out I can only have a Wiki article, and a separate user thing. You still have to put my article back up here, being that it follows guidelines, is very organized, and again "gets to the point without rambling" . I think you just deleted this because I'm new here to Wikipedia, and read the rules and followed best I could, I think this is favoritism, and if this happens again someday before I die. I will sue you in court for negligance and opression of freedom to create a biography. This is hypocrisy, and I will not stand for it any longer! I demand to know why you deleted it, and if you tell me it's not favoritism, then you're out of line, because plenty of articles get deleted on that meet all standards, this place sometimes promotes favoritism. How would you like it if we the community who works hard at these articles were to delete your articles you the administrators worked on. I bet you'd feel pretty bad, yet you have no pity on those who pour their hearts, sources, souls, and lives into creating on here. If you delete this 2 more times. I will take it to court someday, and sue you for gross incompitance and negligance, and opression to submit a biography that is 100% accurate.
Daniel Steven Grosskreuz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Steven Grosskreuz ( talk • contribs) 20:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Side note, souldnt the image [7] be deleted as well? no need to waste space.-- SelfQ ( talk) 11:24, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
This mockery is not at all like the professionalism I usually see from Wikipedians. We all understand the lack of notability in this case. I googled him and got facebook -- that's it. But the man spent a lot of time on something that was flushed. Please be gentle.
Daniel Steven Grosskreuz, if you are reading this, they were right to delete it. You are apparently not notable. If you are, and we are mistaken, please dig up some newspaper articles, or something to show people as references. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not facebook. Don't threaten to sue people, don't write your own articles, read before you write, move out of Trenton for heaven's sake, work hard on your music, get famous, then everyone will write about you. Your friend, Anna. -- Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 13:16, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Would anyone care to weigh in here about an idea some of us have had in editing the Entropa article, and whether or not it would be acceptable fair use? Here's the gist: Entropa is a sculpture with satirical representations of 28 nations in the European Union; the article currently contains one big fair-use picture of the sculpture, and a list of the nations depicted (each with a brief description of how they are depicted). Someone raised the idea of making small cropped images of each nation in the sculpture and putting them in a gallery, with the captions being the descriptions of each nation's depiction, to minimize the scrolling back-and-forth. It would certainly look nice, but might be too many fair use images. Any thoughts? (If you leave comments at the article talk page, rather than here, they'll probably be noticed faster.) Thanks, Politizer talk/ contribs 21:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Have come across some edits signed by "Newsroom heirarchies". Sounds a bit official so thought this might be some group such as an editorial team, but cannot find anything listed under that name in Editors index. Is it just an ordinary username? -- AlotToLearn ( talk) 00:01, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
I've been monitoring
Robert F. Kennedy assassination, which is today's featured article on the main page, and the editing pattern there has led me to some pondering. There are a significant number of vandal edits, which in this case has largely to do with the conspiracy theory surrounding the topic, but in their midst there are some really good IP edits. One of the problems I had was getting input from other editors, and today has seen a couple of rewrites from editors that have really improved the article.
What this has made me wonder is: what about articles that need cleaning up or where more input is desired? One of the problems with some articles is getting enough eyes on them to improve them satisfactorily. I wondered if it might be an idea to allocate some limited space to the main page, or to do something else in a similarly high profile area that would assist in getting anon edits and other editors looking at the articles. Perhaps placed on the main page (or elsewhere) by request of other editors of that article? Placing it here because it's a little vague, but it seemed to me that getting more people looking at some of our not-so-good work would be as beneficial as showing off our "perfect" stuff.
Fritzpoll (
talk)
12:13, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible to have the field "language" added in the infoboxes? I wish to have that field category for additional information of artists' infobox and the like. Thanks. - Lee Heon Jin —Preceding undated comment was added at 08:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC).
Hello!
I need translation from Japanese to English:
Amette tanoshiine
Doko kara tomonaku futtekite itzumo
tanoshiku utatteru
Dakedo hitorigia utaenai
Nakayoshi koyoshide atzumatte
Yaneto isshyoni ton ton ton
Tzuchitto isshyoni pin pin pin
Hanato isshyoni shan shan shan
Minnato tanoshiku utatteru.
You can hear the song also at:
http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=XmgKiioec1o
Thank You! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.88.82.94 ( talk) 14:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I read somewhere on wikipedia that the majority of new articles are by new editors. Please, please, please, I am not here to solicit opinions on this statement, I am simply interested where this factoid is found, I thought it was on WP:BITE but I can't find it now, even in the edit history. travb ( talk) 01:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure how to name my User:Gun Powder Ma/List of exactly what? List of Greco-Roman roofs fits the subject, but sounds somehow strange, doesn't it? Is List of Greco-Roman roof constructions or List of Greco-Roman roofing better? And: Greco-Roman or Greek and Roman? Any suggestions are welcome. Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 23:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Does any one know how to remove inappropriate pictures from articles? Skye Novacek ( talk) 01:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
[[File:Example.png|...]]
). But please make sure you give a good reason why you are removing the image; you may want to familiarize yourself with the guidelines at
WP:IMAGE and
the basic policies of Wikipedia.
Politizer
talk/
contribs
01:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)Category:Rockets and missiles have loads og talkpages [8]. This can't be right?-- Ezzex ( talk) 18:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion going on about which of two infoboxes to use for Japanese railway stations. One is easy to number, the infobox japan station, as it is only for the Japanese railways. The other, the universal infobox station is harder as we would have to filter the total number by using a category, for example Category:Stations of East Japan Railway Company (there is no unifying single category).
Is there a way to do this sort of count? Cosnahang ( talk) 12:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
That is the answer, thanks Cosnahang ( talk) 14:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
please make a cd/dvd of wikipedia and introduce it into the market as an encyclopedic cd/dvd.so that the people who do not have internet can have encyclopedia and gain knowledge.we will be very much thankful to you.
posted by a poor indian.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.195.224.195 ( talk) 13:43, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Okay, this is a bit editcountitis. For some reason my edit count differs in both where it shows up on the preferences and in the tools by almost 700 edits. Why is this? Simply south not SS, sorry 23:26, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Featured sounds has recently restarted, and we could really use some more people to evaluate the sounds. It's at WP:FSC. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 10:50, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
This is a notification to all interested parties that I have accepted a nomination to join the Bot Approvals Group - the above link should take you to the discussion. Foxy Loxy Pounce! 03:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
I am interested in really excellent articles for deletion debates, where the article was saved because of the mental prowess of one editor. I am hoping to collect some Article for deletion stories on several topics, particuarly notability, because that is the most common reason for deletion. Anyone care to share a link? travb ( talk) 22:13, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, just to toot my own horn a bit -- I was pretty pleased with this one. WikiProjects are invited to establish standards the "exceed" WP:NOTE, but there's a lot of sloppy thinking out there about what "exceed" means. I am fairly certain that the original intent -- and the best policy -- is the WikiProjects may establish guidelines that are more inclusive, but they can't override the notability standard (in other words, they can't say "these articles should not exist, even though they pass WP:NOTE). The deletion debate about footballer Alex Nimo centered around this issue, and I was able to persuade some people who initially argued for deletion; I believe everyone, myself included, came away with a clearer understanding of how those guidelines apply, in addition to a decision about that specific article. - Pete ( talk) 01:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
I am including all of these ideas at: Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron/Hall of Fame Ikip ( talk) 01:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
On "my preferences", what does "Enable "jump to" accessibility links" mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AnyPerson ( talk • contribs) 00:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Reviewers are lacking at WP:FAC. It may be helpful for editors to transclude User:Deckiller/FAC urgents to their talk pages (by adding {{User:Deckiller/FAC urgents}}, to watch for articles they may be interested in reviewing relative to the featured article criteria. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey everyone can practice writing leads, which should be short summaries of the most important facts of an article - so why not everyone take a look at what links to this template and spruce up some leads.... Robin Williams had totally lost his.... Casliber ( talk · contribs) 05:53, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
...and then I found this.... :( Casliber ( talk · contribs) 05:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm a Senior Editor here on the 'pedia, but I don't have much experience with this type of issue and need some guidance. A new user named DChoc keeps changing the Digital Chocolate article. Not only do they add highly POV statements, they also violate Wikipedia standards left and right in terms of formatting and use of extensive lists. In short, they're trying to turn the article into an advertising vehicle.
I've reverted the article several times, but they keep changing it back to their version. Can someone with the power please protect the article or deal with the rampant user? I fear that blocking them from editing won't be enough, as they may just create a new username and keep up their work. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 20:54, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, this is completely random, but I've been wondering for a long time; what is the title/link of the image of an open book in the background of all Wikipedia's pages? Does anyone know? Thanks, and have a fun day! BobAmnertiopsis ∴ ChatMe! 20:39, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for this unconventional posting but I thought that the usual routes might take too long, "protecting the encyclopedia" and all that! lol This article is currently #10 on the reddit front page, with over 600 hits in the last 15 hours. I'd wager that it's because of that, that we are presently getting a deluge of vandalism directed at the article and at least a short term form of protection is needed on it. cheers Deconstructhis ( talk) 18:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Some editors have been promoting their own work on the page on Secure multi-party computation. I have undone their actions several times, but they keep reverting me. Their work is not published yet, though I have just learnt that it has been accepted for a conference. At present, it is not clear that this work is particularly notable, so I'm not sure what to do. I am trying to maintain good faith while being concious of WP:COI. (PS. I wouldn't call myself an expert in the field.) 87.112.55.49 ( talk) 20:34, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
The Hobbit and its talk page have been moved to The Hobbitt (allegedly to correct a "mispelling"—itself misspelled!) and no one seems to have caught it. The original spelling was the correct one. Sorry to ask this here, but I have to run and have no time to do the move (and, I assume, request the speedy deletion). I'm assuming good faith, but the picture of the book at the top of the article does show the title. Rivertorch ( talk) 07:58, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to experiment in the sandbox, but can't upload images to do so. I understand that this requires an uploader privilege. How can I get that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyesdav ( talk • contribs) 19:08, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Under the category of pointless wikipedia trivia, I wonder what article has survived the most attempts to delete it. List of unusual deaths has been nominated six times (the first under its delightful original title, List of people who died with tortoises on their heads) - DavidWBrooks 02:37, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
ive just looked at the Help:Edit_conflict and i noticed in the master box at the top there is a link to hhhhhh. is it supposed to be there? rdunn PLIB 09:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I've come across a new school project with dates January 22 – February 12. The professor appears to be from the University of Toronto and editing under EEB356Prof. I've left the best message I could at their talkpage and here and was wondering if I could have some extra eyes. So far I've found users Leemin2-356, Bajrobin356, Mr Insect, User:Bealelor356, and Rodri101; they are editing Wheat weevil, Forficula auricularia, Tree cricket, and Cheiracanthium inclusum repectively; though Mr Insect has also created a few other articles that were not tagged as projects so he may be a keeper. That's 1/4 of their project I've been able to dig up due to direct links to the prof's page. Thanks, §hep • Talk 05:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
This may not be the correct place but anyway.
On The Chaser APEC pranks in the "The Chaser's response" section, there is an entire section cited by the radio interview on Source 44. The problem is that the website containing the media file is not dead linked. Since then there has been two tags added questioning the reliability of the source.
Now I listened to that radio interview, and while I couldn't possibly remember it, I know that all that information is correct when it was written. I suggested this source on the talk page to another editor (Jasewese) who then wrote that section and sourced it.
Now while archive.org does store the website, the media file dosen't play. So it is probably lost.
Is there a way to get rid of the citation questions around that source. The Windler talk 11:20, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, my apologies if this is already known - I only noticed it today, but google.co.uk flags en.wikipedia.org pages as potentially harmful, and directs people to a holding page before passing them on, like so: http://www.google.co.uk/interstitial?url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walrus At the moment, the diagnostic page 502's. Odd. Random name ( talk) 14:52, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art for a massive collaborative contest to gather illustrations for as many articles as we can! Add your name under participants!-- Aervanath ( talk) 17:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
I wasn't sure if new WikiProjects are "announced" anywhere, so I thought that I'd just mention here that I've started a Vital Articles WikiProject. All assistance would be appreciated! - Drilnoth ( talk) 00:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Here's a conundrum - when is a copyvio not a copyvio? ...presumably when it's an administrator looking at it?
This issue has been at the back of my mind for ages, and it came up three times today in three separate areas I was lazily clicking through. Not being one to ignore such a clear sign from the wiki gods, I thought I'd bring it here for.. you know.. review ;-)
So it's illegal to break copyright, right? - and if an article, or image on a wikimedia foundation project breaks copyright then it gets deleted. I just wonder how the copyright owner feels about the article / image still being available to over a thousand (and growing) number of unidentified people - that's illegal, right?
I've had this in the 'don't really care' bucket for ages - but as part of my forays into sexual content on wiki, came across this image (now deleted) which I believe was very (very) close to being an illegal image, because it sexualised a child.
Anyone reading this who's an admin at commons can view the image - isn't that a bit wrong?
The fact is that wikimedia's administrators have unfettered (and apparently un-monitorable) access to a huge, and ever growing body of copyright infringing work. Doesn't seem sustainable to me. Privatemusings ( talk) 05:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)I've posted this in a couple of places to try and figure out where the best fit is... please feel free to move elsewhere / refactor etc. :-)
“ | to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending; | ” |
— [11] |
< fwiw - this is the most useful response I had on this particular question - interestingly this whole thing seems tied up in the 'are we a publisher or not, or what' type questions. Also, fwiw, I think it's rather too easy to slam the door on some of this stuff, without taking care not to catch one's allegorical fingers. With the recent 100MB expansion, and a clever 'convertor' which will oggify things like videos on the fly, I'd predict the uploading of copyvio material is something which may increase in the mid-term. If the owners of the copyright are cool with administrators having unfettered access, then I certainly have no complaint :-) As I mentioned above, my primary area of concern is in potentially illegal material (like [ this image, in my view) - I believe it would be desirable to have a 'genuine and full delete' option in this case. Privatemusings ( talk) 23:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)ps. I love you guys, and if you wanna talk about me, or offer further advice etc. - please do swing by my talk page - I hope you don't disagree that that ain't not half bad an idea.
Anyone who has a view about WP:ANN, particularly whether having a bot would help it (or not), speak here! - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 12:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
While doing new page patrol once in a while, I run across an article that may be worthy of an AFD. In those cases of which I am not sure, I think it would be useful to ask the opinion of a few other editors, without going through a formal AFD process. Is there any process in Wikipedia to ask a few editors for an informal opinion on a subject’s notability, before nominating the article for AFD? ••• Life of Riley ( talk) 00:03, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I keep hearing the figure that 25% (one fourth) of wikipedia is articles on fictional topics (television, movies, novels), does anyone know where this figure comes from? Ikip ( talk) 02:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm seeking the aid of an administrator in regard to the Selwyn Dewdney article. For the past month, a series of anonymous IP editors have continuously attempted to add material to the article in the form of dubious claims and posting citations in support of them, which not only do not back up what's being contended by the editors, in the most recent examples they actually specifically refute what is being claimed. I have attempted (at length) both on the discussion page of the article itself and on various talk pages of those making the edits to engage those involved in a discussion regarding these matters. These attempts are simply ignored and the material is constantly reverted without comment on either the articles discussion page or my own talk page, in the vast majority of cases not even an edit summary is utilized. This continues, despite the fact that I have posted specific quotes from the references that are being posted on the articles talk page which clearly demonstrate their complete inappropriateness in this context. Although, I've been attempting to maintain "good faith", it's appearing more likely to me all the time that what's perhaps going on is retaliatory 'tag-teaming' in nature in response to my anti-vandalism activities in other articles. I would appreciate any help in this regard, especially some sort of even short term protection for the article in question. cheers Deconstructhis ( talk) 18:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
This article is only being edited by editors with a pro-Rush Limbaugh POV, who typically cite only to Rush Limbaugh's own website as a source. I am posting here to ask for more editors on the article. An example is the I Hope Obama Fails section. The section is written only explaining "Rush's" side ( the editors on the article call him by his first name in the text). This section only presents Limbaugh's statements that he hopes Obama fails, and why he would say that, with no explanation about what made this controversial, or who found it controversial. User:Furtive admirer, backed up by User:Soxwon, are putting in a WSJ op-ed piece that I read and has nothing to do with the "fail" controversy (that also had a race element to it), but Limbaugh continuing to criticize Obama. That's Limbaugh's job - to criticize Obama, and it is distinct from the particular controversy. User:Furtive admirer uses POV language like "The Democrats escalated the issue", and when I revert, I get bizarre talk page messages about how liberal I am and how Obama needs a teleprompter to speak. I'm no longer watching the article, so it could use other editors who care more about WP:NPOV than about their own POV. --David Shankbone 23:44, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Anyone whose interested in Wikipedia history should take a look at a page I just unearthed from the Nostalgia Wikipedia, Wikipedia talk:List of Wikipedians in order of arrival/Archive 1. Some of the early Wikipedians talk about ownership of articles, whether attribution is needed, whether Wikipedia will become popular, and other topics. It's fascinating reading. I'm amazed that it sat dormant at the title Talk:Wikipedians/History for nearly seven years. Graham 87 12:03, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I've put up User:Orngjce223/Wikipedia legends. Am I duplicating some sort of effort here? If not, could you add what you can to it (yes, you have permission to do that)? Thanks, ~ user:orngjce223 how am I typing? 15:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
The actress Chi-Lan Lieu stated on her personal blog [19] [20] that the show Designed to Sell is only producing 11 new episodes in one of four of its airing locations, to be aired in 2010 (so noted because she'll be taking over hosting duties in these episodes), and that these will be the last new episodes as the show has not been renewed. I'd like to update the show's article with this information, as I'm reasonably confident there will be no issue with notability concerning the source. What I can't figure out is whether this is a good idea or not. I'm mildly worried that since HGTV has made no official announcements, I could potentially get the actress in trouble by adding this info to the article where the producers could see it (if she hasn't already done it herself by posting this info on her blog for everyone to see). Since this could sort of be an indirect issue along WP:BLP privacy concerns, I figured I would ask the community to be safe.
For the record, the reason I skipped past the show's article talk page is because said article receives updates so rarely (months in between edits at times) that I had a feeling nobody would ever see my question there. Arrowned ( talk) 22:39, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
I couldn't think where this would actually fit as a question - are individual buildings of an notable entity notable? For example List of MIT undergraduate dormitories? If random tower block x is notable for a university - is random storage building y notable for the BBC (as an example)? -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 17:22, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to add your own products to this new list! Everyone must have made something in their time here :) Majorly talk 19:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Firstly, apologies if this is not the best place to post this - most of the talk pages for the relevant policy pages are quiet and I wanted some good eyes on it. AN and ANI didn't seem like a good fit for this enquiry.
Secondly, I have already looked over some relevant pages, including Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content and Wikipedia:Verbatim copying, but none of the scenarios given there seem to cover what I want to do.
Okay, basically, what I wish to do, is to use segments of some articles (in most cases, the lead section of biographies and band articles) on my own website. My idea includes:
Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Lankiveil ( speak to me) 12:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC).
Was it the point of adding a {{ nofootnotes}}, {{ refimprove}}, {{ onesource}}, or even {{ expand}} tag to an article that already has a visible stub template. The article obviously needs expanding that's what the stub is telling the reader. A short article with only one source and no inline footnotes qualifies to be tagged with all four of these maintenance tags or it could just have one simple stub template. I'm fine with BLP stubs with {{ unreferenced}} tags but I will remove these other tags from most other stubs I see. OlEnglish ( talk) 21:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
we recently purchased a vehicle here in Florida. Our credit was OK and we were told that a bank now is the lien holder and the vehicle is ours. Two (2) days later we get a call from the owners wife stating that my wife had committed fraud and submitted a made up or false pay stub. I was there when my wife told the sales manager that she doesn't get pay stubs yet because they are still moving into the new offices and there are only 4 people working at the office right now , so the owner just gives her a check for her weekly pay and he will give her a 1099 for this period of transition, but soon he will start taking out taxes and she will at that time have pay stubs. The sales manager just said don't worry about it, that he would take care of it. He apparently got very creative in order to get the loan passed. He also changed some things on the original application like how long my wife has been working for the company and how long we have lived in our present home. We didnt do any of this. At the end of the day after we had been there 5hours and we were exhausted he called us into his office and congratulated us on the purchase of our new used vehicle. we ask him if the bank picked up the loan, and his reply was it was a tough one but I got them to take it, the vehicle is now yours and he even told us who the lien holder is. on the bottom of the bill of sale paper a box is checked which states that the loan is assigned with out recourse. Since we did nothing wrong I dont feel that we have to return the vehicle, especially to the dealership, because the bank is the lien holder and we have yet to hear from them. I really need to know what the term means assigned with out recourse. I plan to fight this thing hand and fist. We are not responsible for what the dealerships people do to get people loans through the banks that they use. The owner of the dealership has threatened my wife and myself with arrest for auto theft and fraud. I told her just go call the police I have a bill of sale and as for fraud we did nothing wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.254.97.243 ( talk) 21:24, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Moved to WP:RDM#Berlin murder-- Patton t/ c 23:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
I suspect the article Jack Jones (banker) doesn't describe a real-life person of this name at all. Is there any template or place to bring this to the attention of experts? Or administrators for that matter? I mean, something that will make somebody have a look soon, not just when he runs into it. Debresser ( talk) 09:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Through the help of a fellow Wikipedian I can now prove from article "Jack Jones," aka Larry Hagman as a composite character based in Dallas that this is not a real person. What should we do now? Debresser ( talk) 16:15, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Those of us who remember the last recession may have been touched by the huge number of rogues and charlatans amongst the real and tested motivational speakers who came out of the woodwork and parted those desperate to find work, any work, and money, any money, from that money by selling courses that ranged from the mundane to the somewhat useful.
These people are skilled at self promotion, write excellent marketing puffery about themselves, often support each other because they are creating the market for their services. It starts to look very like incest with money.
The object is to establish notability and to sell, sell, sell books, tapes, courses, the lot. Who can blame them? They have to make money too.
Our duty is, of course, to report even handedly on the good, the bad and the downright appalling in a wholly factual manner based upon reliable sources. This is a great place to ask editors to go through biographies and rip out the puffery and the non verifiable stuff, and to ensure that these biographies are balanced and worth including in our encyclopaedia in the first place.
So I am alerting folk here to Category:Motivational speakers which contains many of them, and suggesting a jaundiced eye be passed over the contents with a view to validating, through AfD if necessary, the presence of the articles here. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 07:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Is it correct categorisation, if I add Category:People from České Budějovice onto Category:HC České Budějovice players ( HC České Budějovice is a hockey club in a town called České Budějovice), or if I add Category:České Budějovice to the page, or if I create a new Category:HC České Budějovice? I apologise, if I am not writing this question at the right place. -- Voletyvole ( talk) 21:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Where do I request for a "current" template? I'm looking to add one to the Office Live Workspace article. Currently, there is only a {{ future software}} template, but nothing for a current or a "in beta" template. Where could I request that such a template be made? Smallman12q ( talk) 01:58, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:Drawing Board, where new contributors can go to get feedback on articles (and are encouraged to do so at WP:YFA), is in need of a contributor or two. It is very low traffic at the moment--with a request every 2-5 days or so--but requests are going unanswered. We had a bit more participation in responders last autumn, which was good because we were busier then (see Wikipedia:Drawing board/Archives/2008/October, for instance), but they seem to have moved on.
The primary value of this board in my opinion is that it gives us an opportunity to educate contributors before they hit the WP:CSD point. Most responses boil down to pointing out the relevant notability guideline, explaining how to verify, and discouraging non-neutral contributions. Usually, it's an opportunity to say, "You really shouldn't create that article" in a friendly, non-bitey fashion. There's a lot of repetition, because evidently they don't read each other's questions and answers. Occasionally, we get an opportunity to help a new contributor with a good, notable subject figure out the wiki way.
Anyone up for watchlisting and pitching in? I've been one of the more consistent maintainers for well over a year now, and though I'm a bit burnt out on it, I hate to see it wither on the vine. I checked on it yesterday and found unanswered requests going back to January 24th (I've caught it up), which kind of suggests that at the moment it has no other eyes.
If anyone knows a better place to "advertise" the position, I'm all ears. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:42, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
-- Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) ( Talk) 06:30, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm bored of vandal patrolling and I'm probably doing it wrong anyway. I need something really constructive. Could anyone look into my edit history and pick something? Try not to be random about it... Elm-39 - T/ C 14:10, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey guys! What happened to the big survey whose results were to be announced a few months ago. I participated in that and I'm curious to see the results. I am talking about the survey of wikipedia users and their usage habits. ReluctantPhilosopher ( talk) 13:05, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Does it make any difference to a proposed deletion if a user alters a timestamp? - Ddawkins73 ( talk) 00:23, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
[I'm not sure what is the right place to ask; please redirect me if this page is inappropriate.]
I recently noticed that
List of Tamil people and
List of people from Tamil Nadu had almost the same content, and nominated the latter for deletion, although I later realized that it was not the right thing to do. This is a more general problem; several pairs of Wikipedia articles have a significant amount of content in common, and this has some issues: mistakes fixed in one article might fail to be corrected in the other, or content that should get added to both might get added only to one, etc. Is there some (technical, policy or anything) solution to keeping such articles "in sync"? Or is this a less significant issue than I think and should just be ignored? Thanks,
Shreevatsa (
talk)
07:44, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Anyone realize that the icon for Wikipedia in IE is currently that for Facebook? It's both on the address bar and the favorites list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juggins ( talk • contribs) 13:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
And, the AOL icon was set for Google. Got it fixed, did a disk clean-up. How do these things happen?..... Juggins ( talk) 14:32, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
I have accepted a nomination to join the Bot Approvals Group - relevant discussion is just a click on the link above away. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 20:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Next time you need a reference for a fact, please try the WRS project's search engine. It is based on Google but only shows results from a few hundreds "reliable websites", making it faster to find a good reference. Open the search page and enter a fact (for instance: Obama born in 1961). Your feedback is most welcome :-) Thanks Nicolas1981 ( talk) 14:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm fairly new here, and I'd like to add some info about the pubs, shops, etc in our local villages as I think this makes the pages more interesting and would be useful to visitors... However, I don't want to be seen as advertising any particular businesses - is it ok to put links to pubs, etc? I'm aware I should just say 'there is a pub' rather than 'there is a really good pub'. Thanks Minute7 ( talk) 20:37, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Thanks for this, it's really helpful advice, and I'll have a look at the travel section. Thanks Minute7 ( talk) 20:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello ! The Graphic Lab is a project where graphist create or improves images, for free, of course. You need an illustration for an article ? you need to improve a photography ? Come there, and request graphist to improve your photo, or create a scheme.
Recently, we opened a Map Workshop : that's the same, come there, request a map creation or improvement, we (graphist) do the image creation work.
Note: we need advertising, to let user know about these images-creation possibilities. Please, help us to spread the news accross suitable wikipage and wikiprojects.
Yug (talk) 16:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
This ongoing discussion could use some more feedback/activity. Comments, questions, concerns, anything else, etc. etc. etc. about Portal:The Beatles would be appreciated. Thank you, Cirt ( talk) 02:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
I think that the AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia Art, which I started, has got badly out of hand. I don't think I have handled it very well and now it is turning into some sort of art intervention which might be worse than the "article" it seeks to delete. I am beginning to wonder if I should have put speedy deletion on the article and never been drawn into discussion about it. It seems that somebody is yanking our chains and I have fallen for it. Please can somebody help or offer advice? -- DanielRigal ( talk) 02:11, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
-- Patlichty ( talk) 06:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
I ended the circus as a routine A7. — Werdna • talk 06:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
I am amused by the use of the word "illegally" above, and it got me thinking about the legal issues, specifically trademark infringement. As it says at the foot of the main page "Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity.". This may mean that the use of the term "Wikipedia Art" as the name for a project, domainname and a website is an infringement of this trademark. I would also like to suggest to anybody seriously thinking about writing a book about this folly that everything on Wikipedia is licensed under the GFDL and any book that is largely culled from such sources would probably also have to be so licensed. Of course, I am not a lawyer and this is only speculation. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 13:25, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
see http://nathanielstern.com/blog/2009/02/15/wikipedia-art-retaliation/. Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 19:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Is this and this a violation of the GFDL? The information seems to be the same as the articles on Wikipedia, but, although they reference GNU Free Documentation License 1.2., they don't reference the Wikipedia pages. Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 19:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
This is nathaniel stern. I've entirely avoided any discussion on this project, and have no aliases at all on Wikipedia, because of my own bias. I do feel I should set the record straight on a few things.
Pat Lichty has not replied to my post to his user talk, but he posted several times to the Village Pump afterward so he's probably seen this. Other artists from Wikipedia Art would be more likely to notice the opportunity here.
A group of editors have been restoring historic images and audio files from the public domain for encyclopedic use.
Not exactly art for art's sake, but quite useful. Our goals are to persuade more museums and archives to digitize their collections in high quality files, and to mobilize a network of active restorationists. If we had 100 people each doing 2 restorations a week, Wikipedia could gain 10,000 featured pictures in one year. And since Wikipedia exists in nearly 300 language versions this material would have global application.
Encyclopedic restorations cover a wide range of subjects and genres from the Civil War portraits of Matthew Brady to the children's book illustrations of Louis-Maurice Boutet de Monvel. We would very much like to recruit restorationists, and to gain access to high resolution digitized files from more archives.
Active photographers and other artists may also qualify for exposure on the main page of Wikipedia in the Picture of the Day section. Wikipedia's main page receives an average of 6-7 million page views daily. This is a fine opportunity for artists to collaborate synergistically with Wikipedia. As the contributor of ten percent of Wikipedia's featured pictures, I would gladly work with professional artists and academics toward a more successful variety of collaboration. Please contact me here, at user talk, or via email (available by link at my user page). Best regards, Durova Charge! 06:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey - i doubt my own work is suitable for this project, but for what's it's worth I've re-posted your blog post about this to my own blog. I hope you get some takers. NathanielS ( talk) 03:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Is there a userbox that automatically shows whether I am online or offline? Debresser ( talk) 14:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, thank you. Debresser ( talk) 19:59, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
First off, I apologise if I'm in the wrong place. Several members of WP:F1 have identified a copyright violation in a book that is a direct copy-paste from Wikipedia's articles. Can someone look at this discussion currently ongoing at WT:F1; I'm not sure what step is appropriate next. The book homepage, I think is here, with a screenshot of an example of one copy-vio here. That is clearly a direct copy-vio of Michael Schumacher#Complete Formula One results (albeit slightly adjusted). Thoughts? D.M.N. ( talk) 09:04, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you all. I have continued the discussion back on WT:F1, so we can decide our next steps. Cdhaptomos talk– contribs 23:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
I think I've found some unattributed copying in eBay Reviews & Guides. For instance, compare:
The eBay member in question is named booksuncommon and I would like to contact the member to politely remind them about copyrights and plagiarism, to give them a chance to fix up their stuff. If that doesn't help, contact eBay itself next. Unfortunately, the only contact methods I can find insist that I register and provide a whole slew of information. I don't want to do that, and I don't want to go the "George Bush, 555-1212" route either.
Is there anyone out there who is already registered with eBay willing to make the contact? Alternatively, does anyone know how to contact eBay via email? Thanks! Franamax ( talk) 21:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
how does one make a table that contains a name of a band, possibly a picture, origin, labels, etc. on a band's page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by EatSleepBlink ( talk • contribs) 23:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
how does one post a table of information containing a band name, possibly a picture, origin, labels, members, former members, etc. on a band's page?
-- EatSleepBlink ( talk) 23:09, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Some may call posting here overkill, but I think it's good to let everyone know what's happening: there is a proposal to overhaul the category at WP:BON and a CfD, but I can't find the link for that one. All comments appreciated. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 16:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
There are lots of newspapers that have been put online up to a certain date. They are archived online. But you can't use the "archiveurl=" because there is no "url=" to start with. What is the solution? Is there a template that allows for an "archiveurl=" from a paper source? What I usually do is put the online archive as url and add outside the template but still within the reference that "Archived on ..." Debresser ( talk) 00:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
In general that would be the logical thing to do. Unfortunately, it's not always that easy, because often these newspapers are archived on sites run by other organisations. Moreover, sometimes it's just a private person who archived an article or one edition of a newspaper on some site. Debresser ( talk) 01:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
OK, I'm judging from one observed incident, so the statistics could be better, but anyway:
I fear that redlinks in disambigs mostly escape standard fact checking procedure.
It's more than easy to invent just a fictional person and add it to the surname disambig. And you can even try to insert higher nonsense and laugh your ass off that it isn't detected.
This is my example. More than 3 years undetected.
-- Pjacobi ( talk) 18:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
See what I wrote at Wikipedia talk:Article Rescue Squadron#Who is affected when an article is deleted for the other, somewhat larger, side to this coin. Uncle G ( talk) 14:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
English: Wikimania 2009, this year's global event devoted to Wikimedia projects around the globe, is accepting submissions for presentations, workshops, panels, posters, open space discussions, and artistic works related to the Wikimedia projects or free content topics in general. The conference will be held from August 26-28 in Buenos Aires, Argentina. For more information, check the official Call for Participation. Cbrown1023 talk 17:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
I do not understand what has happened to the article Shadowlife. Its history seems to show that it existed a few days ago, and was the subject of a move. But now all that remains is a self-redirect that has been marked for speedy deletion. JonH ( talk) 18:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed that in the articles about artitsts like 50 Cent, Ciara, Kanye West etc. their nicknames are missing. I thought that I've already seen them on wikipedia (in the background information box) but obviously they aren't there (anymore?). I wanted to ask wheter they are left out intentionally or accidentally because in my opinion this information can be really helpful and is also an important part of an artist's biography.
I don't know if that's the right section to ask a question like that but if I'm wrong here just tell me where I should go ;) 21:09, 23 February 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.155.111.155 ( talk • contribs)
Is File:Montage Atlanta.jpg really under the correct copyright? It may be true that the uploader put the pieces together, but the individual images look professionally-made. Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 06:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Why every edition I do here (in english wikipedia) is vandalism by my contributions? -- Fernando Carrazzoni ( talk) 15:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I've been working on Portal:NATO, trying to update it, and in updating the news section I seem to have created some strange problem. On the NATO Portal page, Portal:NATO/NATO news/Wikinews renders as a redlink, but the page exists, and links correctly anywhere else I put it. Any one know what went wrong? Thanks. Cool3 ( talk) 15:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Is there a place to report publications that plagiarise Wikipedia, or is that something that Wikipedia is not interested in? 98.66.145.114 ( talk) 18:17, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I have been working on list of skin-related conditions for the past few weeks and wanted to know if a computer savy user could help me with the following. I want to know what diseases and/or disease synonyms (those names found within parentheticals) are listed more than once in the list. I am not asking for any editing, just a list of what has been listed more than once. Could someone help me with this? kilbad ( talk) 00:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
This is weird - my signature with four tildes no longer automatically creates a link to my User page, as you'll see at the end of this comment. I haven't changed any preferences that I know of. Anybody have any idea why? - DavidWBrooks 13:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Can someone who speaks Italian clarify with Italian Wikipedians that surely their heading "Sturmabteilungen" is incorrect. There was only one SA (Sturmabteilung, namely the paramilitary organization of the NSDAP. It was the mass noun for this organization, there weren't umpteen of them. In fact, this heading would be the only one in all the languages who have articles about the subject, as far as I can tell. Dieter Simon ( talk) 01:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
There have been several articles popping up on Google News about Skittles turning Wikipedia into its homepage. What this consists of is if you go to skittles.com and then select something on the drop-down "Products" menu, you will be linked to a section in the article Skittles (confectionery). On the face of it there's nothing wrong with inbound links to Wikipedia, though it's a rather stupid idea since the headings within the article could change any second. The more serious aspect is if professional ad people are changing the article to align it with some PR campaign. I can't tell on that front, as it seems the current article format has been like that for a while. (Apparently some other website tried this but quickly ended the test) Joshdboz ( talk) 09:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Hm. I just went to skittles.com and got redirected to Twitter. Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 22:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh wow, this is, ah, something. I'm even logged in. It's somehow just overlaying its site on WP, so it's technically not copying anything, is it? But I can't see how any sane company, especially one that big, could think that this was a smart idea. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ ( talk) 23:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been patrolling new pages for a few hours tonight as well as some other editors, but there don't seem to be any admins currently working on clearing out the speedy delete queue. There's some attack pages and stuff up that could really use to be taken down. So if someone has the time, heading over to WP:Candidates for speedy deletion would be a big help. Huadpe ( talk) 10:28, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I just don't have time to look into it now, but African Wild Dog has some suspicious content. Anyone want to investigate? See Talk:African_Wild_Dog#Copyright_violation.3F for details. — Epastore ( talk) 23:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
This might be more of a meta thing, but does anyone know what happened to the WP:SURVEY? We all diligently filled it out, and the results were supposed to come out eight weeks after the closure of the survey. That time has well-and-truly passed. We want to know what the results were! Anyone know anything, or where the information is hidden? This, that and the other [ talk 09:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
There is an article Red cunt hair and its abbreviation Rch. If it is an in-joke, the 'in-crowd' is very small. I added a tag calling for a discussion but an anonymous IP simply removed the tag without comment. Perhaps I used the wrong tag. Can somebody take a look and see. Lightmouse ( talk) 10:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
The graphics used to represent national production of a certain good (e.g. bananas, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Banana_production_by_nation.svg) are difficult to read. I don't know which jurisdictions the circles represent. It's clearly not countries. Perhaps we should just color each country a color. Right now most of the map is grey, which isn't too useful. 131.107.0.86 ( talk) 01:30, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello, the template {{ NovelsWikiProject Collaboration}} was added to the top of Shantaram (novel), and I do not believe that adding such templates to the pages themselves have any precedence. Such templates are meant for talk pages. Am I wrong in thinking this? — Erik ( talk • contrib) 00:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
um hi im new to wikipedia and as iwas just surfing around i found this place where you can totally make wikipedia better so here goes every time you make an edit you have to sign of with those little twirly things i think they're caled tilds they look like this ~~~~~ and i was wondering if it could be done automatically instead of always having to do it manually. this is just a suggestion and i am a noob so waht do i know but think about it also i need to be adopted so if you're willing go for it (please) oops almost forgot AntiFetch ( talk) 09:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
OK cool AntiFetch ( talk) 04:35, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Merged to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#It_May_be_Time_to_Shut_this_Down
Could an admin add the infomation wich were lost on Commons? thx-- Sanandros ( talk) 17:07, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Isn't that the same as VPP? ~ user:orngjce223 how am I typing? 04:08, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
A question for the editors. I am an undergrad at Georgia Tech's School of Public Policy currently involved in a class extending a wiki developed by a prior class regarding open source software and public policy. The goal of the project is create a comprehensive and current understanding of FOSS in the realm of public policy based on peer reviewed scholarly research. The technology we are using is abysmal and I am looking for a solution to improve the way we compile our knowledge base. One thought was to just change the technology but the more I thought about it - developing a way for the class into constructively interface with the wikipedia community might be much more productive both in terms of an educational experience and actually contributing to global knowledge. Unfortunately the scope of the information we are attempting to compile is much broader than this particular WikiProject seems to encompass. For example we are interested in compiling information regarding the FOSS legal issues and cases mentioned above, indexing data useful for evaluating FOSS policy claims, as well identifying local, state and national policy with regard to the use of FOSS, just to name a few. Would incorporating our project into Wikipedia be appropriate or even a good idea from a community development standpoint?
Thanks, Wryen Meek —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.207.180.118 ( talk) 11:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
I have created that template because I figured it would be useful, however, nobody is using it other than me. Does anybody know how I can promote the template? Should it be deleted? -- IRP ☎ 22:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC), post moved to this page 23:54, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Could someone explain what this is all about ? Thank you.-- ExpImp talk con 19:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Does it exist a French Wikipedia Village pump? -- Cywil ( talk) 21:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
There is an article at Velascanding which has been prodded as being made up. When I did a Google search for the word, there are very few sources, but the word turns up in X Games, http://wapedia.mobi/en/X_Games (which is a mirror of Wikipedia), http://top40-charts.com/pedia.php?title=X_Games_12 (which is also a mirror), and http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Games, which is the Italian Wikipedia. Are we being hoaxed? Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 22:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
::::I wasn't asking for a discussion about problems. I was asking if anybody had ever heard of the term before. How cooperative. What's the point of the village pump if valid topics are looked down upon?
Who then was a gentleman? (
talk)
19:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
You know what, never mind. Nobody wants to be cooperative, why should I care? Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 19:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I've posted this on ' Wikipedia Review - it's related to some 'big picture' stuff about wikipedia, pseudonymous editing etc. etc. - thoughts most welcome anywhere :-) - it was prompted by a post by ex wiki stalwart Doc Glasgow, who said - "Hiding behind a pseudonym, whilst commenting on real identifiable people, is cowardly and deplorable." - a view echoed on akahele.org - "When people hide behind anonymous identifiers or phony pseudonyms, trust breaks down." (those interested in these issue should definitely read akahele - it's very good.
I just wanted to mention (as an pseudonymous person!) that I kinda hope that pseudonymous writing and good ethics / value / humour / quality aren't fundamentally in tension, rather that they will just tend to lead to the whole slew of problems well documented already.
In particular, I thought I'd mention the example of 'Private Eye' - a british institution and fantastic magazine which doesn't generally do 'bylines' (with notable exceptions) - contributors make up silly names and write their stuff... sound familiar?
The fundamental difference of course is that Private Eye is 'published' - and as such is regularly in and out of the courts, with varying degrees of success. The important point is that they manage very successfully to continue to publish, and even though they fairly regularly make mistakes / cross lines and have to pay damages, they're more often 'right' in some sense or other.....
So if one allows that pseudonymous contribution can be valuable - where does 'responsibility' come in? - On the part of the publisher, I guess - and it's the absence of such which I reckon is of higher importance than the identity of author thing.
The more you think about it, the odder it seems that publication wouldn't be a stated goal of a foundation seeking to share the sum of human knowledge. If the tool requires 'self-publication' (which is how I'd describe wikipedia?) - then that's where identification is required - fundamentally because the buck stopping somewhere is a good thing, and should be supported - I don't think many would disagree? Privatemusings ( talk) 23:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, this is relatively new, but I guess we need to start thinking about it. Edits for the sole reason of improving the book of a user, instead of improving the article. Do we want to allow such things ? -- TheDJ ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
The "In the News" section on the Main Page hasn't been updated in more than a day (WP Time) and there is current;y a message on the Main page talk page. Since there's been at least one fairly high profile event yesterday (The Tsvangari Crash incident) is it possible that someone could update? BigHairRef | Talk 04:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
hi, whenever i look for something with google i always get lot of sites to get info. And always one of those would be something-Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia but recently when i click on it the message drops down with save or find and i get no-where. Would you help me please to fix it so it will be as it was before —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.71.211 ( talk) 17:44, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Would the picture on Matthew Martin at http://www.richmondfed.org/press_room/press_releases/about_us/2009/mmartin_20090205.cfm be considered fair use? Smallman12q ( talk) 00:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
(undent) Basically, fair use isn't good enough for living people. Specifically, a fair use picture of a living person fails criterion 1 of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. So if you're looking at a picture of a living person, one you found on the web, it's up to you to demonstrate that the picture is in the public domain or has been released with a free content license. And the lack of an explicit copyright claim is not such a demonstration. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Well perhaps this picture is in the public domain...that's what I'm trying to get at. Is this picture in the public domain? The site is by the federal reserve(which I believe is a government agency) and their copyright license is here http://license.icopyright.net/creator/tag.act?tag=federalreservebankofrichmond (which seems to be a creative commons license). So my question really is...is the picture in public domain?(And if so, why not). Smallman12q ( talk) 20:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
It's been a few days...and still no answer. I also would like to ask if the Detroit branch is also under CC rather than as a work of a government agency. Smallman12q ( talk) 01:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC) ...Anyone want to give an answer? Smallman12q ( talk) 01:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia promotes itself as "the free encyclopedia." This is not completely true. Yes, it may not costs anything of monetary value to read the articles. However, it costs a great deal to the people whom are reading it assuming they are recieving the truth. The costs of midinformed people is something we need to consider. If Wikipedia chooses to continue with their with holding of truth and political spinning, then they should change their slogan. Instead of "The Free Encyclopedia" they should refer to themselves as "The not Completely Free but Completely BIAS Encyclopedia." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.220.55 ( talk) 07:38, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
That and wikipedia is Free as in speech not as in beer. -- Kim Bruning ( talk) 11:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
The secure server has been unavailable in mainland China for several weeks now, as are all the English pages on the non-secure server that relate to this problem. Someone who can access them should check whether those pages have been updated. English non-secure pages on other topics are unaffected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.122.115.161 ( talk) 05:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
This page contains discussions that have been archived from Village pump (miscellaneous). 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, T, U, V, W, X · 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79
Sorry for the late message but Happy New Year for to all Wikipedians and visitors. Let's hope in 2009 there are no edit wars, no POV pushers, no sockpuppetry, no trolls, no vandals...Oooh well it was a good hope while it lasted [1]. Nil Einne ( talk) 00:33, 1 January 2009 (NZDT, UTC+13)
What would be the proper place to verify the interwiki links at Dalet School? The article seems to have quite a few, let's just say enthusiastic users, who inserted a couple of interwiki links there. One was to sv:Elementary school which I removed as clearly inappropriate, but I'm wondering about the others. -- Ricky81682 ( talk) 02:33, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
The discussion on the implementation of a 'trial' configuration of FlaggedRevisions on en.wiki has now reached the 'straw poll' stage. All editors are invited to read the proposal and discussion and to participate in the straw poll. Happy‑ melon 17:53, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
I am taking a survey about Wikipedia. The question is:
How many minutes per day, on average, do you spend on Wikipedia?
If you don't know exactly, give your best estimate. As always, please answer honestly. Thank you for answering this question!
Death glean er 04:13, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics/Article titles about multiples and submultiples of units. -- Army1987 – Deeds, not words. 18:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)
Just a suggestion. I think Interesting! I cant find it in Wikipedia.
CHINESE TYPING
One types in, phonetically, the word you want, let's say "Ma" or "Hu" or "Min", in Latin letters - M A or H U or M I N. On the screen then appear all the words that consist of these sounds, no matter what the tonality and thus the meaning of the said word might be. The writer gets a choice of Chinese written signs, and clicks the one he wants, which then appear in the text. Works best with a split screen, I imagine. Some people can do thid really fast. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jroider ( talk • contribs) 16:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Is my memory shot or did the link at the top left of article and article talk pages used to read "article", not "page"? Either way, I like it better the other way. "Article" is more encyclopedic and more accurate: everything here is a page, but only certain pages contain articles. Rivertorch ( talk) 00:03, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Hmm. I'm not entirely clear about the rationale for the change—when the word "developer" enters the picture, I suddenly feel extraordinarily dense—but I think the result is unfortunate and have commented at MediaWiki talk:Nstab-main#Proposed change. Rivertorch ( talk) 05:45, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
To the doubters, the goal was met... :D-- Cerejota ( talk) 16:28, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I'm of the ca:viquipèdia and we have a problem. Excuse my english. In my wikipedia there are a discussion about the conveniency of category:African American. I consider it's its a category necessary and convenient, but there are people what explain it'snt convenient because it's racist. I consider that african american are an human group with his own history and peculiarities. I've put the exemple of wikipedia in english, and other wikipedias. I'like very much if there are some specialist in history or culture african american come in catalan wikipedia and help us. The lind its: ca:categoria:Afroamericans. In the page of discussion. It's in catalan language, but if you read spanish, italian or portugues, you can understand it well. There are too the embassy, where you can talk in english: ca:Viquipèdia:Ambaixada. Thank you. -- Pitxiquin ( talk) 22:34, 5 January 2009 (UTC). The lind its in [http//www.viquipedia.cat/catalan wikipedia]-- Pitxiquin ( talk) 22:36, 5 January 2009 (UTC) [3] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pitxiquin ( talk • contribs) 22:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Can people stop using pointless redirects?
Here's an example:
So, from that, can anyone tell me what Kre'fey is? Not really, eh? Given that the term isn't mentioned at all within the linked to article. What's the reader to think? That the term is perhaps a synonym for the book series?
This really needs to be a guideline. A redirect that leads to a page that does not even mention the subject does nothing but frustrate the reader. AFDs that result in the article being changed into a redirection should imply (a) a check of the target, (b) a merge, however minor, if necessary, (c) a removal of potential self-redirects, and (d) the redirection itself.
Because do it in any other order, and people will forget about the other steps and indeed the whole business and someone coming back afterwards to fix things wouldn't even have the original article to refer to figure out what exactly is missing.
Anyways, rant over.-- Fangz ( talk) 03:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
Has anyone noticed the change in the name of the main namespace? Look at this cache of a deleted article.-- Ipatrol ( talk) 14:31, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
This is a notification to all interested parties that I have accepted a nomination to join the Bot Approvals Group - the above link should take you to the discussion. APologies for the delay getting this notice out, but I've been busy over the holidays etc. Best wishes, Fritzpoll ( talk) 10:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
<moved to WP:HD#need information> flaming lawye r c 23:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I put the article on Vrillon into the category of hoaxes, based on the idea that it is a likely hoax (either that or a message from an alien race!) only for it to be removed as pushing my own opinion. Am I right in thinking that it's not unreasonable to put this into the hoaxes category, or is the fact that it can't be 100% proved with certainty that this isn't a message from an alien race, it doesn't fit in the hoaxes category? I'm loath to get into an edit war, but this does seem like a common sense categorisation... Richard Hock ( talk) 12:10, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Max Cream is an American who has played for both American and Irish football/soccer clubs. Should the word be "football" or "soccer" in his article? An anonymous user just made an incivil edit to switch soccer to football, and I've reverted, but I'm not sure which way it should be. AnyPerson ( talk) 05:10, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
What can be done about editors who discuss something in bad faith? For example, someone says A is true, then someone proves that it is not true. The original person then comes back and says "A is true and no one has refuted it." This is only an example. 80.126.66.106 ( talk) 15:32, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
This page appears to have targeted by the same single vandal or group of vandals 63 times since its creation more than five years ago in October 2003. Is that a record for keeping up the same puerile vandalism over the longest period of time, or is that not something that gets recorded on here? -- role player 16:19, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
Yesterday while researching I came across a topic discussing at length a proprietary process, namely Confidence-based learning. I wonder is this sort of thing OK. How do we prevent marketing? I am fairly new (few months) so have not met this issue till now. I've have had a quick search for past posts but found nothing in discussions, so will raise it here.-- AlotToLearn ( talk) 00:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Can anyone add the name of the ship in English?
Or, even better, add the IMO number of the ship? -- Stunteltje ( talk) 07:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Can any one confirm if Sharon is still alive. I think of him so often especially as his country is going through such r=terrible times and would like to know if he is at peace. Margaret —Preceding unsigned comment added by M.CIANNI ( talk • contribs) 15:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm just interested in people's views on this really? Domesday 1986 was a schools project managed by the BBC in the mid-1980s to create a national survey of the UK to celebrate the 900th anniversary of the original Domesday survey. There is relatively little consistency in the formation of each 'article' about any given area of the nation, and of course, most of it was written by schoolchildren. Would users consider this to be a reliable source on its own? I'd quite happily use it as supporting evidence to back up another more formal source, but how do people feel about this? For reference, the data can be found at the Domesday1986 website
Tafkam ( talk) 14:43, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Yes, seriously. Is it considerably less reliable than the locally-published book of local history by the local schoolteacher? There is relatively little historical reference, but a considerable amount of contemporary description and comment - much like the Domesday survey itself. And of course, the project will have been locally managed by teachers as well as nationally managed by the BBC. Tafkam ( talk) 15:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I found an article that I believe lacks credible sources for surprising claims. I do not mention which article here, because it's irrelevant to the questions. My first question is, what constitutes a credible source? Surely the credibility of the source must go up as the claims get more 'surprising'? My second question is, which tag would be appropriate to add to an article that I believe lacks credible sources? My third question is, is there a list of such tags somewhere that I can browse, for future reference? 71.231.102.197 ( talk) 22:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
Actually, I meant that you should raise the issue on the Talk page before you put down a tag. Once a tag exists it tends to linger far beyond its useful life, so try to solve problems first; if that doesn't succeed, then a tag is appropriate. (This is particularly the case with all those "cleanup" tags, which usually deal with subjective opinions about appearance and organization, rather than serious content issues that readers need to be warned about). - DavidWBrooks ( talk) 14:45, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
In inline referencing templates, it is possible to take a selection of material as a quote which is displayed for a reference. This is done with the {{cite whatever|quote=Quote goes here}} syntax. I just discovered it recently, and have found that it may save time for people double-checking references. Do many other people use this feature? The only two possible shortcomings I can think of is a lack of context (without reading the entire work), and potentially increasing the page size considerably if done on a page with a good number of references. ← Spidern → 16:20, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
I discovered by chance that Special:BlockMe existed. Right now it says, "This function is disabled". Does anyone know what the page was for? A way for administrators to give themselves wikibreaks by blocking themselves? 140.247.249.150 ( talk) 06:11, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible to edit the formatting of page name of a wiki? For example, changing "Kiefer sutherland" to "Kiefer Sutherland". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Callthecoroner ( talk • contribs) 17:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Could something similar to the 'Random Plot Generator' (see web) be set up under a variety of headings (history, science, sport...) - and categories (Wikify, stub etc): might generate more activity and development. Jackiespeel ( talk) 15:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
I meant for Wikipedia, to go in the 'Open tasks' area or similar: so a group of 'articles to be improved' are called up - and thus encourage people to resolve some of the pages needing development. (The library computer was timing out.) Jackiespeel ( talk) 23:58, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
I am not quite sure where to post this. [6] This is the worst vandal I have seen. Please advise.-- Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 03:35, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I have a question: Anybody knows abut a company in Japan which do a certifications?, like RIAA in USA?. Thanks a lot. -- 190.222.81.90 ( talk) 18:44, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
My article was deleted on said day of 2:11 Pm on this day of 6th January 2008. The sources I embedded are accurate, and are in my username, and email account possession. They are valid 100%, why was my article deleted. I posted this article, because when I die someday, I doubt they'll write books on me, these are all accurate facts of me, I was born April 5th, 1984, but because birth certificates are copyrighted, I can't post that up here. I'd like to know 8 reasons why my article was deleted. I edited the text, I checked for typos, the content is very mature, and the article stubs are accurate and about me, no one has helped me create the sections this article comprises of, and no one will. I asked Wikipedia and they didn't tell me this or that, I searched numerous times on article deletion. I believe my article was deleted out of unfairness in that, I worked for like 29-35 hours on it rewriting it 100s of times til I got it refined, My mother, father, friends, bandmates, ex bandmates, and family can testify that this article is 100% real, genuine, and accurately sourced, I deserve to know why it was deleted. It didn't ramble, it got the point, and all facts can be proven in court, through documents that my mother and father have, and actual links. I followed many guidelines, the sources still exist. I did nothing wrong, seriously you had no right to delete something I worked hard on. That's cruel, selfish, I want all my bandmates, and friends, and family to see this so that someday when I die, they will know the truth, I don't want any books written on my life, this is good enough, there is nothing wrong with creating a biography, no one else in my family or life will help with this task, so I'm doing it myself. Again, everything is sourced accurately. You're fortunate I saved this as a template etc in my programs, however you have no valid and proven reasons to delete this, It met all guidelines. and was submitted correctly. I edited my userpage once I figured out I can only have a Wiki article, and a separate user thing. You still have to put my article back up here, being that it follows guidelines, is very organized, and again "gets to the point without rambling" . I think you just deleted this because I'm new here to Wikipedia, and read the rules and followed best I could, I think this is favoritism, and if this happens again someday before I die. I will sue you in court for negligance and opression of freedom to create a biography. This is hypocrisy, and I will not stand for it any longer! I demand to know why you deleted it, and if you tell me it's not favoritism, then you're out of line, because plenty of articles get deleted on that meet all standards, this place sometimes promotes favoritism. How would you like it if we the community who works hard at these articles were to delete your articles you the administrators worked on. I bet you'd feel pretty bad, yet you have no pity on those who pour their hearts, sources, souls, and lives into creating on here. If you delete this 2 more times. I will take it to court someday, and sue you for gross incompitance and negligance, and opression to submit a biography that is 100% accurate.
Daniel Steven Grosskreuz —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Steven Grosskreuz ( talk • contribs) 20:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Side note, souldnt the image [7] be deleted as well? no need to waste space.-- SelfQ ( talk) 11:24, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
This mockery is not at all like the professionalism I usually see from Wikipedians. We all understand the lack of notability in this case. I googled him and got facebook -- that's it. But the man spent a lot of time on something that was flushed. Please be gentle.
Daniel Steven Grosskreuz, if you are reading this, they were right to delete it. You are apparently not notable. If you are, and we are mistaken, please dig up some newspaper articles, or something to show people as references. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not facebook. Don't threaten to sue people, don't write your own articles, read before you write, move out of Trenton for heaven's sake, work hard on your music, get famous, then everyone will write about you. Your friend, Anna. -- Anna Frodesiak ( talk) 13:16, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Would anyone care to weigh in here about an idea some of us have had in editing the Entropa article, and whether or not it would be acceptable fair use? Here's the gist: Entropa is a sculpture with satirical representations of 28 nations in the European Union; the article currently contains one big fair-use picture of the sculpture, and a list of the nations depicted (each with a brief description of how they are depicted). Someone raised the idea of making small cropped images of each nation in the sculpture and putting them in a gallery, with the captions being the descriptions of each nation's depiction, to minimize the scrolling back-and-forth. It would certainly look nice, but might be too many fair use images. Any thoughts? (If you leave comments at the article talk page, rather than here, they'll probably be noticed faster.) Thanks, Politizer talk/ contribs 21:26, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Have come across some edits signed by "Newsroom heirarchies". Sounds a bit official so thought this might be some group such as an editorial team, but cannot find anything listed under that name in Editors index. Is it just an ordinary username? -- AlotToLearn ( talk) 00:01, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
I've been monitoring
Robert F. Kennedy assassination, which is today's featured article on the main page, and the editing pattern there has led me to some pondering. There are a significant number of vandal edits, which in this case has largely to do with the conspiracy theory surrounding the topic, but in their midst there are some really good IP edits. One of the problems I had was getting input from other editors, and today has seen a couple of rewrites from editors that have really improved the article.
What this has made me wonder is: what about articles that need cleaning up or where more input is desired? One of the problems with some articles is getting enough eyes on them to improve them satisfactorily. I wondered if it might be an idea to allocate some limited space to the main page, or to do something else in a similarly high profile area that would assist in getting anon edits and other editors looking at the articles. Perhaps placed on the main page (or elsewhere) by request of other editors of that article? Placing it here because it's a little vague, but it seemed to me that getting more people looking at some of our not-so-good work would be as beneficial as showing off our "perfect" stuff.
Fritzpoll (
talk)
12:13, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible to have the field "language" added in the infoboxes? I wish to have that field category for additional information of artists' infobox and the like. Thanks. - Lee Heon Jin —Preceding undated comment was added at 08:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC).
Hello!
I need translation from Japanese to English:
Amette tanoshiine
Doko kara tomonaku futtekite itzumo
tanoshiku utatteru
Dakedo hitorigia utaenai
Nakayoshi koyoshide atzumatte
Yaneto isshyoni ton ton ton
Tzuchitto isshyoni pin pin pin
Hanato isshyoni shan shan shan
Minnato tanoshiku utatteru.
You can hear the song also at:
http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=XmgKiioec1o
Thank You! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.88.82.94 ( talk) 14:37, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
I read somewhere on wikipedia that the majority of new articles are by new editors. Please, please, please, I am not here to solicit opinions on this statement, I am simply interested where this factoid is found, I thought it was on WP:BITE but I can't find it now, even in the edit history. travb ( talk) 01:27, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure how to name my User:Gun Powder Ma/List of exactly what? List of Greco-Roman roofs fits the subject, but sounds somehow strange, doesn't it? Is List of Greco-Roman roof constructions or List of Greco-Roman roofing better? And: Greco-Roman or Greek and Roman? Any suggestions are welcome. Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 23:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
Does any one know how to remove inappropriate pictures from articles? Skye Novacek ( talk) 01:02, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
[[File:Example.png|...]]
). But please make sure you give a good reason why you are removing the image; you may want to familiarize yourself with the guidelines at
WP:IMAGE and
the basic policies of Wikipedia.
Politizer
talk/
contribs
01:08, 20 January 2009 (UTC)Category:Rockets and missiles have loads og talkpages [8]. This can't be right?-- Ezzex ( talk) 18:58, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
There is a discussion going on about which of two infoboxes to use for Japanese railway stations. One is easy to number, the infobox japan station, as it is only for the Japanese railways. The other, the universal infobox station is harder as we would have to filter the total number by using a category, for example Category:Stations of East Japan Railway Company (there is no unifying single category).
Is there a way to do this sort of count? Cosnahang ( talk) 12:06, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
That is the answer, thanks Cosnahang ( talk) 14:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
please make a cd/dvd of wikipedia and introduce it into the market as an encyclopedic cd/dvd.so that the people who do not have internet can have encyclopedia and gain knowledge.we will be very much thankful to you.
posted by a poor indian.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.195.224.195 ( talk) 13:43, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Okay, this is a bit editcountitis. For some reason my edit count differs in both where it shows up on the preferences and in the tools by almost 700 edits. Why is this? Simply south not SS, sorry 23:26, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Featured sounds has recently restarted, and we could really use some more people to evaluate the sounds. It's at WP:FSC. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 10:50, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
This is a notification to all interested parties that I have accepted a nomination to join the Bot Approvals Group - the above link should take you to the discussion. Foxy Loxy Pounce! 03:30, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
I am interested in really excellent articles for deletion debates, where the article was saved because of the mental prowess of one editor. I am hoping to collect some Article for deletion stories on several topics, particuarly notability, because that is the most common reason for deletion. Anyone care to share a link? travb ( talk) 22:13, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Well, just to toot my own horn a bit -- I was pretty pleased with this one. WikiProjects are invited to establish standards the "exceed" WP:NOTE, but there's a lot of sloppy thinking out there about what "exceed" means. I am fairly certain that the original intent -- and the best policy -- is the WikiProjects may establish guidelines that are more inclusive, but they can't override the notability standard (in other words, they can't say "these articles should not exist, even though they pass WP:NOTE). The deletion debate about footballer Alex Nimo centered around this issue, and I was able to persuade some people who initially argued for deletion; I believe everyone, myself included, came away with a clearer understanding of how those guidelines apply, in addition to a decision about that specific article. - Pete ( talk) 01:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
I am including all of these ideas at: Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron/Hall of Fame Ikip ( talk) 01:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
On "my preferences", what does "Enable "jump to" accessibility links" mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by AnyPerson ( talk • contribs) 00:25, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Reviewers are lacking at WP:FAC. It may be helpful for editors to transclude User:Deckiller/FAC urgents to their talk pages (by adding {{User:Deckiller/FAC urgents}}, to watch for articles they may be interested in reviewing relative to the featured article criteria. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Hey everyone can practice writing leads, which should be short summaries of the most important facts of an article - so why not everyone take a look at what links to this template and spruce up some leads.... Robin Williams had totally lost his.... Casliber ( talk · contribs) 05:53, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
...and then I found this.... :( Casliber ( talk · contribs) 05:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm a Senior Editor here on the 'pedia, but I don't have much experience with this type of issue and need some guidance. A new user named DChoc keeps changing the Digital Chocolate article. Not only do they add highly POV statements, they also violate Wikipedia standards left and right in terms of formatting and use of extensive lists. In short, they're trying to turn the article into an advertising vehicle.
I've reverted the article several times, but they keep changing it back to their version. Can someone with the power please protect the article or deal with the rampant user? I fear that blocking them from editing won't be enough, as they may just create a new username and keep up their work. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 20:54, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, this is completely random, but I've been wondering for a long time; what is the title/link of the image of an open book in the background of all Wikipedia's pages? Does anyone know? Thanks, and have a fun day! BobAmnertiopsis ∴ ChatMe! 20:39, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for this unconventional posting but I thought that the usual routes might take too long, "protecting the encyclopedia" and all that! lol This article is currently #10 on the reddit front page, with over 600 hits in the last 15 hours. I'd wager that it's because of that, that we are presently getting a deluge of vandalism directed at the article and at least a short term form of protection is needed on it. cheers Deconstructhis ( talk) 18:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Some editors have been promoting their own work on the page on Secure multi-party computation. I have undone their actions several times, but they keep reverting me. Their work is not published yet, though I have just learnt that it has been accepted for a conference. At present, it is not clear that this work is particularly notable, so I'm not sure what to do. I am trying to maintain good faith while being concious of WP:COI. (PS. I wouldn't call myself an expert in the field.) 87.112.55.49 ( talk) 20:34, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
The Hobbit and its talk page have been moved to The Hobbitt (allegedly to correct a "mispelling"—itself misspelled!) and no one seems to have caught it. The original spelling was the correct one. Sorry to ask this here, but I have to run and have no time to do the move (and, I assume, request the speedy deletion). I'm assuming good faith, but the picture of the book at the top of the article does show the title. Rivertorch ( talk) 07:58, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to experiment in the sandbox, but can't upload images to do so. I understand that this requires an uploader privilege. How can I get that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyesdav ( talk • contribs) 19:08, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Under the category of pointless wikipedia trivia, I wonder what article has survived the most attempts to delete it. List of unusual deaths has been nominated six times (the first under its delightful original title, List of people who died with tortoises on their heads) - DavidWBrooks 02:37, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
ive just looked at the Help:Edit_conflict and i noticed in the master box at the top there is a link to hhhhhh. is it supposed to be there? rdunn PLIB 09:35, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
I've come across a new school project with dates January 22 – February 12. The professor appears to be from the University of Toronto and editing under EEB356Prof. I've left the best message I could at their talkpage and here and was wondering if I could have some extra eyes. So far I've found users Leemin2-356, Bajrobin356, Mr Insect, User:Bealelor356, and Rodri101; they are editing Wheat weevil, Forficula auricularia, Tree cricket, and Cheiracanthium inclusum repectively; though Mr Insect has also created a few other articles that were not tagged as projects so he may be a keeper. That's 1/4 of their project I've been able to dig up due to direct links to the prof's page. Thanks, §hep • Talk 05:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
This may not be the correct place but anyway.
On The Chaser APEC pranks in the "The Chaser's response" section, there is an entire section cited by the radio interview on Source 44. The problem is that the website containing the media file is not dead linked. Since then there has been two tags added questioning the reliability of the source.
Now I listened to that radio interview, and while I couldn't possibly remember it, I know that all that information is correct when it was written. I suggested this source on the talk page to another editor (Jasewese) who then wrote that section and sourced it.
Now while archive.org does store the website, the media file dosen't play. So it is probably lost.
Is there a way to get rid of the citation questions around that source. The Windler talk 11:20, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello, my apologies if this is already known - I only noticed it today, but google.co.uk flags en.wikipedia.org pages as potentially harmful, and directs people to a holding page before passing them on, like so: http://www.google.co.uk/interstitial?url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walrus At the moment, the diagnostic page 502's. Odd. Random name ( talk) 14:52, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Wikipedia Loves Art for a massive collaborative contest to gather illustrations for as many articles as we can! Add your name under participants!-- Aervanath ( talk) 17:05, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
I wasn't sure if new WikiProjects are "announced" anywhere, so I thought that I'd just mention here that I've started a Vital Articles WikiProject. All assistance would be appreciated! - Drilnoth ( talk) 00:25, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Here's a conundrum - when is a copyvio not a copyvio? ...presumably when it's an administrator looking at it?
This issue has been at the back of my mind for ages, and it came up three times today in three separate areas I was lazily clicking through. Not being one to ignore such a clear sign from the wiki gods, I thought I'd bring it here for.. you know.. review ;-)
So it's illegal to break copyright, right? - and if an article, or image on a wikimedia foundation project breaks copyright then it gets deleted. I just wonder how the copyright owner feels about the article / image still being available to over a thousand (and growing) number of unidentified people - that's illegal, right?
I've had this in the 'don't really care' bucket for ages - but as part of my forays into sexual content on wiki, came across this image (now deleted) which I believe was very (very) close to being an illegal image, because it sexualised a child.
Anyone reading this who's an admin at commons can view the image - isn't that a bit wrong?
The fact is that wikimedia's administrators have unfettered (and apparently un-monitorable) access to a huge, and ever growing body of copyright infringing work. Doesn't seem sustainable to me. Privatemusings ( talk) 05:34, 23 January 2009 (UTC)I've posted this in a couple of places to try and figure out where the best fit is... please feel free to move elsewhere / refactor etc. :-)
“ | to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending; | ” |
— [11] |
< fwiw - this is the most useful response I had on this particular question - interestingly this whole thing seems tied up in the 'are we a publisher or not, or what' type questions. Also, fwiw, I think it's rather too easy to slam the door on some of this stuff, without taking care not to catch one's allegorical fingers. With the recent 100MB expansion, and a clever 'convertor' which will oggify things like videos on the fly, I'd predict the uploading of copyvio material is something which may increase in the mid-term. If the owners of the copyright are cool with administrators having unfettered access, then I certainly have no complaint :-) As I mentioned above, my primary area of concern is in potentially illegal material (like [ this image, in my view) - I believe it would be desirable to have a 'genuine and full delete' option in this case. Privatemusings ( talk) 23:27, 1 February 2009 (UTC)ps. I love you guys, and if you wanna talk about me, or offer further advice etc. - please do swing by my talk page - I hope you don't disagree that that ain't not half bad an idea.
Anyone who has a view about WP:ANN, particularly whether having a bot would help it (or not), speak here! - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 12:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
While doing new page patrol once in a while, I run across an article that may be worthy of an AFD. In those cases of which I am not sure, I think it would be useful to ask the opinion of a few other editors, without going through a formal AFD process. Is there any process in Wikipedia to ask a few editors for an informal opinion on a subject’s notability, before nominating the article for AFD? ••• Life of Riley ( talk) 00:03, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I keep hearing the figure that 25% (one fourth) of wikipedia is articles on fictional topics (television, movies, novels), does anyone know where this figure comes from? Ikip ( talk) 02:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm seeking the aid of an administrator in regard to the Selwyn Dewdney article. For the past month, a series of anonymous IP editors have continuously attempted to add material to the article in the form of dubious claims and posting citations in support of them, which not only do not back up what's being contended by the editors, in the most recent examples they actually specifically refute what is being claimed. I have attempted (at length) both on the discussion page of the article itself and on various talk pages of those making the edits to engage those involved in a discussion regarding these matters. These attempts are simply ignored and the material is constantly reverted without comment on either the articles discussion page or my own talk page, in the vast majority of cases not even an edit summary is utilized. This continues, despite the fact that I have posted specific quotes from the references that are being posted on the articles talk page which clearly demonstrate their complete inappropriateness in this context. Although, I've been attempting to maintain "good faith", it's appearing more likely to me all the time that what's perhaps going on is retaliatory 'tag-teaming' in nature in response to my anti-vandalism activities in other articles. I would appreciate any help in this regard, especially some sort of even short term protection for the article in question. cheers Deconstructhis ( talk) 18:52, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
This article is only being edited by editors with a pro-Rush Limbaugh POV, who typically cite only to Rush Limbaugh's own website as a source. I am posting here to ask for more editors on the article. An example is the I Hope Obama Fails section. The section is written only explaining "Rush's" side ( the editors on the article call him by his first name in the text). This section only presents Limbaugh's statements that he hopes Obama fails, and why he would say that, with no explanation about what made this controversial, or who found it controversial. User:Furtive admirer, backed up by User:Soxwon, are putting in a WSJ op-ed piece that I read and has nothing to do with the "fail" controversy (that also had a race element to it), but Limbaugh continuing to criticize Obama. That's Limbaugh's job - to criticize Obama, and it is distinct from the particular controversy. User:Furtive admirer uses POV language like "The Democrats escalated the issue", and when I revert, I get bizarre talk page messages about how liberal I am and how Obama needs a teleprompter to speak. I'm no longer watching the article, so it could use other editors who care more about WP:NPOV than about their own POV. --David Shankbone 23:44, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Anyone whose interested in Wikipedia history should take a look at a page I just unearthed from the Nostalgia Wikipedia, Wikipedia talk:List of Wikipedians in order of arrival/Archive 1. Some of the early Wikipedians talk about ownership of articles, whether attribution is needed, whether Wikipedia will become popular, and other topics. It's fascinating reading. I'm amazed that it sat dormant at the title Talk:Wikipedians/History for nearly seven years. Graham 87 12:03, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
I've put up User:Orngjce223/Wikipedia legends. Am I duplicating some sort of effort here? If not, could you add what you can to it (yes, you have permission to do that)? Thanks, ~ user:orngjce223 how am I typing? 15:25, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
The actress Chi-Lan Lieu stated on her personal blog [19] [20] that the show Designed to Sell is only producing 11 new episodes in one of four of its airing locations, to be aired in 2010 (so noted because she'll be taking over hosting duties in these episodes), and that these will be the last new episodes as the show has not been renewed. I'd like to update the show's article with this information, as I'm reasonably confident there will be no issue with notability concerning the source. What I can't figure out is whether this is a good idea or not. I'm mildly worried that since HGTV has made no official announcements, I could potentially get the actress in trouble by adding this info to the article where the producers could see it (if she hasn't already done it herself by posting this info on her blog for everyone to see). Since this could sort of be an indirect issue along WP:BLP privacy concerns, I figured I would ask the community to be safe.
For the record, the reason I skipped past the show's article talk page is because said article receives updates so rarely (months in between edits at times) that I had a feeling nobody would ever see my question there. Arrowned ( talk) 22:39, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
I couldn't think where this would actually fit as a question - are individual buildings of an notable entity notable? For example List of MIT undergraduate dormitories? If random tower block x is notable for a university - is random storage building y notable for the BBC (as an example)? -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 17:22, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Feel free to add your own products to this new list! Everyone must have made something in their time here :) Majorly talk 19:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Firstly, apologies if this is not the best place to post this - most of the talk pages for the relevant policy pages are quiet and I wanted some good eyes on it. AN and ANI didn't seem like a good fit for this enquiry.
Secondly, I have already looked over some relevant pages, including Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content and Wikipedia:Verbatim copying, but none of the scenarios given there seem to cover what I want to do.
Okay, basically, what I wish to do, is to use segments of some articles (in most cases, the lead section of biographies and band articles) on my own website. My idea includes:
Any insight would be greatly appreciated. Lankiveil ( speak to me) 12:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC).
Was it the point of adding a {{ nofootnotes}}, {{ refimprove}}, {{ onesource}}, or even {{ expand}} tag to an article that already has a visible stub template. The article obviously needs expanding that's what the stub is telling the reader. A short article with only one source and no inline footnotes qualifies to be tagged with all four of these maintenance tags or it could just have one simple stub template. I'm fine with BLP stubs with {{ unreferenced}} tags but I will remove these other tags from most other stubs I see. OlEnglish ( talk) 21:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
we recently purchased a vehicle here in Florida. Our credit was OK and we were told that a bank now is the lien holder and the vehicle is ours. Two (2) days later we get a call from the owners wife stating that my wife had committed fraud and submitted a made up or false pay stub. I was there when my wife told the sales manager that she doesn't get pay stubs yet because they are still moving into the new offices and there are only 4 people working at the office right now , so the owner just gives her a check for her weekly pay and he will give her a 1099 for this period of transition, but soon he will start taking out taxes and she will at that time have pay stubs. The sales manager just said don't worry about it, that he would take care of it. He apparently got very creative in order to get the loan passed. He also changed some things on the original application like how long my wife has been working for the company and how long we have lived in our present home. We didnt do any of this. At the end of the day after we had been there 5hours and we were exhausted he called us into his office and congratulated us on the purchase of our new used vehicle. we ask him if the bank picked up the loan, and his reply was it was a tough one but I got them to take it, the vehicle is now yours and he even told us who the lien holder is. on the bottom of the bill of sale paper a box is checked which states that the loan is assigned with out recourse. Since we did nothing wrong I dont feel that we have to return the vehicle, especially to the dealership, because the bank is the lien holder and we have yet to hear from them. I really need to know what the term means assigned with out recourse. I plan to fight this thing hand and fist. We are not responsible for what the dealerships people do to get people loans through the banks that they use. The owner of the dealership has threatened my wife and myself with arrest for auto theft and fraud. I told her just go call the police I have a bill of sale and as for fraud we did nothing wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.254.97.243 ( talk) 21:24, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Moved to WP:RDM#Berlin murder-- Patton t/ c 23:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
I suspect the article Jack Jones (banker) doesn't describe a real-life person of this name at all. Is there any template or place to bring this to the attention of experts? Or administrators for that matter? I mean, something that will make somebody have a look soon, not just when he runs into it. Debresser ( talk) 09:30, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Through the help of a fellow Wikipedian I can now prove from article "Jack Jones," aka Larry Hagman as a composite character based in Dallas that this is not a real person. What should we do now? Debresser ( talk) 16:15, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Those of us who remember the last recession may have been touched by the huge number of rogues and charlatans amongst the real and tested motivational speakers who came out of the woodwork and parted those desperate to find work, any work, and money, any money, from that money by selling courses that ranged from the mundane to the somewhat useful.
These people are skilled at self promotion, write excellent marketing puffery about themselves, often support each other because they are creating the market for their services. It starts to look very like incest with money.
The object is to establish notability and to sell, sell, sell books, tapes, courses, the lot. Who can blame them? They have to make money too.
Our duty is, of course, to report even handedly on the good, the bad and the downright appalling in a wholly factual manner based upon reliable sources. This is a great place to ask editors to go through biographies and rip out the puffery and the non verifiable stuff, and to ensure that these biographies are balanced and worth including in our encyclopaedia in the first place.
So I am alerting folk here to Category:Motivational speakers which contains many of them, and suggesting a jaundiced eye be passed over the contents with a view to validating, through AfD if necessary, the presence of the articles here. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 07:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Is it correct categorisation, if I add Category:People from České Budějovice onto Category:HC České Budějovice players ( HC České Budějovice is a hockey club in a town called České Budějovice), or if I add Category:České Budějovice to the page, or if I create a new Category:HC České Budějovice? I apologise, if I am not writing this question at the right place. -- Voletyvole ( talk) 21:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Where do I request for a "current" template? I'm looking to add one to the Office Live Workspace article. Currently, there is only a {{ future software}} template, but nothing for a current or a "in beta" template. Where could I request that such a template be made? Smallman12q ( talk) 01:58, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
The Wikipedia:Drawing Board, where new contributors can go to get feedback on articles (and are encouraged to do so at WP:YFA), is in need of a contributor or two. It is very low traffic at the moment--with a request every 2-5 days or so--but requests are going unanswered. We had a bit more participation in responders last autumn, which was good because we were busier then (see Wikipedia:Drawing board/Archives/2008/October, for instance), but they seem to have moved on.
The primary value of this board in my opinion is that it gives us an opportunity to educate contributors before they hit the WP:CSD point. Most responses boil down to pointing out the relevant notability guideline, explaining how to verify, and discouraging non-neutral contributions. Usually, it's an opportunity to say, "You really shouldn't create that article" in a friendly, non-bitey fashion. There's a lot of repetition, because evidently they don't read each other's questions and answers. Occasionally, we get an opportunity to help a new contributor with a good, notable subject figure out the wiki way.
Anyone up for watchlisting and pitching in? I've been one of the more consistent maintainers for well over a year now, and though I'm a bit burnt out on it, I hate to see it wither on the vine. I checked on it yesterday and found unanswered requests going back to January 24th (I've caught it up), which kind of suggests that at the moment it has no other eyes.
If anyone knows a better place to "advertise" the position, I'm all ears. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:42, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
-- Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) ( Talk) 06:30, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm bored of vandal patrolling and I'm probably doing it wrong anyway. I need something really constructive. Could anyone look into my edit history and pick something? Try not to be random about it... Elm-39 - T/ C 14:10, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey guys! What happened to the big survey whose results were to be announced a few months ago. I participated in that and I'm curious to see the results. I am talking about the survey of wikipedia users and their usage habits. ReluctantPhilosopher ( talk) 13:05, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Does it make any difference to a proposed deletion if a user alters a timestamp? - Ddawkins73 ( talk) 00:23, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
[I'm not sure what is the right place to ask; please redirect me if this page is inappropriate.]
I recently noticed that
List of Tamil people and
List of people from Tamil Nadu had almost the same content, and nominated the latter for deletion, although I later realized that it was not the right thing to do. This is a more general problem; several pairs of Wikipedia articles have a significant amount of content in common, and this has some issues: mistakes fixed in one article might fail to be corrected in the other, or content that should get added to both might get added only to one, etc. Is there some (technical, policy or anything) solution to keeping such articles "in sync"? Or is this a less significant issue than I think and should just be ignored? Thanks,
Shreevatsa (
talk)
07:44, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Anyone realize that the icon for Wikipedia in IE is currently that for Facebook? It's both on the address bar and the favorites list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juggins ( talk • contribs) 13:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
And, the AOL icon was set for Google. Got it fixed, did a disk clean-up. How do these things happen?..... Juggins ( talk) 14:32, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
I have accepted a nomination to join the Bot Approvals Group - relevant discussion is just a click on the link above away. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 20:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Next time you need a reference for a fact, please try the WRS project's search engine. It is based on Google but only shows results from a few hundreds "reliable websites", making it faster to find a good reference. Open the search page and enter a fact (for instance: Obama born in 1961). Your feedback is most welcome :-) Thanks Nicolas1981 ( talk) 14:35, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm fairly new here, and I'd like to add some info about the pubs, shops, etc in our local villages as I think this makes the pages more interesting and would be useful to visitors... However, I don't want to be seen as advertising any particular businesses - is it ok to put links to pubs, etc? I'm aware I should just say 'there is a pub' rather than 'there is a really good pub'. Thanks Minute7 ( talk) 20:37, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Thanks for this, it's really helpful advice, and I'll have a look at the travel section. Thanks Minute7 ( talk) 20:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello ! The Graphic Lab is a project where graphist create or improves images, for free, of course. You need an illustration for an article ? you need to improve a photography ? Come there, and request graphist to improve your photo, or create a scheme.
Recently, we opened a Map Workshop : that's the same, come there, request a map creation or improvement, we (graphist) do the image creation work.
Note: we need advertising, to let user know about these images-creation possibilities. Please, help us to spread the news accross suitable wikipage and wikiprojects.
Yug (talk) 16:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
This ongoing discussion could use some more feedback/activity. Comments, questions, concerns, anything else, etc. etc. etc. about Portal:The Beatles would be appreciated. Thank you, Cirt ( talk) 02:34, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
I think that the AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia Art, which I started, has got badly out of hand. I don't think I have handled it very well and now it is turning into some sort of art intervention which might be worse than the "article" it seeks to delete. I am beginning to wonder if I should have put speedy deletion on the article and never been drawn into discussion about it. It seems that somebody is yanking our chains and I have fallen for it. Please can somebody help or offer advice? -- DanielRigal ( talk) 02:11, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
-- Patlichty ( talk) 06:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
I ended the circus as a routine A7. — Werdna • talk 06:37, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
I am amused by the use of the word "illegally" above, and it got me thinking about the legal issues, specifically trademark infringement. As it says at the foot of the main page "Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity.". This may mean that the use of the term "Wikipedia Art" as the name for a project, domainname and a website is an infringement of this trademark. I would also like to suggest to anybody seriously thinking about writing a book about this folly that everything on Wikipedia is licensed under the GFDL and any book that is largely culled from such sources would probably also have to be so licensed. Of course, I am not a lawyer and this is only speculation. -- DanielRigal ( talk) 13:25, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
see http://nathanielstern.com/blog/2009/02/15/wikipedia-art-retaliation/. Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 19:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Is this and this a violation of the GFDL? The information seems to be the same as the articles on Wikipedia, but, although they reference GNU Free Documentation License 1.2., they don't reference the Wikipedia pages. Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 19:42, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
This is nathaniel stern. I've entirely avoided any discussion on this project, and have no aliases at all on Wikipedia, because of my own bias. I do feel I should set the record straight on a few things.
Pat Lichty has not replied to my post to his user talk, but he posted several times to the Village Pump afterward so he's probably seen this. Other artists from Wikipedia Art would be more likely to notice the opportunity here.
A group of editors have been restoring historic images and audio files from the public domain for encyclopedic use.
Not exactly art for art's sake, but quite useful. Our goals are to persuade more museums and archives to digitize their collections in high quality files, and to mobilize a network of active restorationists. If we had 100 people each doing 2 restorations a week, Wikipedia could gain 10,000 featured pictures in one year. And since Wikipedia exists in nearly 300 language versions this material would have global application.
Encyclopedic restorations cover a wide range of subjects and genres from the Civil War portraits of Matthew Brady to the children's book illustrations of Louis-Maurice Boutet de Monvel. We would very much like to recruit restorationists, and to gain access to high resolution digitized files from more archives.
Active photographers and other artists may also qualify for exposure on the main page of Wikipedia in the Picture of the Day section. Wikipedia's main page receives an average of 6-7 million page views daily. This is a fine opportunity for artists to collaborate synergistically with Wikipedia. As the contributor of ten percent of Wikipedia's featured pictures, I would gladly work with professional artists and academics toward a more successful variety of collaboration. Please contact me here, at user talk, or via email (available by link at my user page). Best regards, Durova Charge! 06:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Hey - i doubt my own work is suitable for this project, but for what's it's worth I've re-posted your blog post about this to my own blog. I hope you get some takers. NathanielS ( talk) 03:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Is there a userbox that automatically shows whether I am online or offline? Debresser ( talk) 14:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, thank you. Debresser ( talk) 19:59, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
First off, I apologise if I'm in the wrong place. Several members of WP:F1 have identified a copyright violation in a book that is a direct copy-paste from Wikipedia's articles. Can someone look at this discussion currently ongoing at WT:F1; I'm not sure what step is appropriate next. The book homepage, I think is here, with a screenshot of an example of one copy-vio here. That is clearly a direct copy-vio of Michael Schumacher#Complete Formula One results (albeit slightly adjusted). Thoughts? D.M.N. ( talk) 09:04, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you all. I have continued the discussion back on WT:F1, so we can decide our next steps. Cdhaptomos talk– contribs 23:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
I think I've found some unattributed copying in eBay Reviews & Guides. For instance, compare:
The eBay member in question is named booksuncommon and I would like to contact the member to politely remind them about copyrights and plagiarism, to give them a chance to fix up their stuff. If that doesn't help, contact eBay itself next. Unfortunately, the only contact methods I can find insist that I register and provide a whole slew of information. I don't want to do that, and I don't want to go the "George Bush, 555-1212" route either.
Is there anyone out there who is already registered with eBay willing to make the contact? Alternatively, does anyone know how to contact eBay via email? Thanks! Franamax ( talk) 21:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
how does one make a table that contains a name of a band, possibly a picture, origin, labels, etc. on a band's page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by EatSleepBlink ( talk • contribs) 23:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
how does one post a table of information containing a band name, possibly a picture, origin, labels, members, former members, etc. on a band's page?
-- EatSleepBlink ( talk) 23:09, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Some may call posting here overkill, but I think it's good to let everyone know what's happening: there is a proposal to overhaul the category at WP:BON and a CfD, but I can't find the link for that one. All comments appreciated. - Jarry1250 ( t, c) 16:50, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
There are lots of newspapers that have been put online up to a certain date. They are archived online. But you can't use the "archiveurl=" because there is no "url=" to start with. What is the solution? Is there a template that allows for an "archiveurl=" from a paper source? What I usually do is put the online archive as url and add outside the template but still within the reference that "Archived on ..." Debresser ( talk) 00:04, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
In general that would be the logical thing to do. Unfortunately, it's not always that easy, because often these newspapers are archived on sites run by other organisations. Moreover, sometimes it's just a private person who archived an article or one edition of a newspaper on some site. Debresser ( talk) 01:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
OK, I'm judging from one observed incident, so the statistics could be better, but anyway:
I fear that redlinks in disambigs mostly escape standard fact checking procedure.
It's more than easy to invent just a fictional person and add it to the surname disambig. And you can even try to insert higher nonsense and laugh your ass off that it isn't detected.
This is my example. More than 3 years undetected.
-- Pjacobi ( talk) 18:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
See what I wrote at Wikipedia talk:Article Rescue Squadron#Who is affected when an article is deleted for the other, somewhat larger, side to this coin. Uncle G ( talk) 14:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
English: Wikimania 2009, this year's global event devoted to Wikimedia projects around the globe, is accepting submissions for presentations, workshops, panels, posters, open space discussions, and artistic works related to the Wikimedia projects or free content topics in general. The conference will be held from August 26-28 in Buenos Aires, Argentina. For more information, check the official Call for Participation. Cbrown1023 talk 17:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
I do not understand what has happened to the article Shadowlife. Its history seems to show that it existed a few days ago, and was the subject of a move. But now all that remains is a self-redirect that has been marked for speedy deletion. JonH ( talk) 18:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed that in the articles about artitsts like 50 Cent, Ciara, Kanye West etc. their nicknames are missing. I thought that I've already seen them on wikipedia (in the background information box) but obviously they aren't there (anymore?). I wanted to ask wheter they are left out intentionally or accidentally because in my opinion this information can be really helpful and is also an important part of an artist's biography.
I don't know if that's the right section to ask a question like that but if I'm wrong here just tell me where I should go ;) 21:09, 23 February 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.155.111.155 ( talk • contribs)
Is File:Montage Atlanta.jpg really under the correct copyright? It may be true that the uploader put the pieces together, but the individual images look professionally-made. Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 06:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Why every edition I do here (in english wikipedia) is vandalism by my contributions? -- Fernando Carrazzoni ( talk) 15:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
I've been working on Portal:NATO, trying to update it, and in updating the news section I seem to have created some strange problem. On the NATO Portal page, Portal:NATO/NATO news/Wikinews renders as a redlink, but the page exists, and links correctly anywhere else I put it. Any one know what went wrong? Thanks. Cool3 ( talk) 15:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Is there a place to report publications that plagiarise Wikipedia, or is that something that Wikipedia is not interested in? 98.66.145.114 ( talk) 18:17, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I have been working on list of skin-related conditions for the past few weeks and wanted to know if a computer savy user could help me with the following. I want to know what diseases and/or disease synonyms (those names found within parentheticals) are listed more than once in the list. I am not asking for any editing, just a list of what has been listed more than once. Could someone help me with this? kilbad ( talk) 00:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
This is weird - my signature with four tildes no longer automatically creates a link to my User page, as you'll see at the end of this comment. I haven't changed any preferences that I know of. Anybody have any idea why? - DavidWBrooks 13:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Can someone who speaks Italian clarify with Italian Wikipedians that surely their heading "Sturmabteilungen" is incorrect. There was only one SA (Sturmabteilung, namely the paramilitary organization of the NSDAP. It was the mass noun for this organization, there weren't umpteen of them. In fact, this heading would be the only one in all the languages who have articles about the subject, as far as I can tell. Dieter Simon ( talk) 01:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
There have been several articles popping up on Google News about Skittles turning Wikipedia into its homepage. What this consists of is if you go to skittles.com and then select something on the drop-down "Products" menu, you will be linked to a section in the article Skittles (confectionery). On the face of it there's nothing wrong with inbound links to Wikipedia, though it's a rather stupid idea since the headings within the article could change any second. The more serious aspect is if professional ad people are changing the article to align it with some PR campaign. I can't tell on that front, as it seems the current article format has been like that for a while. (Apparently some other website tried this but quickly ended the test) Joshdboz ( talk) 09:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Hm. I just went to skittles.com and got redirected to Twitter. Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 22:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh wow, this is, ah, something. I'm even logged in. It's somehow just overlaying its site on WP, so it's technically not copying anything, is it? But I can't see how any sane company, especially one that big, could think that this was a smart idea. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ ( talk) 23:26, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
I've been patrolling new pages for a few hours tonight as well as some other editors, but there don't seem to be any admins currently working on clearing out the speedy delete queue. There's some attack pages and stuff up that could really use to be taken down. So if someone has the time, heading over to WP:Candidates for speedy deletion would be a big help. Huadpe ( talk) 10:28, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I just don't have time to look into it now, but African Wild Dog has some suspicious content. Anyone want to investigate? See Talk:African_Wild_Dog#Copyright_violation.3F for details. — Epastore ( talk) 23:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
This might be more of a meta thing, but does anyone know what happened to the WP:SURVEY? We all diligently filled it out, and the results were supposed to come out eight weeks after the closure of the survey. That time has well-and-truly passed. We want to know what the results were! Anyone know anything, or where the information is hidden? This, that and the other [ talk 09:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
There is an article Red cunt hair and its abbreviation Rch. If it is an in-joke, the 'in-crowd' is very small. I added a tag calling for a discussion but an anonymous IP simply removed the tag without comment. Perhaps I used the wrong tag. Can somebody take a look and see. Lightmouse ( talk) 10:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
The graphics used to represent national production of a certain good (e.g. bananas, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Banana_production_by_nation.svg) are difficult to read. I don't know which jurisdictions the circles represent. It's clearly not countries. Perhaps we should just color each country a color. Right now most of the map is grey, which isn't too useful. 131.107.0.86 ( talk) 01:30, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
Hello, the template {{ NovelsWikiProject Collaboration}} was added to the top of Shantaram (novel), and I do not believe that adding such templates to the pages themselves have any precedence. Such templates are meant for talk pages. Am I wrong in thinking this? — Erik ( talk • contrib) 00:11, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
um hi im new to wikipedia and as iwas just surfing around i found this place where you can totally make wikipedia better so here goes every time you make an edit you have to sign of with those little twirly things i think they're caled tilds they look like this ~~~~~ and i was wondering if it could be done automatically instead of always having to do it manually. this is just a suggestion and i am a noob so waht do i know but think about it also i need to be adopted so if you're willing go for it (please) oops almost forgot AntiFetch ( talk) 09:47, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
OK cool AntiFetch ( talk) 04:35, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Merged to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#It_May_be_Time_to_Shut_this_Down
Could an admin add the infomation wich were lost on Commons? thx-- Sanandros ( talk) 17:07, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Isn't that the same as VPP? ~ user:orngjce223 how am I typing? 04:08, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
A question for the editors. I am an undergrad at Georgia Tech's School of Public Policy currently involved in a class extending a wiki developed by a prior class regarding open source software and public policy. The goal of the project is create a comprehensive and current understanding of FOSS in the realm of public policy based on peer reviewed scholarly research. The technology we are using is abysmal and I am looking for a solution to improve the way we compile our knowledge base. One thought was to just change the technology but the more I thought about it - developing a way for the class into constructively interface with the wikipedia community might be much more productive both in terms of an educational experience and actually contributing to global knowledge. Unfortunately the scope of the information we are attempting to compile is much broader than this particular WikiProject seems to encompass. For example we are interested in compiling information regarding the FOSS legal issues and cases mentioned above, indexing data useful for evaluating FOSS policy claims, as well identifying local, state and national policy with regard to the use of FOSS, just to name a few. Would incorporating our project into Wikipedia be appropriate or even a good idea from a community development standpoint?
Thanks, Wryen Meek —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.207.180.118 ( talk) 11:58, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
I have created that template because I figured it would be useful, however, nobody is using it other than me. Does anybody know how I can promote the template? Should it be deleted? -- IRP ☎ 22:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC), post moved to this page 23:54, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
Could someone explain what this is all about ? Thank you.-- ExpImp talk con 19:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Does it exist a French Wikipedia Village pump? -- Cywil ( talk) 21:23, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
There is an article at Velascanding which has been prodded as being made up. When I did a Google search for the word, there are very few sources, but the word turns up in X Games, http://wapedia.mobi/en/X_Games (which is a mirror of Wikipedia), http://top40-charts.com/pedia.php?title=X_Games_12 (which is also a mirror), and http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Games, which is the Italian Wikipedia. Are we being hoaxed? Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 22:29, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
::::I wasn't asking for a discussion about problems. I was asking if anybody had ever heard of the term before. How cooperative. What's the point of the village pump if valid topics are looked down upon?
Who then was a gentleman? (
talk)
19:42, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
You know what, never mind. Nobody wants to be cooperative, why should I care? Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 19:47, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I've posted this on ' Wikipedia Review - it's related to some 'big picture' stuff about wikipedia, pseudonymous editing etc. etc. - thoughts most welcome anywhere :-) - it was prompted by a post by ex wiki stalwart Doc Glasgow, who said - "Hiding behind a pseudonym, whilst commenting on real identifiable people, is cowardly and deplorable." - a view echoed on akahele.org - "When people hide behind anonymous identifiers or phony pseudonyms, trust breaks down." (those interested in these issue should definitely read akahele - it's very good.
I just wanted to mention (as an pseudonymous person!) that I kinda hope that pseudonymous writing and good ethics / value / humour / quality aren't fundamentally in tension, rather that they will just tend to lead to the whole slew of problems well documented already.
In particular, I thought I'd mention the example of 'Private Eye' - a british institution and fantastic magazine which doesn't generally do 'bylines' (with notable exceptions) - contributors make up silly names and write their stuff... sound familiar?
The fundamental difference of course is that Private Eye is 'published' - and as such is regularly in and out of the courts, with varying degrees of success. The important point is that they manage very successfully to continue to publish, and even though they fairly regularly make mistakes / cross lines and have to pay damages, they're more often 'right' in some sense or other.....
So if one allows that pseudonymous contribution can be valuable - where does 'responsibility' come in? - On the part of the publisher, I guess - and it's the absence of such which I reckon is of higher importance than the identity of author thing.
The more you think about it, the odder it seems that publication wouldn't be a stated goal of a foundation seeking to share the sum of human knowledge. If the tool requires 'self-publication' (which is how I'd describe wikipedia?) - then that's where identification is required - fundamentally because the buck stopping somewhere is a good thing, and should be supported - I don't think many would disagree? Privatemusings ( talk) 23:47, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, this is relatively new, but I guess we need to start thinking about it. Edits for the sole reason of improving the book of a user, instead of improving the article. Do we want to allow such things ? -- TheDJ ( talk • contribs) 21:25, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
The "In the News" section on the Main Page hasn't been updated in more than a day (WP Time) and there is current;y a message on the Main page talk page. Since there's been at least one fairly high profile event yesterday (The Tsvangari Crash incident) is it possible that someone could update? BigHairRef | Talk 04:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
hi, whenever i look for something with google i always get lot of sites to get info. And always one of those would be something-Wikipedia,the free encyclopedia but recently when i click on it the message drops down with save or find and i get no-where. Would you help me please to fix it so it will be as it was before —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.41.71.211 ( talk) 17:44, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Would the picture on Matthew Martin at http://www.richmondfed.org/press_room/press_releases/about_us/2009/mmartin_20090205.cfm be considered fair use? Smallman12q ( talk) 00:25, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
(undent) Basically, fair use isn't good enough for living people. Specifically, a fair use picture of a living person fails criterion 1 of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. So if you're looking at a picture of a living person, one you found on the web, it's up to you to demonstrate that the picture is in the public domain or has been released with a free content license. And the lack of an explicit copyright claim is not such a demonstration. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Well perhaps this picture is in the public domain...that's what I'm trying to get at. Is this picture in the public domain? The site is by the federal reserve(which I believe is a government agency) and their copyright license is here http://license.icopyright.net/creator/tag.act?tag=federalreservebankofrichmond (which seems to be a creative commons license). So my question really is...is the picture in public domain?(And if so, why not). Smallman12q ( talk) 20:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
It's been a few days...and still no answer. I also would like to ask if the Detroit branch is also under CC rather than as a work of a government agency. Smallman12q ( talk) 01:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC) ...Anyone want to give an answer? Smallman12q ( talk) 01:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia promotes itself as "the free encyclopedia." This is not completely true. Yes, it may not costs anything of monetary value to read the articles. However, it costs a great deal to the people whom are reading it assuming they are recieving the truth. The costs of midinformed people is something we need to consider. If Wikipedia chooses to continue with their with holding of truth and political spinning, then they should change their slogan. Instead of "The Free Encyclopedia" they should refer to themselves as "The not Completely Free but Completely BIAS Encyclopedia." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.220.55 ( talk) 07:38, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
That and wikipedia is Free as in speech not as in beer. -- Kim Bruning ( talk) 11:36, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
The secure server has been unavailable in mainland China for several weeks now, as are all the English pages on the non-secure server that relate to this problem. Someone who can access them should check whether those pages have been updated. English non-secure pages on other topics are unaffected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.122.115.161 ( talk) 05:53, 13 March 2009 (UTC)