This page contains discussions that have been archived from Village pump (miscellaneous).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
I think link rot is one of the biggest threats to Wikipedia's future, so I designed three userboxes to spread the word about link rot and how to combat it with WebCite and the Internet Archive. Please help spread the word.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 04:14, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
archiveurl= | This user combats link rot when creating citations |
IA | This user uses the Internet Archive. |
I use User:Dispenser/Checklinks through the user script toolbox.js. Protonk ( talk) 04:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
There's a great bot that combats link rot by automatically archiving with WebCite any new citation links. See User:WebCiteBOT. I love the userboxes btw.-- œ ™ 18:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
When do the article assessment tables get updated? I thought maybe overnight, but I have waited several days, and no update so far, at least not on the Puerto Rico project. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 12:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
List of zombie novels - a huge list of non-notable novels by non-notable authors. This would be like putting all of the bands that don't meet WP:BAND into List of punk albums What's the consensus on lists like these? Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 05:07, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to request a general moratorium on the use of the phrase "is not notable". That's a value judgment about the subject of an article, and can have BLP implications. "Does not show evidence of notability" is a value judgment about the article itself, and is appropriate in deletion discussions and elsewhere.
Thank you. We now return you to your regularly scheduled ranting. -- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 16:34, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to request a general moratorium on the use of the phrase "is not notable". You might as well ask for a moratorium on people saying "it's cruft" and "fuck" because it's just not happening... -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 17:04, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I have just watched this video which seems to suggest that content in Wikipedia articles is now colour coded in terms of its reliability (based upon contributor history etc). However, I can't see any such colour coding. I have created an account and am now using the Beta version, and even performed a small edit myself but cannot see any colour coding. Is this feature now in place, or is it just planned? If it is in place, how do I use it, please? Spin Dryer ( talk) 23:22, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
closed nm
|
---|
I got to thinking, I can name some really influential editors who tend to support deletion, architects of many of our current policies, but I can't think of any editors who are super influential editors who support inclusion, or saving articles. Who is, in your opinion the most influencial editor who supports inclusion, or saving artilces? I am talking about editors who are admins or arbcomes, who have created policy and been very influential in that respect. I am looking for names, and why please. Thank you in advance. Ikip ( talk) 21:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
|
Wikipedia is an interactive encyclopedia with contributors from all across the world. Please be aware that threats or messages that promote harm or establish a sense of danger to the recipient are still considered against the law by means of harassment, stalking and even defamation. The Wikimedia Foundation routinely reports private user information such as the offender's real name, physical location and IP addresses to authorities closest to their location. If you post ill meaning, harmful or violent messages to any user on Wikipedia, including those who edit without registering, you can face real life consequences. Web site administrators have access to your private information and can flag your IP address or user account with several notices that publicly show information such as internet service provider or school, company and network names and titles. |
Hey guys, I decieded to make this into a template. I have always used it on my talk page to thwart unwanted and even digusting messages from appearing on my talk page. I originally created a page with it, which can be found here, back in 2008. Other people have used it and even edited it at times. Let me know what you think about it. I don't see it being a legal threat but instead a valid warning. Thanks. -- A3RO (mailbox) 23:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I edited a table to fix the formatting a little, but now the center part of the table is no longer centered. Help?
Here's a link to the table.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine#Action_of_an_alpha_type_Stirling_engine —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.61.90.27 ( talk) 04:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
That was me btw. ;) --
Markspace (
talk)
04:35, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I've been tagging a lot of talk pages with a wikiproject tag lately. As I've been through, I've noticed about 95% of the musicians, albums, songs, and groups that aren't "known" (by anyone not specifically into that band, really) have had their fair use images removed by bot. The bot posted on the talk pages, asked for a description, and deleted the image a mere week later, as obviously nobody provided a description.
With very few exception, most of these images were acceptable fair use for identifying the album, and were simply deleted by a (In my opinion, moronic) automated process. If nobody watched those articles, the bot tagged and deleted the picture, simply on the grounds that nobody noticed and added "This is fair use because it..." in the short lived week.
If I were to provide a list of these images, can they be undeleted, and have a generic fair use explanation added that they represent a work for which no free image can be made available? - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 01:10, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I created this template [This template], the opposite of {{
Do not move to Commons}}, [exists] for a number of reasons, but I would like to know if there's a better solution and generally what everyone thinks. Hopefully we can agree that the problem exists at least (except if you disagree about the utility of Commons, in which case this thread may not be for you).
The problem is thus: only some of the many images tagged as {{ PD-US}} are suitable for transfer to Commons. In certain circumstances content created in other countries can be used on Wikipedia quite happily under PD-US but is totally unsuitable for Commons, which requires that it be public domain in its country of origin and the United States. Until now, there has existed a useful way of acknowledging that an image isn't suitable for Commons, {{ Do not move to Commons}}. But it isn't used widely enough that we can safely (by any measure) deduce that "all files not tagged with that are suitable for Commons". Instead, each must be reviewed by hand - a long, tiresome process, which introduces the occasional human error.
I think I'm right in saying that the "It exist happily on Wikipedia, then it was moved to Commons, deleted there as unsuitable, and never seen again" argument is a reasonably common complaint of the system at the moment. Hopefully we can sort a bit of this out. My idea is thus: rather than / as well as having lots of different templates with varying criteria for saying something can be moved to Commons (e.g. the various bot-transfer templates), we have [increase the usage of this] one clear, obvious template. It could also be included by default in templates which always mean that a file can be transferred. Alternatively, we could not [persuade people to] use this template, and instead prefer to use a new parameter of {{
PD-US}} for this purpose. Would there be support for a push of this kind to get all PD-US files clarified in some fashion?
I didn't intend for this to be quite such a long post, so if any further clarification is needed, just ask. - Jarry1250 [ In the UK? Sign the petition! ] 18:36, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
For those familiar with the history of South Tyrol. It is certain that Wilhelm Dilthey, God bless his soul, died on 1 October, 1911, but it is less certain where he died. Did he die in
It is easy to commit an anachronism here. What do the WP regulations say about cases such as this? Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 17:48, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Below is a C&P from the the Village Pump archive. I have included it here so that the path of discussion can be easily referred to. There were three people on that thread. The first was Pat Pending, the next was - Tagishsimon and lastly 24.172.36.194 [1] or Dave Huffman.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(assistance)/Archive_9
This is a problem that has not gone away and I fear that it may get worse as this person has now threatened to edit the page daily. What it's all about is the English Soul group, The Foundations who had the classic hits in the 1960's, Baby, Now That I've Found You and Build Me Up Buttercup In the past this person has blanked the article page and he's done it on more than one occasion. He's come back now and it's likely that this disruptive vandalistic behaviour will continue. Besides blanking the page when he can't get his own way he has popped message on it saying "come and visit us at" and he gives his website url. He has also posted threatening legal warnings on the article page as if it was a signpost outside private premises. He has also on more than one occasion put all the songs of his CD album individually as if they were single releases. He mixed them in with the Foundations discography.
I've carried on the thread and I've replied to Tagishsimon, hopefully he and others will read it and understand what's really at stake here. ( George-Archer ( talk) 16:23, 4 April 2009 (UTC))
Hello, will someone please help me. There is someone from the USA by the name of Dave Huffman laying claim to the name "The Foundations" who keeps inserting his "legal claim" into the article. To the best of my knowlege, there are only two people who "own" the name in the UK - Clem Curtis & The Foundations, and Colin Young & The New Foundations. Will someone please advise. Pat Pending ( talk) 12:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
This person is not "laying claim" to "The Foundations" name but has legally owned the name and all performance rights to "The Foundations" in the US since the mid 70's. This was obtained when both Clem Curtis and Colin Young left the group after breaking ties with their management company in 1970. Both left the group under their own free will to pursue other projects. All of the other "original" UK members of the group also returned home and gave up any rights to "The Foundations" name at that time. I really appreciate you ignoring the legal aspects of this discussion. I have been performing with and recording with the group legally longer that any of your so called "original" members. This is my last statement on Wikipedia as I have learned that this website is a total farce not at all interested in the true facts and they are as follows:
Clem Curtis left the group even before Buttercup was recorded. Colin Young left the group shortly after. The group did not disband in 1970 as stated but was reorganized in the US and has been recording and performing ever since. Believe what you wish but there are apparently three "Foundations". One owned by Clem Curtis? One owned by Dave Huffman One owned by Colin Young?
The question marks are there due to the fact that I have not checked to make sure that they have legal rights in England but I'm assuming that they do.
You seem to be willing to accept the English groups but not the American group that has been in legal existence longer that either of the British groups. That is your God given right to hide your head in the sand and ignore the facts but it is my God given legal right to state the true facts and you, Sir have taken that right from me. Hope you're satisfied. I'm through trying to have the facts stated correctly on Wikipedia.
Dave Huffman The Foundations US www.thefoundations.us
dear Wikipedists,
who can help me translating the additional information in the dutch article on Cab kaye at http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cab_Kaye to the English one? -- NorbertvR ( talk) 17:31, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone have a photo of the Travel Air Mystery Ship "Texaco 13" that is on display at the museum. I would like to use a PD image to illustrate an article on Frank Hawks. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 21:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC).
Hi from the
Basque Country!
This is a message to the administrators of English Wikipedia or for someone who can help me with this issue:
I´m an user and contributor of the
Basque Wikipedia.,
Basque language is one of the oldest in Europe and the world, it has thousands of years old and is one of the few languages that survived the arrival of Indo-Europeans to Europe. Perhaps being one of the oldest nations or countries of the world not even have our own state, but our language is our homeland and pride. It put us on the map and give a reference recognizable to English speakers, the city of
Pamplona (
Iruña in basque language), where they celebrate the internationally famous festival of
San Fermin is in the
Basque Country.
After this brief introduction I would kindly ask you this request:
On July 15, 2009, in the Basque Wikipedia we exceed the figure of 40,000 articles, today (August 26, 2009) we have 42,000 articles, achievement of which we are very proud, because if we compare proportionately the number of speakers of the Basque language (about a million) with other Wikipedia versions of languages spoken in more than one state or nation in the world with millions of speakers is like to be proud.
Because one of the aims of Wikipedia Project in addition to expanding human knowledge worldwide is also to expand the knowledge of all languages of mankind: From the Basque Wikipedia we wanted to make the request to the users and particularly to the Administrators of the English wikipedia would be possible if you put the link to Basque Wikipedia in your English Wikipedia´s language list of everyone in your main cover ("Languages" section: as is currently the case Galician or Catalan language) and the Wikipedia list of more than 40,000 items that is below your main entrance page ("Wikipedia languages" section). Since English is currently the most powerful, influential and widespread in the world (your wikipedia already has 3,000,000 articles), the presence of Basque Wikipedia in your list of the world would be a great help to supervival of our language and their knowledge in the world.
Awaiting your reply.
Greetings from the Basque Wikipedia.
.
--
Euskalduna
(tell me) 15:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
85.86.101.120 (
talk)
We are making a lot of great progress with the Bolognia Push 2009. If you are not currently involved, perhaps consider contributing as we are always looking for more help at the dermatology task force. Feel free to e-mail me for all the details. --- kilbad ( talk) 22:47, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
anybody know what happened to the search option when clicking a redlink? apparently a new template is being used, and it's been omitted. -- emerson7 18:26, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
I have to protest that User:Mrlodotcom have not repsect other users (me). He said my manner is uncivilized, and said I am low-level, as he has better English level than me.-- Antonytse ( talk) 13:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
I am involved in a minor dispute at the above article. This dispute does not involve any policy or guideline issues... it is purely an editorial disagreement over whether to include a particular photo or not. (see Talk:Phil Hartman#Photos for the arguments). We could use some outside opinions to resolve the dispute. Blueboar ( talk) 16:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
In this article, it is written that Tumansky had received an award in 1946 (Gospremii of the USSR). What is this award? The USSR State Prize? or something else? Thanks for your help. Skiff ( talk) 08:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
There are three featured portal candidate discussions that could use some input. Comments would be appreciated at the individual discussion subpages. Please see WP:FPORTC. Cirt ( talk) 03:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
I made a template called Template:Cheesepuff but no one is using it. How can I make it more popular? Please don't ban me for editing pages because I adding wrong stuff to a page once before I made an account. Dipotassitrimanganate ( talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 15:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC). Dipotassitrimanganate ( talk) 15:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC) 15:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
It's come to my attention recently that we have a large number of "<year> <sport team name>" ( example) articles where we have logos created after that year being placed on that year's season article. Continuing the above example, the current logo for the University of Pittsburgh Panthers sports teams is File:PittPanthers.png. This logo was created by the university and put into use in 2005. Yet, the logo was/is being used on season articles that predate 2005 (see the above example for the 1975 Panthers).
I feel that this use is revisionist history. Logos created after a particular season are not the logos of the team for the year in question. They operated and performed under a different logo, and their identity is tied to that logo, not a future logo. Encyclopedias encapsulate history, not revise it and update it to current marketing materials.
I'm finding I am being reverted by a particular user. A discussion has evolved on my talk page at User_talk:Hammersoft#Pitt logos. I'd like to see a wider discussion here on this forum regarding this issue.
Should current logos of sports teams be used in the infoboxes of earlier iterations of the team to represent that team when the team predates the current logos? -- Hammersoft ( talk) 12:30, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
There is also a discussion about this issue here on the College Football Wikiproject if anyone is interested. CrazyPaco ( talk) 20:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I am working on a new article about Steven Hayne, the primary medical examiner for Mississippi, and while it is NPOV and very well sourced, much of the content is negative, (this negativity is an accurate barometer of the sources I've been able to find so far). The sources I've found also show him to be very litigious ( http://www.reason.com/blog/show/129975.html), so what is wikipedia's policy with regard to individual contributors when faced with a defamation lawsuit? Huadpe ( talk) 05:54, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
In his artcle, it is written that he was made Honorary Citizen of Kuybyshev in 1982, but the link to this city is a disambiguation page. So he is Honorary Citizen of which city? Thanks for your help. Skiff ( talk) 07:42, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
As a result of a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#The "no negative comments" stipulation, and an alternative, the page Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Vetting has been created. This is not an alternative to RfA; the whole point is the potentially disheartening stuff is said in private before a prospect agrees to go through RfA. — Sebastian 22:22, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
If the no references template is removed by an editor, but no references are in or have been added to the article, what should be done next? I added the no references template in July. I added it again today after seeing that it was removed, and I will watch to see what happens, but perhaps there is something else I should know or do.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 17:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
I've just made a fairly comprehensive how-to for sound file editing, using the free software program Audacity, at Wikipedia:Wikivoices/Episode_48. Would this be useful more generally? Shoemaker's Holiday Over 206 FCs served 08:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Please help. This is not in the text of the article. In fact, I don't even know if it is an error. Who is Parr?
See John F. Kennedy, Jr., at the very bottom, there is a blue box. Parr killed JFK????
I would like to fix this if this is an error or vandalism. But when I click "edit this page", I can't even find the Parr word. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 21:22, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
1. Explain to me who is Parr.
2. Should this be fixed?
3. How to fix it?
[User:Suomi Finland 2009|Suomi Finland 2009]] ( talk) 21:24, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm sure many of you caught the news article about Adler and Alfaro's research in wiki trustability being applied to live Wikipedia. It just so happens that I have been working on a similar problem from a completely different direction during my research and am ready to share this work with the community. I have designed and implemented a user script modification that I call HAPPI and am currently running a non-profit/academic analysis of its usefulness. The script adds a couple of new controls that will appear over the edit pane. These controls will allow you to toggle the highlighting of wiki text while you edit it. If you'd like to give it a try, please see the documentation page for more information. -- E poch F ail ( talk| contribs) 15:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
First of all, I wrote for help in the dispute resolution section and after 5 days got zero response. I'm not trying to cross-post but I need help here.
Northport, New York ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) User:Tavix has repeatedly removed large amounts of well referenced/cited content from Northport, New York with complete disregard for prior or post discussion with other editors, explanation of existing Wikipedia policies disputing his edits, and multiple editor warnings. He has removed the names of nine people from the article without any justification despite that most have perfectly valid source reference citations from trustworthy sources. I have explained how his edits were both destructively unnecessary (a few just needed a 'citation needed' tag and somebody could have easily added it) and often against Wikipedia policy (removing valid newspaper article references only because the link was no longer online), to other edits which I can't even figure out why he arbitarily decided he didn't like it (no explanation is also against WP policy). He has not only refused to justify or explain his edits but he has three times re-reverted back to his destructive mass removal edits. He has refused to discuss the changes (one or two may be valid removal candidates but certainly not obvious), ignored multiple warnings, and continues to (at this point) vandalize the article. I would also like a temporary ban be placed on this editor so he can learn to stop being destructive and start being constructive and cooperative.
-- Fife Club ( talk) 03:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm trying to find the old WP: namespace page where people stored wikicurrency (in Wikis, of course). You can see the symbol for the currency on things such as this postage stamp. Can someone point me to it? It was active as a toy project around 2004/5, and listed how many Wikis each of a few hundred Wikipedians had. Thanks, +sj + 21:00, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Please read here. What about the press links in our articles ? To analyse, you can translate this coming from es Wikipedia. What can we do ? Manuel González Olaechea ( talk) 15:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
There are a number of places, particularly in Canada, that bear the name Capilano. Does anyone know the origin of this name, please? Bridgeplayer ( talk) 22:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Is there anywhere us young'uns can sit around the campfire, and listen to Oldtimers talk about what things were like in 2001-2? I'm curious whether things started out amicable and then gradually got more conflicted; how soon after creation the inclusionist/deletionist camps started forming; when nationalist POV pushing raised its ugly head; how vandals were handled (escalating level-1 thru level-4 warnings? I suspect not, but just don't know); etc.
I don't even really know how many oldtimers there are left. There don't seem to be many. Natural attrition, or have us (relatively) whipersnappers driven them away?
If we created WP:GRAMPA (or perhaps WP:LISTENTOYOURELDERSYOUPUNKS), where people with an account created before, say, 2004, could reminisce, and people with newer accounts could stop by occasionally, listen for a while, maybe ask a question, and bask in their reflected glory, I think that would be kind of cool. If such a place already exists, that's even better. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 21:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Just to let people know, I have created the redirect Template:Excessive so I (and others) can convey the message without using the slightly derogatory slang. What do people think about switching them round so Template:Fancruft is the redirect? OrangeDog ( talk • edits) 03:44, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Done The template now resides at {{ Overdetailed}}. If anything explodes as a result, let me know. Skomorokh 18:00, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
What do people think of this new product and the possible interactions between google sidewiki and here? I have added a sidewiki entry for the Article Rescue Squadron and I see Matt Sanchez and the front page already have comments. It will be interesting to see if people try to change articles after reading the sidewiki. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 06:58, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm anonymous Wikipedia user contributing to articles on Immigration, Ethnic groups and Foreign relations related to Pakistan and I do believe, a lot of things still missing because the biggest challenge is lack of reliable sources on a particular subject. Recently, I got an idea of compiling a book containing statistics of Non-indigenous ethnic groups living or working in Pakistan. The population of a particular ethnic group would be obtain respectively from their diplomatic missions in Pakistan. The actual reason for such publication is Wikipedia and if book's content could be use for citing as sources to Wikipedia articles. Any suggestion or comment would be highly appreciated.-- 119.155.10.14 ( talk) 11:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
What do you find are the worst, most distasteful things on wikipedia? (I'm interested to see what people hate about wikipedia, and perhaps find a way to fix it). Smallman12q ( talk) 13:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I come here at the suggestion of an administrator, Sarek.
Is it better to write just 2-3 articles well and then, when much progress is made (temporarily finished) then to move on. Or write hundreds of articles, with just minor improvements, but having 2x or 3x the number of edits. I am thinking about doing the first strategy. What is consider more "prestigious" or valued? Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 21:05, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
I have an old book that has no DOI/ISBN, but it does have a Library of Congress Catalog Card Number -- is there a convenient way to use this with {{cite book}} ? User A1 ( talk) 12:45, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
There seems to be some confusion between Wanamaker Organ and the talk page Wanamaker Grand Organ because there are two names. Therefore, going from Wanamaker Organ, the article, to the talk page at Wanamaker Grand Organ those two are inadequately linked, and the talk page comes up unranked, even though the class and importance are specified for Philadelphia. I do not know how to untangle this situation, but I am sure someone here does.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 19:03, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Can someone use Webcite or another archival program to archive Media Create's game ranking page. It's updated on a weekly basis listing the top 50 game sales in Japan. They do later republish this information, but the books are quite expensive, especially when you add import fees. They do not archive the site and archive.org doesn't do so regularly enough. 陣 内 Jinnai 23:37, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Is it anyone who knows what this peninsula close to Rijeka Crnojevica, Montenegro is really called? The reason for the question is that i've been working on the sv-wiki version of Rijeka Crnojevica in almost a month, and i still don't know what this place, that is located close to RC is named. If that's not revealed in the article, it certainly would not be a selected article... But that is what i want with this article, i want it to be at least recommended...
I would be very grateful for knowing the name on this place, and i hope somebody here could help me...
Thanks!
Perolinka ( talk) 00:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
According to The Uranium Information Centre, their web site no longer exit and will be closed on 19 December. On the web site it said that much of the information it contained is available on http://aua.org.au and http://world-nuclear.org It was a widely used source for quite a number of articles, as shown by the Special:Search/"uic.com.au". These references may become dead link if we don't fix it. -- Quest for Truth ( talk) 05:37, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I'm just curious how Featured Article selection works for Portals. I also want to know whether or not a Featured Article of the week is possible for a Portal. And lastly; can a Portal pick an article not voted as a Featured Article on the main but considered a FAC by the supporting Wikiproject? Thank you -- Marx01 Tell me about it 05:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Why is there no list anymore of the highest number of red references without an article. That was a useful facility to have ? -- Penbat ( talk) 19:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I have almost single handedly done tons of work recently on workplace bullying, narcissism, personal boundaries and ( I hope) psychological manipulation. It would be nice if someone else helped, preferably an academic.-- Penbat ( talk) 19:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I recommended to Penbat on their talk page that they seek input here regarding the desirability of creating a separate 'free standing' article, devoted exclusively to the concept of "psychological manipulation". In my opinion that are already other articles in existence that potentially address the topic such as psychological abuse and the "psychological" section of the coercion article and perhaps even others as well. My concern is with avoiding the creation of a content fork WP:CFORK, but personally I'm open to any reasonable (and referenced) argument that allows me to see some 'daylight' between what appear to me to be very closely overlapping categories. Personally, I'd rather see resources devoted toward improving the closely related articles that already exist. cheers Deconstructhis ( talk) 19:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm glad that the other editor mentioned an alternative place for you to make enquiries that might prove more potentially useful than the one I provided, my hope was to encourage you to communicate with others and attempt to move forward smoothly through consensus. Yes, I understand that you have located a source which you believe supports a necessary distinction should be made between "psychological manipulation" and psychological abuse in the encyclopedia. When I suggested that it might be a good idea to communicate with other editors, it was to encourage you to garner other opinions (and perhaps 'counter references') on the matter. Let me try to explain my current perspective based on what I've read so far a different way. If a new article appeared tonight in Wiki and its conceptual content mirrored the proposed version of psychological manipulation that you posted yesterday and I was asked to vote on it in an afd, I'd vote for merger, probably with "psychological abuse". This doesn't mean that I think that you're "wrong" in your position, or that there's anything implicitly bad about your source, I'm suggesting that its possible that many other editors might hold the same position as myself, that what's being talked about is an issue of semantics in splitting the words "manipulation" and "abuse" and that it's an example of content forking. Then again, a large number of other editors might thoroughly agree with the interpretation you're putting forward and a quick consensus would be reached in support of it. My attempt at encouraging you to communicate directly with other editors on the matter was in hope that if it was the former, that you might be saved more time and disappointment. Really, the only way to find out, is to ask other editors in an appropriate forum, in a direct fashion, ahead of time. cheers Deconstructhis ( talk) 03:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I posted about this event a while ago, but let me remind you again, and make the last minute call for presentation applications. This conference will be held on November 22 at the University of Tokyo. The details are posted at this site, and a tentative program will appear soon. Meanwhile we are still accepting applications to lightning talks and other form of small sessions here. The deadline is close, so please contact the staff asap if you need to know anything about it. -- Makotoy ( talk) 22:06, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
There was recently an article about WP in TIME. It discusses things like how only 13% of editors are female, and how the top-level contributors are largely from a narrow demographic. This has sparked a lot of discussion, and it's gotten me thinking...
In a system like WP, when those in control come from a largely homogeneous demographic, the consensus will be biased towards the POVs common to that demographic. Furthermore, this will happen even with well-meaning editors. It can be hard to tell the difference between a lone crackpot and someone from a significant but underrepresented group on WP.
I think it's extremely important that underrepresented groups have their voices heard, for the sake of NPOV. It seems like there should be a policy and/or procedure for people who feel that their arguments are not being considered due to such a systemic bias. In other words, they have a valid argument with verifiable sources, but consensus is still against them. Is there any such policy, or related discussion? What are people's thoughts on this?-- Elplatt ( talk) 01:04, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I've cleaned up the article about the hoax, and it is now at Hungry Beast ( AfD discussion). Various editors have reverted the hoax edits themselves. They were all perpetrated by 203.45.16.153 ( talk · contribs) who claimed to be Allan Hogan back in April, but which reliable sources state to have been Andrew Denton this month. Uncle G ( talk) 17:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I wonder if there is a salt request template that can be put on articles that are persistently being recreated after having been speedily deleted several times. I see that Template:Salt was deleted some time ago, so I am reluctant to recreate it. Is this the best venue for this sort of discussion? Basket of Puppies 18:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Anyone know if it will happen any time soon ? It would be nice to get back full statistical data on internal links etc and email alerts of article changes for example.-- Penbat ( talk) 15:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi all,
Although we removed the centralnotice that was up, the Wikimedia Foundation is still looking for volunteers to serve as subject area experts or to sit on
task forces that will study particular areas and make recommendations to the Foundation about its strategic plan. You may apply to serve on a task force or register your name as an expert in a specific area at
http://volunteer.wikimedia.org.
The Foundation's strategy project is a year-long collaborative process which is hosted on the strategy wiki, at
http://strategy.wikimedia.org. Your input is welcome (and greatly desired) there. When the task forces begin to meet, they will do their work transparently and on that wiki, and any member of the community may join fully in their work. This process is specifically designed to involve as many community members as possible.
Any questions can be addressed to me either on my talk page here or
on the strategy wiki or by email to philippe at wikimedia.org.
I hope you'll consider joining us!
-
Philippe
00:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Proposal at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee code of conduct. Input would be appreciated. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 09:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
I've posted a new essay documenting my thoughts on the project's status as an encyclopedia, although they do not necessarily represent those of the community. I'd appreciate if some folks could go post their ideas as well. – Juliancolton | Talk 02:51, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm a scientist at the US Geological Survey headquarters in Reston VA USA. I would like to know of the use of the wiki format for the production (writing, reviewing, publication, indexing, etc) of our scientific reports. Lee De Cola ( talk) 14:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
I brought this up at WikiProject Arts, but nobody there has responded. Could people take a look at the first two edits made by Brendanwoods ( talk · contribs)? I don't know if their edits were correct or not, but they have given no sources for their edits, and have not replied to my request for sources. I don't know anything about these subjects to know if the edits are correct or not. 99.166.95.142 ( talk) 16:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
I am wondering about the value of these. Certainly Oedipus might merit extensive out-of-universe discussion, as might Heathcliffe of Gandalf - however I suspect they have them, and probably without prompting. Jonathan Archer, however, has been tagged since 2006 and really I see nothing wrong with the article (except maybe a tiny amount of cruft) as it stands. Since we are not permitted to discourse on Archer as a reaction to previous enterprise Captains, for example, without supporting references, and there is probably a very limited amount of RS, the article seems essentially complete as it stands. [Disclaimer:I haven't actually seen the show in question.) Comments? Rich Farmbrough, 14:05, 4 October 2009 (UTC).
I was looking at images on the commons and I noticed this discussion: commons:Commons:Language policy#Titles of galleries. Is that something that affects us here? Newport Backbay ( talk) 01:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
The process to appoint the three non-arbitrator members of the Audit Subcommittee is underway, with the election itself starting on 30 October. If you think you may be suitably qualified, please see the election pages for the job specification and application arrangements. Applications close 22 October 2009.
For the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher 21:44, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I think I've heard of some sort of tool that can pinpoint the revision/author of a given section of text withough having to trawl through the history myself. Does anyone know about this or where I could find it? Thanks, Oreo Priest talk 00:12, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Please could anyone interested review (with a fine tooth comb) the edits listed at Special:Contributions/Full-date_unlinking_bot. One bad edit has been account for at the BRFA, which is where any wannabe commentators should also go. Thanks, - Jarry1250 [ In the UK? Sign the petition! ] 10:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Between 15 May 2007 and 7 July 2008, the page Help:Transwiki was a simple soft-redirect to m:Help:Transwiki on Meta. On the latter date however, user:Yecril added the phrase "Note: According to User:John Broughton, incoming Transwiki content is not accepted and the relevant sections do not apply; just copying the content is recommended instead." [8]
To me this sounds very dubious and so I thought I'd check whether it is actually the case or not? I'm doing so here as this is a much higher traffic location than the talk page of a soft redirect in the help namespace. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
If you haven't seen it, Erik Zachte has just released the first public version of our monthly "Report Card", which is tracking key metrics (traffic, content quantity, participation rates, etc.) on an ongoing basis: http://stats.wikimedia.org/reportcard/
See more in his blog post about it here.-- Eloquence * 01:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Right. I know about the rules stateing that in most cases one is not allowed to revert edits by a user to thier own talk pages, but what happens if an IP removes posts? Do the same rules still apply? rdunn albatross 12:23, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
In response to several years of debate across many subjects, Wikipedia:Reliable sources may be non-neutral. Durova 322 17:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
This is about ta.wikipedia.org
I have read one problem about usage of right words. Some people (group1) prefer using common word which are in day-to-day usage (derived from some other language). Some others (group2) are in favor of using right words that are not in use, and little bit difficult to understand for a layman. Problem comes when these group2 people starts editing pages created by group1 people. How to handle this case ? Do we have any policies which could solve the dispute ? -- V4vijayakumar ( talk) 10:52, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
OpenMoko Inc. announced the WikiReader today - a portable device for browsing Wikipedia. It will cost $99, is powered by two AAA batteries, and reads a Wikipedia dump from a micro SD card which can be updated by the user. TRS-80 ( talk) 15:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Anyone here know how to suppress the leading space when cutting and pasting section titles? When running Firefox under XP, double clicking and drag-selecting over a section title to grab a word at a time causes a leading space to be included, but this does not happen with article titles. I know that this has got to bug other users as well as I've seen a fair number of broken section redirects and links caused by a space after the fragment separator. Triple clicking for the entire line includes the "[edit] " (and I've see a few of those in links as well). Single clicking and drag selecting certainly works, but less pointer precision is required for word at a time selection, making much it faster. -- ToE T 19:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi all,
The volunteer response team is looking for a number of English-speaking Wikimedia contributors to join their team to handle incoming voicemail enquiries. There has been a recent surge in queries left on the Wikimedia Foundation's voicemail service, which end up being forwarded to the volunteer response team for action. Unfortunately, the volunteer response team leaders have so far been unable to find sufficient cover to handle the increase in voicemail correspondence received.
If you would be interested in joining the volunteer response team to handle voicemail enquiries, and are comfortable volunteering your time to telephone people who have left voicemail enquiries, please leave the appropriate details at meta:OTRS/volunteering. Please make sure to mention in your nomination that you are interested in, and comfortable replying to, voicemail enquiries. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact one of the volunteer response team leaders listed at Wikipedia:Volunteer response team#List of volunteer response team leaders.
Regards,
Daniel (
talk)
13:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
The dermatologic-related content on Wikipedia continues to improve; however, we still need help to complete the Bolognia Push 2009! This is an effort to make sure that every topic found within this unabridged dermatology text is also found on Wikipeda. Please see the above link for more information, and, if you are interested in helping, e-mail me for the login information.
There are still hundreds of disease stubs and redirects to be made. We need your help! --- kilbad ( talk) 22:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I read a Chinese news report on a city in Northern Sweden that, according to the report, is the only female-only city in the world since 1820. However, the news only quoted the name in Chinese as 沙科保市, without its native name. Though "沙科保" ( pinyin:Shakebo) suggests a three-syllable name starting with S, no such article under the relevant wikipedia list and category contains the description of male-free. We should create a wikipedia article for it if it really exists, provided we know its name. -- Poeticlion ( talk) 18:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
If you have any ideas let me know. Thanks --TaRiX oF tAjUn 18:53, 14 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarix of Tajun ( talk • contribs)
Here are some more biographies that need to be written. Kaldari ( talk) 14:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Do we have an idea of stats for an average editor of Wikipedia? How long has s/he been registered, how many edits s/he has made, and so on? PS. Since we know how many editors there are in this project, do we keep the track of the total number of edits? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
The Philadelphia Inquirer article has an image of the newspaper’s front page, with indications that this is a fair use. I am writing an article on the ‘’The Public Record’’ newspaper, published weekly in Philadelphia, and I am being challenged on Wikimedia Commons on the copyright issue.
How do I make use of this kind of image, in the same way that currently The Philadelphia Inquirer and The New York Times are now appearing on Wikipedia? -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 18:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
I created a Happy Halloween Template.
Copy and past it to your user page. Have a safe halloween.-- Zink Dawg -- 00:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Could anyone please confirm if the PRC govt tightened the GFW again? I'm now getting blockedfrom accessing en.wp(by blocked I mean deprived of access to the entire site, not WP:BLOCK.) for 5mins every time after I make my edit. Initially, I could get the edit i was trying to make done, and occasionally I could escape the block. But nowadays, most of the time I get blocked w/o actually getting the edit done. It's not the problem of my comp - I'm now on a public computer and the problem still persists, and I'm struggling w/ a loooong proxy list trying to get THIS edit done. I'd really appreciate it if anyone know a mean to get rid of this ridiculous censorship, such as a regular proxy(instead of the random ones I'm currently relying on)... And prolly even happier if told it is actually not the problem of GFW... :P Btw, could anyone else who can translates Japanese into English help me get the article Japan Airlines Flight 446 done? I'm changing my connection now and this issue is making me almost impossible to make any useful edit at all. Thx alot. Blodance ( talk) 02:26, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Recently, adobe unveiled "incontext editing". It'd be nice to see if wikipedia could allow for similar editing. Smallman12q ( talk) 15:31, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
The process to appoint the three non-arbitrator members of the Audit Subcommittee is underway. If you are suitably qualified, please see the election pages for the job specification and application arrangements. Applications close 22 October 2009.
For the Arbitration Committee, Roger Davies talk 19:16, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure as to whether this is the best place to post this message. I have just received a rather strange e-mail:
Caro ACEOREVIVED, A página Cumbersa outelizador:ACEOREVIVED na Wikipedia foi criada a 09h29min de 11 de Outubre de 2009 por Chabi; consulte http://mwl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbersa_outelizador:ACEOREVIVED para a versão atual. Esta é uma página nova. Sumário de edição: Criou nova página com '{{Bienbenido}} -- ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 19:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)' Contacte o editor: e-mail: http://mwl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contactar_utilizador/Chabi wiki: http://mwl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outelizador:Chabi Não haverá mais notificações no caso de futuras alterações a não ser que visite esta página. Poderá também restaurar as bandeiras de notificação para todas as suas páginas vigiadas na sua lista de vigiados. O seu amigável sistema de notificação de Wikipedia -- Para alterar as suas preferências da lista de vigiados, visite http://mwl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Watchlist/edit Contacto e assistência: http://mwl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajuda:Cuntenidos
I do not recognise this language. Can any one please help me? What is this all about? If
you understand what this is about, can you please leave a message at my userpage. Many thanks, ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 19:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Not sure where the best place for this is but anyway. Have you ever wished that pages accessed through the mini search form in the sidebar could open in a new window/tab so you could keep the current page open? I've written User:Anakin101/search-new-window.js. It changes the mini search form behavior so that it opens in a new window (or tab, assuming your browser is set to prefer tabs) if you hold down ⇧ Shift, as you press enter/click.
To use it add this to your custom script file:
importScript('User:Anakin101/search-new-window.js');
(which will be, as always, dependent on the skin, monobook.js or modern.js or vector.js etc.) (Alternatively copy & paste the code directly (it's short) or put it in a Greasemonkey script.)
I tested it in IE6/Firefox/Opera but I'd be delighted if others could test it and give feedback. • Anakin (talk) 06:44, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I look for to a assign, who know, how was permit to the Wikimedia for exam. the Samgotian wikipedia, inasmuch as the Samogitian dialect have not ISO code. Doncsecz znánje 15:32, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Slides by Phyllis Nicklin of Birmingham in the 1960s are "available to download and redistribute for non-commercial purposes". Is there a project who batch-upload such stuff? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:41, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
I have a history book that provides a brief biography of a certain viceroy and that may be useful for being used as a source to expand and check the article. But there's a point I'm a little confused. After providing the mere facts (did this, did that, was designated for this, died on such date, etc.) there's some analysis of the viceroy, but instead of analyzing himself the viceroy, the author quotes other historians and what do they said about him (in a style not unlike the one we would use ourselves here on wikipedia). It's clear who do the quotes belong to, but wich book should I cite? The original book of the cited author, wich I have never read, or the book I have read, where the cited author did not wrote anything, but is instead just being cited? MBelgrano ( talk) 02:32, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I linked the birth and death categories on a number of articles at the top of the page like this because I thought this would be a more helpful location for these links rather than stuck somewhere at the bottom.
Nobody objected to this for several weeks until User:John removed them saying that they were duplicate links, and sent me a link to WP:OVERLINK as a reason. However when I looked at this it appeared to support what I had done: To quote.
Repeated links
In general, link only the first occurrence of an item. This is a rule of thumb that has many exceptions, including the following:
This appears to apply to this case, so am I within the rules or not? Cabbawoo ( talk) 11:17, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
I keep seeing new articles with " prefix:<valid page name>" at the end of their titles, for example: Roblox prefix:Talk:Main Page. Here is a list of some. They seem to have been created by different people. Is there some article creation wizard that leads people to do this? Not a serious problem just a puzzle that I would like answered. — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 22:48, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Indeed, from the top of this page. Many thanks. If they start arriving faster than one a day, I might report it as a bug. — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 23:37, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Time is rapidly running out. The closing date for completed applications is 23:59 (UTC) 22 October 2009. If you are interested in becoming one of the three non-arbitrator members of the Audit Subcommittee, see the election pages now for the job specification and application details.
For the Arbitration Committee, Roger Davies talk 17:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
This collaboration is in need for people to help, this message is also posted in the wikiprojects Typography and Writing systems as well as in user namespace. Wikiproject talks may be inactive for medium-to-long periods, so it´s also advertised here to atract contributor´s help. Any suggestions are welcome.
There is currently an oppened collaboration which aims in improving articles related to typefaces and font categorization. If you´re interested in this subject, please visit the collaboration page, add your self and see how you can help. |
- ☩ Damërung ☩ . -- 20:15, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Anybody know anything about Atlantic books [10]? One of their books [11] that I looked at on Google Books consists mostly of material copied from Wikipedia articles. Anyone know the dirt on them? Are they legit and just have poor editorial standards or is the whole operation a scam? Kaldari ( talk) 20:54, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 20#The Alphascript-Amazon-Wikipedia book hoax. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 22:56, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
A significant editor to one of the feminism articles could send them the Standard license violation letter and go from there. -- Cybercobra (talk) 23:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Someone should contact Wikimedia's lawyer, User:MGodwin about this. -- Blargh29 ( talk) 14:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
I would like to create a workgroup on within the WikiProject:Pennsylvania that focuses on the politics and government of Pennsylvania. I have looked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government as a model for this possible workgroup, and I am wondering what it would take to create such a workgroup. Thank you,-- Blargh29 ( talk) 03:11, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Is there some estimation on how many active users does Wikipedia have? "Active" means performing at least a minimal number of edits each day (or at least without very big gaps between edits, and with the last one being somewhat recent). It's not needed to be an exact number, an estimation for getting the idea would suffice MBelgrano ( talk) 13:13, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I'd like to create a Google Maps window or API-like, like in http://routes.wikia.com (e.g. A36). Otherwise, I have to draw a map under Google Maps, hardlink it to the article, and nobody can contribute to modify it... Such a feature would be nice for wikipedia. I had a look at {{fr:KML}}, but it is rather limited (only points, not lines). Regards, Jack ma ( talk) 13:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
[12] - makes one wonder how they determine that an editor is reliable. Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 20:04, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Does this seem suspicious to anyone? Would it be worth emailing that address to explain that I see no problem with the loading of the image, or is it likely to be a spam/phish attempt? OrangeDog ( τ • ε) 15:31, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Has there been any discussion about random geocaching references being made to text as in Cleckheaton, please? I think these look a bit odd and out of place in an encyclopedia.-- Harkey ( talk) 21:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Do somebody have book "The Smithsonian Book of North American Mammals", ISBN 9781560988458. I need information of mustela erminea, I try that on featured article in fi-wikipedia. – EtäKärppä äl' yli päästä perhanaa 09:54, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello. With the proliferation of various flavors of sockpuppet and sockpuppeteer templates, I have worked on consolidating. When it came to {{ Sockpuppeteer}}, there were no inherent contradictions between parameter naming and usage between the variations, and I was able to adjust the existing template to be both backwards compatible and pretty much totally inclusive. However, when it came to {{ sockpuppet}}, that was not the case. I worked on a new template, which can be found at User:Avraham/Sandbox/SPOM with many (but not all) permutations of its usage. However, this would call for a re-mapping of existing parameters. The mapping can be found at WT:SPI#Single sockpuppet template. While it is not complete, it should cover >99.9% of the 49K+ instances of the templates. We have discussed this many times at WT:SPI (see Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Archives/Archive4#First stab at combined sockpuppet template, Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Archives/Archive5#New combined sockpuppet template, and Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Archives/Archive6#Are we giving up on the combined sockpuppet template? for examples. Recently, the issue arose again at WT:SPI#Sock template cleanup. At this point, we would like some more input whether or not there would be any serious opposition to a bot-driven replacement and re-mapping of the templates, that would break most of them while the process is in progress. Thank you. -- Avi ( talk) 16:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
The THUDD article, which is about a 10 second spoof of THX from Tiny Toon Adventures, somehow has avoided deletion for 4 years. It's like a throwback to the old days of Wikipedia when anything had its own article. See it before it gets WP:SNOWed into extinction. -- Blargh29 ( talk) 03:52, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
i left them messages but they ignore them and do not reply. They are also lazy and do not assess their pages i mean i found five with no effort which were not tagged at all and they have thousands unassessed. Pleas notify the local authorities and tell them that that Wikiproject's "members" are not improving this encyclopaedia and their project is a failure if they don't get cracking asap!--anonimous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.114.215.165 ( talk) 02:46, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Why is everyone ignoring my questions i though everyone is welcome here? Who do i complain to about not getting answers here? I tried Wikipedia:Police but it is not there. Are they out?--anonimous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.114.215.165 ( talk) 02:55, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
While conducting an academic study of Wikipedia, I have come into the possession of a large number of rewrites of Wikipedia articles by outside experts, as well as the notation of a great number of errors, omissions, etc. I have no particular interest in acting on the basis of any of this material myself, so please do not invite me to edit, however charmingly. I would, however, like to know if anyone would be interested in having this information with the understanding that the sources involved would remain entirely anonymous. If you would be interested in seeing some of these expert reviews, please leave your email address and I will get in touch with you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.214.112 ( talk) 14:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
I would be happy to see this. Could you send it to apoc2400@gmail.com -- Apoc2400 ( talk) 22:10, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
What is the status of the Flagged Revision idea? Has it been dropped? Is it still under discussion? Is a trial run being done (if so where)? Blueboar ( talk) 15:25, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Uncategorized biographies of living people/BLPPotential needs editors' attention. They are about 16,000 articles to be checked whether are lacking Category:Living people. This will help us to better protect BLPs. You can help. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 10:32, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Yes it's that time of year again. As many as EIGHT Arbitration Committee seats are up for consideration.
Timeline:
Potential candidates are advised to start thinking about their statements. Volunteers are also invited to sign on to help with the housekeeping involved in an election.
Manning ( talk) 16:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Currently we are placing way too much trust in Google to be the deciding factor in AfD discussions.. We come across an AfD on an unsourced article on a foreign subject we know absolutely nothing about. First thing we do is a quick Google search for any mentions in (mostly American) sources. And that's usually all that is done.. if nothing can be found we are most likely to !vote "Delete, cannot find any coverage, no hits on Google" The question I have is, can Google alone be counted on in all cases to be the definitive method to establish whether a subject is notable or not? What about really old references? subjects that have not been digitised? These sources cannot be found on Google, does this mean the article should be deleted for failing WP:V? What about foreign subjects in other languages? This ties in with Wikipedia:Systemic bias and Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Subjective importance yet there's no mention in either of these pages that Google is what's behind it all. I think anyone who participates AfD needs to be educated about not relying primarily on Google to determine how they !vote. Except I don't know how else it can be done?? -- œ ™ 08:10, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
btw, although I don't necessarily disagree with the result, this afd was what influenced me to write the above: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr Prabhat Das Foundation. -- œ ™ 08:14, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
The burden to show coverage of the article topic using reliable sources is on the editors, not the reviewers. Reviewers use a google test just to demonstrate there is, on the surface, a problem with the article topic which needs to be addressed by the article editors. It is indicative of a problem, not conclusive proof of the lack of coverage. Discussion above is drifting between the article topic itself WP:N and content within an article WP:V once WP:N is passed for it. patsw ( talk) 14:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
I noted something interesting about the article John Verbanac. I have evidence the Wikipedia article was used by a political campaign to develop a new campaign strategy. See the page view statistics.
For months, this article about a Pennsylvania lobbyist, received 1-2 page views at most. All of a sudden, from October 17-21, the page views jumped 300% up to around 30 per day. Then on October 22, Pittsburgh mayoral candidate Kevin Acklin launched a campaign attack against Luke Ravenstahl that focused on Ravenstahl's close relationship with Verbanac. The page views went through the roof and are still 200% higher than the average as this story continues to get traction in the media.
So, how can we explain the 300% jump in page views before Acklin campaign launched its missive? Those page views are his campaign staffers consulting the Wikipedia article for background information and sources before they attacked Ravenstahl.
Just an interesting observation of Wikipedia influencing the public debate.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 03:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
I keep getting a 404 error when I try to access Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomy. Does anybody have an idea what's up? Thanks.— RJH ( talk) 17:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Where are the messages that appear below the top bar discussed and approved? The current survey on Wikimedia Commons has got right up my nose as being a deeply flawed and insulting waste of time. I'm wondering where that can be brought up? Yes, I know I can just hide it but that's not the point. CrispMuncher ( talk) 17:08, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
The election, using SecurePoll, has now started. You may:
The election closes at 23:59 (UTC) on 8 November 2009.
For the Arbitration Committee, Roger Davies talk 07:31, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Note that this was moved to WP:RD/C#Xbox 360 backwards compatability. Killiondude ( talk) 03:26, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
I am not pleased about how the sister projects interlink: Currently, the template is
template:sisterlinks, which is rarely added and if it is it is out of the way at the bottom or in the text somewhere due to impagination constraints. Wiktionary's one (
Template:Wiktionary) is only slightly better as it is smaller and users are more happy to put it on top, but often clutter also dictates where it goes.Wikias, which also belong to wikimedia, have to go in the external link section due to policy.
There is a lot of discussion of people wanting to merge all into wikipedia, but that never goes nowhere. I think changing the location of the links to sister projects to outside the article space would be a good solution, see picture for a nice possible space to put it. Obviously no users can edit this in, but if there is a good support, the idea will float to who can internally change it. What do people think? (for simplicity, no discussion of merging the sisters projects nor policy changes, Thanks)
-- Squidonius ( talk) 16:24, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I find it hard to read plain text that spans the width of my browser window, and because I generally have Wikipedia open as a tab in my browser, I don't want to resize the window (and thus all my tabs). Some text-heavy sites used fixed width columns to better approximate the width of printed materials and avoid this issue (e.g., [15] [16]). Would it be possible to change the overall format in Wikipedia to make it easier to read? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agrantx ( talk • contribs) 12:35, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Sometimes it is needed to point small quotes from people when writing an article, such as "X the shouted 'This is a quote!' and then...". When writing topics that took place in a languaje other than english, it should be pointed both the origional quote and an english translation. But in wich order? I can be the original and "which can be translated as..." in brackets, or the translation and a "the original quote is...". Or other better explanations, the question is about the order MBelgrano ( talk) 13:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
This script often used in GA/FA reviews needs adoption by an active user or a WikiProject. Please see my comments here for a centralized discussion. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:50, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Everyone,
I am new to this section of wikipedia, as I created an account just today. I am a design student in NYC, and for one of my classes I chose to redesign wikipedia. I know, I know.. it's not easy! In my opinion there is a lot that could be improved, but I would be very glad if you could answer few questions that will help me to untangle the different realities behind wikipedia.org.
1) Most of users search wikipedia, read articles and leave. Other p[articipate in its editing and discussions. What kind of user are you?
2) name the most common actions you do on wikipedia (read articles and then take a look at the discussion, read article and leave, edit articles)
3) waht do you think wikipedia's design?
4) do you think it's easy to navigate?
5)what would you like to see improved? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gioru-chan ( talk • contribs) 23:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Please weigh in with your thoughts about having Razzie Awards templates at the bottom of film-related articles. Check in here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers#Gaining_consensus:_Razzie_award_templates_at_the_bottom_of_articles. Thanks! Cirt ( talk) 05:46, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I have completed a how-to essay, Wikipedia:Using WebCite, that describes how to use WebCite within Wikipedia. It is an analogue of Wikipedia:Using the Wayback Machine. Perhaps people can review it and proofread.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 01:51, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
This template should only be used on articles with stuff that should be removed: I have reviewed a few and found them to mainly be either sourced or non-controversial, and removed the tag. Obviously any un-sourced controversial material needs to go (and then the tag can too), but there is really no excuse for putting this tag on an article unless one is so unsure about the basic principles of editing that removing the material is "too difficult". Anyone has a couple of spare minutes, please help get the transclusions of this template (not very many) down to zero. Rich Farmbrough, 05:54, 5 November 2009 (UTC).
The article Playhouse Theatre (Seattle) which I recently started has been tagged with {{ essay-like}}. I requested clarification from the person who tagged it as to what he objects to, but none has been forthcoming. I don't see anywhere in the piece I have inserted an opinion of my own; the few opinions in the article are cited (and most are direct quotes).
All I can think is that someone is objecting because I'm not falling into the leaden prose style which has become so predominant on Wikipedia this last few years. The problem with essayistic content, as I understand it, is the injection of the writer's opinions and, secondarily, the problem of undue emphasis. It is not that it is detectable that the article was written by a human who has actually written something else in his or her life.
I won't remove the tag myself, but would appreciate it if someone else either can point out specific issues in the article or remove the tag. - Jmabel | Talk 05:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I've recently initiated an informal WikiProject which will, in theory, help to support the Wikipedia community and its volunteers. I'm looking for a few people to help me get it off the ground, so feel free to join up! Regards, – Juliancolton | Talk 05:17, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Just to let people know, I have started an event to tag that category as it can be shrunk with ease. Please feel free to join. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 02:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
This is an entry about the Wikipedia:United States Government Image Categorizing Week event.
If I go to the Category:United States government images, there are 38 subcategories, and this message before a series of images:
"The following 162 files are in this category, out of 3,521 total."
Today, (8 November 2009 (UTC)), the first image was: File:070310-A-4000S-001.jpg first file, U.S. Army National Guard photo by Spc. Gail Sanders
I was able to add the following category, United States Army National Guard
The second image was: File:19620220-JohnGlennMedical.jpg
I was able to add the following categories:
[[Category:United States Astronaut Hall of Fame inductees]] [[Category:United States Marine Corps officers]] [[Category:United States naval aviators]] [[Category:Recipients of the Air Medal]]
After doing this, I tried to remove the United States government image category from these images. This did not work. I get a message that says the category is not found, and maybe it is in a template. Well, maybe it is a result of a template.
So, my question is whether the Wikipedia:United States Government Image Categorizing Week event is doomed to failure, or whether I have somehow misunderstood my experiences with adding categories to these two images. Perhaps they are not representative of the 3,521 images (more or less by the time this is read). Perhaps these images should be in subcategories instead.
Any advice or assistance would be greatly appreciated. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 01:12, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
For clarification on Dthomsen8's post, I meant adding a template ending such as "-Military-Army, Navy, etc." You can also change the categories by changing what the template says. It's a common thing among these templates to be confusing, so I can understand where your coming from. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 01:45, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Nominations are now open for candidates to run in the Arbitration Committee elections of December 2009 ( WP:ACE2009). In order to be eligible to run, editors must have 1,000 mainspace edits, be at least 18 years of age, and be of legal age in their place of residence; note also that successful candidates must identify to the Wikimedia Foundation before taking their seats. Nominations will be accepted from today, November 10, through November 24, with voting scheduled to begin on December 1. To submit your candidacy, proceed to the candidate statements page. The conditions of the election are currently under discussion; all editors are encouraged to participate. For the coordination cabal, Skomorokh, barbarian 01:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Civility is expected in Wikipedia. Do I have any remedy if I am called foul names? -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 14:56, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
“If you can't answer a man's argument, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names” · Elbert Hubbard. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 14:59, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Defend Each Other. Don't defend yourself. If you think more defense is needed, go out and defend others. If a particular individual is upsetting you, ignore him. Wikipedia is a big place. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 21:36, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Over the past few weeks, several editors have revamped the Wikipedia:Linkrot essay. Please take a look.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 06:40, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
There's only one day to go! The Audit Subcommittee election, using SecurePoll, closes at 23:59 (UTC) 8 November. Three community members will be appointed to supervise use of the CheckUser and OverSight tools. If you wish to vote you must do so urgently. Here's how:
here.
For the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 17:01, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
According to the US Census Bureau, the state of Pennsylvania has 1,728 special district governments and municipal authorities. These are organizations set up by local governments with delegated sovereignty to perform government functions. Some examples are Housing authorities, or stadium authorities. Many have taxation and condemnation power, as well as some level of sovereign immunity. It is my understanding that municipal governments are pretty much notable, even without independent, secondary sources. So, here's my question: would special governmental districts be be similarly inherently notable? If so, is there a bot that could take data from the U.S. Census Bureau Census of Governments and make stubs for them? I think this would be very powerful material for the encyclopedia.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 16:12, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Here is my vision for how this would work. I have downloaded an .xls file with data on the operation of each municipal authority. It is my understanding that a bot can draw data from such a spreadsheet and plug it into an article template. So, here is a possible template: User:Blargh29/Elk Water2. Here is an example of how that could look after the bot takes the data from the spreadsheet: User:Blargh29/Elk Water.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 04:09, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
I have officially made this proposal at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Municipal authorities/special district governments, which is probably a better place to hash out the notability question.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 22:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Did the monobook font change today? I'm not in the beta usability rollout, but it looks.. different. Smaller or more serif-y or more compact or something. No, I didn't change my font size in the browser, it appears to be something unique to Wikipedia. Has it changed, and is there a way to change it back? tedder ( talk) 06:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
I've always had my preferences set to underline links, but today I noticed they're no longer underlined even though the option is still set in My Preferences. Is this something that was recently changed, or is it on my end? -- L P talk 05:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
What percentage of all the articles created by: a. Non-autoconfirmed registered users b. Auto-confirmed registered users get deleted via: 1. speedy deletion, 2. proposed deletion and 3. articles for deletion? Thanks! Fences& Windows 20:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
If anybody is struggling to find information to use to update or improve Wikipedia, a good website to use for this is Brittanica online encyclopedia : http://www.britannica.com/ Harls ( talk) 20:21, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Interested editors are invited to participate in the
SecurePoll feedback and workshop.
SecurePoll was recently used in the
Audit Subcommittee election, and has been proposed for use for the
upcoming Arbitration Committee election at this current
request for comment (RFC). Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.
For the Arbitration Committee,
Dougweller (
talk)
09:17, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
In a recent PBS program concerning a group of people that walked on all fours, it was discovered that there was an anomaly in the medulla oblongata that affected balance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.251.73.244 ( talk) 20:59, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering if there are any open discussions regarding the Wikipedia logo, its appearance and so forth. Thanks. SharkD ( talk) 04:48, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
HAI2U! Policy-ish question... So, for many years several editors from many diverse articles have been dealing with a persistent POV-warrior who takes every possible opportunity to misstate facts, misrepresent sources, and misapply policy to service his agenda. We have let this go on literally for years, and several of us have come to the realization that additional assumption of good faith is pointless. A topic ban or community ban is likely in order, but it is going to take us a while to assemble all the evidence. However, I've seen plenty of editors accused of harboring "drop files" or "attack pages" and I want to check with the community before starting down this road. There is, in my mind, no doubt that we can put together a very compelling case -- we have editors and admins from multiple articles that have fought his bias for years -- but the patterns are so long term and the incidents are spread across so many articles that is going to take some type of coordination to put together a coherent and compelling case. In normal circumstances I'd just do it locally with vi and upload when done, however to really give the case justice we need to have a place we can gather and store evidence, and collaborate on assembling the case before presenting it to ANI and/or ArbCom for adjudication. What is the best course of action? Thanks in advance! // Blaxthos ( t / c ) 18:19, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
I look for Wikipedian in South Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. The cause: in South Bethlehem was work the Slovene tidings: Amerikanszki Szlovénczov Glász and if somebody look for archive tidings and if take a photo. Doncsecz znánje 20:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Where can I shop a Wikipedia shirt? I'm a contributor to wikipedia, and I though I do not must sent money, but I want to buy a shirt. Pérez ( talk) 09:18, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
can File:Eminem at DJ Hero Party.jpg be transfered to commons? i'd transfer it myself, but i'm not sure of copyright of that image -- SveroH ( talk) 14:44, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
There is a new shared IP template for use on corporate networks: {{ SharedIPCORP}}. Figured we needed one for corporate networks since we have {{ SharedIPEDU}}, {{ SharedIPPublic}}, {{ SharedIPUSMilitary}}, and {{ MobileIP}}. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 21:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
There's a new essay at Wikipedia:Offline sources that explains the use of offline sources within Wikipedia, a frequent source of confusion among editors.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 06:12, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
A user whose only purpose so far on Wikipedia has been reverting my edits on this article, " Kitab al Majmu", has now taken the name of my old account (Funkynusayri), before I changed the name to the current one, and his account now sill redirects to mine! Isn't there some sort of protection against this? See revision history of the Kitab al Majmu article for more info. Furthermore, my old account name was rather unique, no one else would make it up themselves unless they wanted to harass me, so can't it be blocked for new users or something? FunkMonk ( talk) 06:45, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
I would like to get the attention of some moderators to the article about World Genseiryū Karate-dō Federation (WGKF). In the past, Peter Lee has caused some trouble on this and also on other articles, like Genseiryu, writing unfactual stories. In the recent months he has ruined the article on WGKF with name slandering, false accusations and so on, all without backing it up. Of course he cannot. The only thing he wants is to bring the WGKF and persons inside that organization into discredit. I don't care what you people know about karate or about Genseiryu, but if you would just have a look at what he write, you can clearly see that everything he says is totally against the policies of Wikipedia. I have reverted the story MANY times, but he keeps reverting it back, calling ME a vandal. It is Peter Lee who is the vandal, for he is turning a NPOV story into a personal ferry tale, full of unfactual accusations that is putting other people in a bad daylight. It's now like a personal vendetta to him, for he simply keeps going on with this. None of his claims and accusations he wants to back up with evidence. I warned him on his talk page, but he keeps deleting everything there. Please, point out to him that he cannot just slander somebody's name on Wikipedia, just because he doesn't like the person... Thank you for your help! MarioR 03:26, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
A discussion regarding the appropriateness of using unofficial logos in an infobox to represent a university has begun at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Universities#Using_.22unofficial.22_logos_in_university_infoboxes. Your input is welcome. Thanks, -- Hammersoft ( talk) 17:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I've posted some questions regarding new Wikipedia users on the talk page of the Welcoming Committee. If you have the time to help us out, please go have a look, much appreciated! Regards, Nettrom ( talk) 19:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
User:Youve's Talking Page Who's youve?-- Badbread123 ( talk) 06:07, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Would you please vote for the Friendly discussion here? Thank you. Btilm 01:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I recently brought up a subject on the FfD talk page, but noone responded. This seemed like a next logical place to point it out. Any input would be appreciated.-- Rockfang ( talk) 06:23, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Lawrence County, Pennsylvania#Historical markers is a copyright violation. See the talk page. I stumbled on this while doing updates to every Category:Pennsylvania counties entry for a county. Pursuing this copyright violation is beyond my interests or skills. Please help. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 01:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
What are we going to do about CAT:TEMP? It's an absolute nightmare. Most of it is old user talk pages full of auto-messages which can be safely deleted. It's apparently even got socks in it (which I can't confirm - the sock cats have the user pages, but this one has the talk pages). It's pretty useless as is. Any ideas? — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:19, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I found out that runcible has several WP entries, namely :
As runcible redirects to runcible spoon, I was at first going to make it a disambig page. Then I figured out that according to the article runcible spoon, runcible is an adjective used not only for spoons. Moreover, all other "runcible" articles are about the same thing. So I don't know what to do anymore, and don't really care, this is why I leave this message right there hoping that someone interested in it will do whatever he/she finds the most accurate. Skippy le Grand Gourou ( talk) 16:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
There has been an earlier attempt to come up with a logo for wiktionary. The Dutch wiktionary did not initiate this drive but we did loyally adopt its outcome, as did numerous other sister sites. Sadly, the anglophone wiktionary did what anglophones always do: if it is not your idea, you boycott it. (This holds for the metric system, for the Kyoto protocol and for many another occasion.)
So, this time we boycott you. The Dutch wiktionary will not adopt any logo that comes out of the current procedures. They simply lack democratic credibility and represent an imposition by en.wiktionary.
If you really want a different logo than the tile one this is the proper procedure:
nl:Gebruiker:Jcwf Jcwf ( talk) 21:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Ever want to engage in discussion of the subject matter of a topic, but can't because it's WikiChat ("text whose purpose is anything other than improving the related article—usually a comment about the subject an article, rather than about the wording or information in the article")? There's now a wiki in which to do it in which each entry is tied to an en-Wikipedia article: WikiChat. Give it a try! TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 22:42, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
This is a reminder that the nominations phase of the December 2009 elections to select new members of the Arbitration Committee, as well as the Request for Comment|Request for Comment on the conditions for the elections and the 2010 Committee, will close on November 24, in one day's time.
If you have been considering running as a candidate in this year's election to the Committee, now is the time to make the decision. It's worth noting that there are twenty-two candidates at the time of writing, six fewer than last year, and so with eight seats available the field is not as competitive as might have been expected. All editors who had made 1,000 mainspace edits by November 10, 2009, are over 18 years of age and of the age of majority in their nation of residence, and are willing to identify themselves to the Wikimedia Foundation are eligible to stand as candidates. You can declare your candidacy by following the instructions at the candidate statements page.
The Request for Comment on the Arbitration Committee covers the conditions for the elections and the Committee in 2010. Specific issues under debate include term lengths, number of seats, election methods, ballot transparency, the tranche system, threshold for successful candidacies and voter eligibility. If you want to participate in the discussion on any of these issues, you have less than a day to have your voice heard. For the coordinators, Skomorokh, barbarian 01:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Zzyzx11 ( talk) 05:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
How can one find the content and history of articles that have been merged into others? There was an article on-poetry. This was suddenly merged into digital poetry, and now I can't find what got merged out of exist'nce. Kdammers ( talk) 09:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
It should just link to Sanskrit, since Sanskrit language redirects to Sanskrit. -- 76.211.91.135 ( talk) 00:45, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Is this really an "official" Twitter account as it claims? – xeno talk 18:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed a number of novice editors and IP editors make the same error: They delete some prose along with its reference, but because other parts of the article may call for that same reference (e.g., like <ref name="fubar"/>, where the original "fubar" ref was deleted), it leads to lost information and errors. This seems to me like it's primarily a design flaw of Wikipedia, and it's difficult to explain to new editors what they need to do to prevent the issue or to fix it when it occurs.
Does anyone have suggestions for how best to approach this issue, or how best to explain it to new editors? — Notyourbroom ( talk) 23:22, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
There are 13,418 English places listed in the Domesday Book of 1086; and many of the wikipedia articles for English settlements make reference to their inclusion as this is often the first record of a particular place. These articles usually include a link back to the Domesday Book article.
There is a category Places listed in the Domesday Book which is an attempt to link and organise these pages - but the task of manually adding this category to every appropriate article is daunting.
There is not currently a bot to automate this task, so if editors reviewing English settlement/placename articles can add this category to pages where appropriate this will help with categorisation of these articles.
Josephus ( talk) 10:52, 23 November 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
I think link rot is one of the biggest threats to Wikipedia's future, so I designed three userboxes to spread the word about link rot and how to combat it with WebCite and the Internet Archive. Please help spread the word.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 04:14, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
archiveurl= | This user combats link rot when creating citations |
IA | This user uses the Internet Archive. |
I use User:Dispenser/Checklinks through the user script toolbox.js. Protonk ( talk) 04:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
There's a great bot that combats link rot by automatically archiving with WebCite any new citation links. See User:WebCiteBOT. I love the userboxes btw.-- œ ™ 18:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
When do the article assessment tables get updated? I thought maybe overnight, but I have waited several days, and no update so far, at least not on the Puerto Rico project. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 12:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
List of zombie novels - a huge list of non-notable novels by non-notable authors. This would be like putting all of the bands that don't meet WP:BAND into List of punk albums What's the consensus on lists like these? Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 05:07, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to request a general moratorium on the use of the phrase "is not notable". That's a value judgment about the subject of an article, and can have BLP implications. "Does not show evidence of notability" is a value judgment about the article itself, and is appropriate in deletion discussions and elsewhere.
Thank you. We now return you to your regularly scheduled ranting. -- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 16:34, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to request a general moratorium on the use of the phrase "is not notable". You might as well ask for a moratorium on people saying "it's cruft" and "fuck" because it's just not happening... -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 17:04, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I have just watched this video which seems to suggest that content in Wikipedia articles is now colour coded in terms of its reliability (based upon contributor history etc). However, I can't see any such colour coding. I have created an account and am now using the Beta version, and even performed a small edit myself but cannot see any colour coding. Is this feature now in place, or is it just planned? If it is in place, how do I use it, please? Spin Dryer ( talk) 23:22, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
closed nm
|
---|
I got to thinking, I can name some really influential editors who tend to support deletion, architects of many of our current policies, but I can't think of any editors who are super influential editors who support inclusion, or saving articles. Who is, in your opinion the most influencial editor who supports inclusion, or saving artilces? I am talking about editors who are admins or arbcomes, who have created policy and been very influential in that respect. I am looking for names, and why please. Thank you in advance. Ikip ( talk) 21:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
|
Wikipedia is an interactive encyclopedia with contributors from all across the world. Please be aware that threats or messages that promote harm or establish a sense of danger to the recipient are still considered against the law by means of harassment, stalking and even defamation. The Wikimedia Foundation routinely reports private user information such as the offender's real name, physical location and IP addresses to authorities closest to their location. If you post ill meaning, harmful or violent messages to any user on Wikipedia, including those who edit without registering, you can face real life consequences. Web site administrators have access to your private information and can flag your IP address or user account with several notices that publicly show information such as internet service provider or school, company and network names and titles. |
Hey guys, I decieded to make this into a template. I have always used it on my talk page to thwart unwanted and even digusting messages from appearing on my talk page. I originally created a page with it, which can be found here, back in 2008. Other people have used it and even edited it at times. Let me know what you think about it. I don't see it being a legal threat but instead a valid warning. Thanks. -- A3RO (mailbox) 23:23, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
I edited a table to fix the formatting a little, but now the center part of the table is no longer centered. Help?
Here's a link to the table.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine#Action_of_an_alpha_type_Stirling_engine —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.61.90.27 ( talk) 04:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
That was me btw. ;) --
Markspace (
talk)
04:35, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I've been tagging a lot of talk pages with a wikiproject tag lately. As I've been through, I've noticed about 95% of the musicians, albums, songs, and groups that aren't "known" (by anyone not specifically into that band, really) have had their fair use images removed by bot. The bot posted on the talk pages, asked for a description, and deleted the image a mere week later, as obviously nobody provided a description.
With very few exception, most of these images were acceptable fair use for identifying the album, and were simply deleted by a (In my opinion, moronic) automated process. If nobody watched those articles, the bot tagged and deleted the picture, simply on the grounds that nobody noticed and added "This is fair use because it..." in the short lived week.
If I were to provide a list of these images, can they be undeleted, and have a generic fair use explanation added that they represent a work for which no free image can be made available? - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 01:10, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I created this template [This template], the opposite of {{
Do not move to Commons}}, [exists] for a number of reasons, but I would like to know if there's a better solution and generally what everyone thinks. Hopefully we can agree that the problem exists at least (except if you disagree about the utility of Commons, in which case this thread may not be for you).
The problem is thus: only some of the many images tagged as {{ PD-US}} are suitable for transfer to Commons. In certain circumstances content created in other countries can be used on Wikipedia quite happily under PD-US but is totally unsuitable for Commons, which requires that it be public domain in its country of origin and the United States. Until now, there has existed a useful way of acknowledging that an image isn't suitable for Commons, {{ Do not move to Commons}}. But it isn't used widely enough that we can safely (by any measure) deduce that "all files not tagged with that are suitable for Commons". Instead, each must be reviewed by hand - a long, tiresome process, which introduces the occasional human error.
I think I'm right in saying that the "It exist happily on Wikipedia, then it was moved to Commons, deleted there as unsuitable, and never seen again" argument is a reasonably common complaint of the system at the moment. Hopefully we can sort a bit of this out. My idea is thus: rather than / as well as having lots of different templates with varying criteria for saying something can be moved to Commons (e.g. the various bot-transfer templates), we have [increase the usage of this] one clear, obvious template. It could also be included by default in templates which always mean that a file can be transferred. Alternatively, we could not [persuade people to] use this template, and instead prefer to use a new parameter of {{
PD-US}} for this purpose. Would there be support for a push of this kind to get all PD-US files clarified in some fashion?
I didn't intend for this to be quite such a long post, so if any further clarification is needed, just ask. - Jarry1250 [ In the UK? Sign the petition! ] 18:36, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
For those familiar with the history of South Tyrol. It is certain that Wilhelm Dilthey, God bless his soul, died on 1 October, 1911, but it is less certain where he died. Did he die in
It is easy to commit an anachronism here. What do the WP regulations say about cases such as this? Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 17:48, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Below is a C&P from the the Village Pump archive. I have included it here so that the path of discussion can be easily referred to. There were three people on that thread. The first was Pat Pending, the next was - Tagishsimon and lastly 24.172.36.194 [1] or Dave Huffman.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(assistance)/Archive_9
This is a problem that has not gone away and I fear that it may get worse as this person has now threatened to edit the page daily. What it's all about is the English Soul group, The Foundations who had the classic hits in the 1960's, Baby, Now That I've Found You and Build Me Up Buttercup In the past this person has blanked the article page and he's done it on more than one occasion. He's come back now and it's likely that this disruptive vandalistic behaviour will continue. Besides blanking the page when he can't get his own way he has popped message on it saying "come and visit us at" and he gives his website url. He has also posted threatening legal warnings on the article page as if it was a signpost outside private premises. He has also on more than one occasion put all the songs of his CD album individually as if they were single releases. He mixed them in with the Foundations discography.
I've carried on the thread and I've replied to Tagishsimon, hopefully he and others will read it and understand what's really at stake here. ( George-Archer ( talk) 16:23, 4 April 2009 (UTC))
Hello, will someone please help me. There is someone from the USA by the name of Dave Huffman laying claim to the name "The Foundations" who keeps inserting his "legal claim" into the article. To the best of my knowlege, there are only two people who "own" the name in the UK - Clem Curtis & The Foundations, and Colin Young & The New Foundations. Will someone please advise. Pat Pending ( talk) 12:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
This person is not "laying claim" to "The Foundations" name but has legally owned the name and all performance rights to "The Foundations" in the US since the mid 70's. This was obtained when both Clem Curtis and Colin Young left the group after breaking ties with their management company in 1970. Both left the group under their own free will to pursue other projects. All of the other "original" UK members of the group also returned home and gave up any rights to "The Foundations" name at that time. I really appreciate you ignoring the legal aspects of this discussion. I have been performing with and recording with the group legally longer that any of your so called "original" members. This is my last statement on Wikipedia as I have learned that this website is a total farce not at all interested in the true facts and they are as follows:
Clem Curtis left the group even before Buttercup was recorded. Colin Young left the group shortly after. The group did not disband in 1970 as stated but was reorganized in the US and has been recording and performing ever since. Believe what you wish but there are apparently three "Foundations". One owned by Clem Curtis? One owned by Dave Huffman One owned by Colin Young?
The question marks are there due to the fact that I have not checked to make sure that they have legal rights in England but I'm assuming that they do.
You seem to be willing to accept the English groups but not the American group that has been in legal existence longer that either of the British groups. That is your God given right to hide your head in the sand and ignore the facts but it is my God given legal right to state the true facts and you, Sir have taken that right from me. Hope you're satisfied. I'm through trying to have the facts stated correctly on Wikipedia.
Dave Huffman The Foundations US www.thefoundations.us
dear Wikipedists,
who can help me translating the additional information in the dutch article on Cab kaye at http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cab_Kaye to the English one? -- NorbertvR ( talk) 17:31, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone have a photo of the Travel Air Mystery Ship "Texaco 13" that is on display at the museum. I would like to use a PD image to illustrate an article on Frank Hawks. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 21:04, 4 July 2009 (UTC).
Hi from the
Basque Country!
This is a message to the administrators of English Wikipedia or for someone who can help me with this issue:
I´m an user and contributor of the
Basque Wikipedia.,
Basque language is one of the oldest in Europe and the world, it has thousands of years old and is one of the few languages that survived the arrival of Indo-Europeans to Europe. Perhaps being one of the oldest nations or countries of the world not even have our own state, but our language is our homeland and pride. It put us on the map and give a reference recognizable to English speakers, the city of
Pamplona (
Iruña in basque language), where they celebrate the internationally famous festival of
San Fermin is in the
Basque Country.
After this brief introduction I would kindly ask you this request:
On July 15, 2009, in the Basque Wikipedia we exceed the figure of 40,000 articles, today (August 26, 2009) we have 42,000 articles, achievement of which we are very proud, because if we compare proportionately the number of speakers of the Basque language (about a million) with other Wikipedia versions of languages spoken in more than one state or nation in the world with millions of speakers is like to be proud.
Because one of the aims of Wikipedia Project in addition to expanding human knowledge worldwide is also to expand the knowledge of all languages of mankind: From the Basque Wikipedia we wanted to make the request to the users and particularly to the Administrators of the English wikipedia would be possible if you put the link to Basque Wikipedia in your English Wikipedia´s language list of everyone in your main cover ("Languages" section: as is currently the case Galician or Catalan language) and the Wikipedia list of more than 40,000 items that is below your main entrance page ("Wikipedia languages" section). Since English is currently the most powerful, influential and widespread in the world (your wikipedia already has 3,000,000 articles), the presence of Basque Wikipedia in your list of the world would be a great help to supervival of our language and their knowledge in the world.
Awaiting your reply.
Greetings from the Basque Wikipedia.
.
--
Euskalduna
(tell me) 15:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
85.86.101.120 (
talk)
We are making a lot of great progress with the Bolognia Push 2009. If you are not currently involved, perhaps consider contributing as we are always looking for more help at the dermatology task force. Feel free to e-mail me for all the details. --- kilbad ( talk) 22:47, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
anybody know what happened to the search option when clicking a redlink? apparently a new template is being used, and it's been omitted. -- emerson7 18:26, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
I have to protest that User:Mrlodotcom have not repsect other users (me). He said my manner is uncivilized, and said I am low-level, as he has better English level than me.-- Antonytse ( talk) 13:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
I am involved in a minor dispute at the above article. This dispute does not involve any policy or guideline issues... it is purely an editorial disagreement over whether to include a particular photo or not. (see Talk:Phil Hartman#Photos for the arguments). We could use some outside opinions to resolve the dispute. Blueboar ( talk) 16:43, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
In this article, it is written that Tumansky had received an award in 1946 (Gospremii of the USSR). What is this award? The USSR State Prize? or something else? Thanks for your help. Skiff ( talk) 08:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
There are three featured portal candidate discussions that could use some input. Comments would be appreciated at the individual discussion subpages. Please see WP:FPORTC. Cirt ( talk) 03:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
I made a template called Template:Cheesepuff but no one is using it. How can I make it more popular? Please don't ban me for editing pages because I adding wrong stuff to a page once before I made an account. Dipotassitrimanganate ( talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 15:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC). Dipotassitrimanganate ( talk) 15:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC) 15:34, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
It's come to my attention recently that we have a large number of "<year> <sport team name>" ( example) articles where we have logos created after that year being placed on that year's season article. Continuing the above example, the current logo for the University of Pittsburgh Panthers sports teams is File:PittPanthers.png. This logo was created by the university and put into use in 2005. Yet, the logo was/is being used on season articles that predate 2005 (see the above example for the 1975 Panthers).
I feel that this use is revisionist history. Logos created after a particular season are not the logos of the team for the year in question. They operated and performed under a different logo, and their identity is tied to that logo, not a future logo. Encyclopedias encapsulate history, not revise it and update it to current marketing materials.
I'm finding I am being reverted by a particular user. A discussion has evolved on my talk page at User_talk:Hammersoft#Pitt logos. I'd like to see a wider discussion here on this forum regarding this issue.
Should current logos of sports teams be used in the infoboxes of earlier iterations of the team to represent that team when the team predates the current logos? -- Hammersoft ( talk) 12:30, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
There is also a discussion about this issue here on the College Football Wikiproject if anyone is interested. CrazyPaco ( talk) 20:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I am working on a new article about Steven Hayne, the primary medical examiner for Mississippi, and while it is NPOV and very well sourced, much of the content is negative, (this negativity is an accurate barometer of the sources I've been able to find so far). The sources I've found also show him to be very litigious ( http://www.reason.com/blog/show/129975.html), so what is wikipedia's policy with regard to individual contributors when faced with a defamation lawsuit? Huadpe ( talk) 05:54, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
In his artcle, it is written that he was made Honorary Citizen of Kuybyshev in 1982, but the link to this city is a disambiguation page. So he is Honorary Citizen of which city? Thanks for your help. Skiff ( talk) 07:42, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
As a result of a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship#The "no negative comments" stipulation, and an alternative, the page Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Vetting has been created. This is not an alternative to RfA; the whole point is the potentially disheartening stuff is said in private before a prospect agrees to go through RfA. — Sebastian 22:22, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
If the no references template is removed by an editor, but no references are in or have been added to the article, what should be done next? I added the no references template in July. I added it again today after seeing that it was removed, and I will watch to see what happens, but perhaps there is something else I should know or do.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 17:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
I've just made a fairly comprehensive how-to for sound file editing, using the free software program Audacity, at Wikipedia:Wikivoices/Episode_48. Would this be useful more generally? Shoemaker's Holiday Over 206 FCs served 08:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Please help. This is not in the text of the article. In fact, I don't even know if it is an error. Who is Parr?
See John F. Kennedy, Jr., at the very bottom, there is a blue box. Parr killed JFK????
I would like to fix this if this is an error or vandalism. But when I click "edit this page", I can't even find the Parr word. Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 21:22, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
1. Explain to me who is Parr.
2. Should this be fixed?
3. How to fix it?
[User:Suomi Finland 2009|Suomi Finland 2009]] ( talk) 21:24, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm sure many of you caught the news article about Adler and Alfaro's research in wiki trustability being applied to live Wikipedia. It just so happens that I have been working on a similar problem from a completely different direction during my research and am ready to share this work with the community. I have designed and implemented a user script modification that I call HAPPI and am currently running a non-profit/academic analysis of its usefulness. The script adds a couple of new controls that will appear over the edit pane. These controls will allow you to toggle the highlighting of wiki text while you edit it. If you'd like to give it a try, please see the documentation page for more information. -- E poch F ail ( talk| contribs) 15:05, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
First of all, I wrote for help in the dispute resolution section and after 5 days got zero response. I'm not trying to cross-post but I need help here.
Northport, New York ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) User:Tavix has repeatedly removed large amounts of well referenced/cited content from Northport, New York with complete disregard for prior or post discussion with other editors, explanation of existing Wikipedia policies disputing his edits, and multiple editor warnings. He has removed the names of nine people from the article without any justification despite that most have perfectly valid source reference citations from trustworthy sources. I have explained how his edits were both destructively unnecessary (a few just needed a 'citation needed' tag and somebody could have easily added it) and often against Wikipedia policy (removing valid newspaper article references only because the link was no longer online), to other edits which I can't even figure out why he arbitarily decided he didn't like it (no explanation is also against WP policy). He has not only refused to justify or explain his edits but he has three times re-reverted back to his destructive mass removal edits. He has refused to discuss the changes (one or two may be valid removal candidates but certainly not obvious), ignored multiple warnings, and continues to (at this point) vandalize the article. I would also like a temporary ban be placed on this editor so he can learn to stop being destructive and start being constructive and cooperative.
-- Fife Club ( talk) 03:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm trying to find the old WP: namespace page where people stored wikicurrency (in Wikis, of course). You can see the symbol for the currency on things such as this postage stamp. Can someone point me to it? It was active as a toy project around 2004/5, and listed how many Wikis each of a few hundred Wikipedians had. Thanks, +sj + 21:00, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Please read here. What about the press links in our articles ? To analyse, you can translate this coming from es Wikipedia. What can we do ? Manuel González Olaechea ( talk) 15:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
There are a number of places, particularly in Canada, that bear the name Capilano. Does anyone know the origin of this name, please? Bridgeplayer ( talk) 22:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Is there anywhere us young'uns can sit around the campfire, and listen to Oldtimers talk about what things were like in 2001-2? I'm curious whether things started out amicable and then gradually got more conflicted; how soon after creation the inclusionist/deletionist camps started forming; when nationalist POV pushing raised its ugly head; how vandals were handled (escalating level-1 thru level-4 warnings? I suspect not, but just don't know); etc.
I don't even really know how many oldtimers there are left. There don't seem to be many. Natural attrition, or have us (relatively) whipersnappers driven them away?
If we created WP:GRAMPA (or perhaps WP:LISTENTOYOURELDERSYOUPUNKS), where people with an account created before, say, 2004, could reminisce, and people with newer accounts could stop by occasionally, listen for a while, maybe ask a question, and bask in their reflected glory, I think that would be kind of cool. If such a place already exists, that's even better. -- Floquenbeam ( talk) 21:26, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
Just to let people know, I have created the redirect Template:Excessive so I (and others) can convey the message without using the slightly derogatory slang. What do people think about switching them round so Template:Fancruft is the redirect? OrangeDog ( talk • edits) 03:44, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Done The template now resides at {{ Overdetailed}}. If anything explodes as a result, let me know. Skomorokh 18:00, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
What do people think of this new product and the possible interactions between google sidewiki and here? I have added a sidewiki entry for the Article Rescue Squadron and I see Matt Sanchez and the front page already have comments. It will be interesting to see if people try to change articles after reading the sidewiki. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 06:58, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm anonymous Wikipedia user contributing to articles on Immigration, Ethnic groups and Foreign relations related to Pakistan and I do believe, a lot of things still missing because the biggest challenge is lack of reliable sources on a particular subject. Recently, I got an idea of compiling a book containing statistics of Non-indigenous ethnic groups living or working in Pakistan. The population of a particular ethnic group would be obtain respectively from their diplomatic missions in Pakistan. The actual reason for such publication is Wikipedia and if book's content could be use for citing as sources to Wikipedia articles. Any suggestion or comment would be highly appreciated.-- 119.155.10.14 ( talk) 11:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
What do you find are the worst, most distasteful things on wikipedia? (I'm interested to see what people hate about wikipedia, and perhaps find a way to fix it). Smallman12q ( talk) 13:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I come here at the suggestion of an administrator, Sarek.
Is it better to write just 2-3 articles well and then, when much progress is made (temporarily finished) then to move on. Or write hundreds of articles, with just minor improvements, but having 2x or 3x the number of edits. I am thinking about doing the first strategy. What is consider more "prestigious" or valued? Suomi Finland 2009 ( talk) 21:05, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
I have an old book that has no DOI/ISBN, but it does have a Library of Congress Catalog Card Number -- is there a convenient way to use this with {{cite book}} ? User A1 ( talk) 12:45, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
There seems to be some confusion between Wanamaker Organ and the talk page Wanamaker Grand Organ because there are two names. Therefore, going from Wanamaker Organ, the article, to the talk page at Wanamaker Grand Organ those two are inadequately linked, and the talk page comes up unranked, even though the class and importance are specified for Philadelphia. I do not know how to untangle this situation, but I am sure someone here does.-- DThomsen8 ( talk) 19:03, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Can someone use Webcite or another archival program to archive Media Create's game ranking page. It's updated on a weekly basis listing the top 50 game sales in Japan. They do later republish this information, but the books are quite expensive, especially when you add import fees. They do not archive the site and archive.org doesn't do so regularly enough. 陣 内 Jinnai 23:37, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Is it anyone who knows what this peninsula close to Rijeka Crnojevica, Montenegro is really called? The reason for the question is that i've been working on the sv-wiki version of Rijeka Crnojevica in almost a month, and i still don't know what this place, that is located close to RC is named. If that's not revealed in the article, it certainly would not be a selected article... But that is what i want with this article, i want it to be at least recommended...
I would be very grateful for knowing the name on this place, and i hope somebody here could help me...
Thanks!
Perolinka ( talk) 00:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
According to The Uranium Information Centre, their web site no longer exit and will be closed on 19 December. On the web site it said that much of the information it contained is available on http://aua.org.au and http://world-nuclear.org It was a widely used source for quite a number of articles, as shown by the Special:Search/"uic.com.au". These references may become dead link if we don't fix it. -- Quest for Truth ( talk) 05:37, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I'm just curious how Featured Article selection works for Portals. I also want to know whether or not a Featured Article of the week is possible for a Portal. And lastly; can a Portal pick an article not voted as a Featured Article on the main but considered a FAC by the supporting Wikiproject? Thank you -- Marx01 Tell me about it 05:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Why is there no list anymore of the highest number of red references without an article. That was a useful facility to have ? -- Penbat ( talk) 19:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I have almost single handedly done tons of work recently on workplace bullying, narcissism, personal boundaries and ( I hope) psychological manipulation. It would be nice if someone else helped, preferably an academic.-- Penbat ( talk) 19:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I recommended to Penbat on their talk page that they seek input here regarding the desirability of creating a separate 'free standing' article, devoted exclusively to the concept of "psychological manipulation". In my opinion that are already other articles in existence that potentially address the topic such as psychological abuse and the "psychological" section of the coercion article and perhaps even others as well. My concern is with avoiding the creation of a content fork WP:CFORK, but personally I'm open to any reasonable (and referenced) argument that allows me to see some 'daylight' between what appear to me to be very closely overlapping categories. Personally, I'd rather see resources devoted toward improving the closely related articles that already exist. cheers Deconstructhis ( talk) 19:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm glad that the other editor mentioned an alternative place for you to make enquiries that might prove more potentially useful than the one I provided, my hope was to encourage you to communicate with others and attempt to move forward smoothly through consensus. Yes, I understand that you have located a source which you believe supports a necessary distinction should be made between "psychological manipulation" and psychological abuse in the encyclopedia. When I suggested that it might be a good idea to communicate with other editors, it was to encourage you to garner other opinions (and perhaps 'counter references') on the matter. Let me try to explain my current perspective based on what I've read so far a different way. If a new article appeared tonight in Wiki and its conceptual content mirrored the proposed version of psychological manipulation that you posted yesterday and I was asked to vote on it in an afd, I'd vote for merger, probably with "psychological abuse". This doesn't mean that I think that you're "wrong" in your position, or that there's anything implicitly bad about your source, I'm suggesting that its possible that many other editors might hold the same position as myself, that what's being talked about is an issue of semantics in splitting the words "manipulation" and "abuse" and that it's an example of content forking. Then again, a large number of other editors might thoroughly agree with the interpretation you're putting forward and a quick consensus would be reached in support of it. My attempt at encouraging you to communicate directly with other editors on the matter was in hope that if it was the former, that you might be saved more time and disappointment. Really, the only way to find out, is to ask other editors in an appropriate forum, in a direct fashion, ahead of time. cheers Deconstructhis ( talk) 03:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I posted about this event a while ago, but let me remind you again, and make the last minute call for presentation applications. This conference will be held on November 22 at the University of Tokyo. The details are posted at this site, and a tentative program will appear soon. Meanwhile we are still accepting applications to lightning talks and other form of small sessions here. The deadline is close, so please contact the staff asap if you need to know anything about it. -- Makotoy ( talk) 22:06, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
There was recently an article about WP in TIME. It discusses things like how only 13% of editors are female, and how the top-level contributors are largely from a narrow demographic. This has sparked a lot of discussion, and it's gotten me thinking...
In a system like WP, when those in control come from a largely homogeneous demographic, the consensus will be biased towards the POVs common to that demographic. Furthermore, this will happen even with well-meaning editors. It can be hard to tell the difference between a lone crackpot and someone from a significant but underrepresented group on WP.
I think it's extremely important that underrepresented groups have their voices heard, for the sake of NPOV. It seems like there should be a policy and/or procedure for people who feel that their arguments are not being considered due to such a systemic bias. In other words, they have a valid argument with verifiable sources, but consensus is still against them. Is there any such policy, or related discussion? What are people's thoughts on this?-- Elplatt ( talk) 01:04, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I've cleaned up the article about the hoax, and it is now at Hungry Beast ( AfD discussion). Various editors have reverted the hoax edits themselves. They were all perpetrated by 203.45.16.153 ( talk · contribs) who claimed to be Allan Hogan back in April, but which reliable sources state to have been Andrew Denton this month. Uncle G ( talk) 17:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
I wonder if there is a salt request template that can be put on articles that are persistently being recreated after having been speedily deleted several times. I see that Template:Salt was deleted some time ago, so I am reluctant to recreate it. Is this the best venue for this sort of discussion? Basket of Puppies 18:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Anyone know if it will happen any time soon ? It would be nice to get back full statistical data on internal links etc and email alerts of article changes for example.-- Penbat ( talk) 15:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi all,
Although we removed the centralnotice that was up, the Wikimedia Foundation is still looking for volunteers to serve as subject area experts or to sit on
task forces that will study particular areas and make recommendations to the Foundation about its strategic plan. You may apply to serve on a task force or register your name as an expert in a specific area at
http://volunteer.wikimedia.org.
The Foundation's strategy project is a year-long collaborative process which is hosted on the strategy wiki, at
http://strategy.wikimedia.org. Your input is welcome (and greatly desired) there. When the task forces begin to meet, they will do their work transparently and on that wiki, and any member of the community may join fully in their work. This process is specifically designed to involve as many community members as possible.
Any questions can be addressed to me either on my talk page here or
on the strategy wiki or by email to philippe at wikimedia.org.
I hope you'll consider joining us!
-
Philippe
00:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Proposal at Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee code of conduct. Input would be appreciated. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 09:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
I've posted a new essay documenting my thoughts on the project's status as an encyclopedia, although they do not necessarily represent those of the community. I'd appreciate if some folks could go post their ideas as well. – Juliancolton | Talk 02:51, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm a scientist at the US Geological Survey headquarters in Reston VA USA. I would like to know of the use of the wiki format for the production (writing, reviewing, publication, indexing, etc) of our scientific reports. Lee De Cola ( talk) 14:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
I brought this up at WikiProject Arts, but nobody there has responded. Could people take a look at the first two edits made by Brendanwoods ( talk · contribs)? I don't know if their edits were correct or not, but they have given no sources for their edits, and have not replied to my request for sources. I don't know anything about these subjects to know if the edits are correct or not. 99.166.95.142 ( talk) 16:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
I am wondering about the value of these. Certainly Oedipus might merit extensive out-of-universe discussion, as might Heathcliffe of Gandalf - however I suspect they have them, and probably without prompting. Jonathan Archer, however, has been tagged since 2006 and really I see nothing wrong with the article (except maybe a tiny amount of cruft) as it stands. Since we are not permitted to discourse on Archer as a reaction to previous enterprise Captains, for example, without supporting references, and there is probably a very limited amount of RS, the article seems essentially complete as it stands. [Disclaimer:I haven't actually seen the show in question.) Comments? Rich Farmbrough, 14:05, 4 October 2009 (UTC).
I was looking at images on the commons and I noticed this discussion: commons:Commons:Language policy#Titles of galleries. Is that something that affects us here? Newport Backbay ( talk) 01:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
The process to appoint the three non-arbitrator members of the Audit Subcommittee is underway, with the election itself starting on 30 October. If you think you may be suitably qualified, please see the election pages for the job specification and application arrangements. Applications close 22 October 2009.
For the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher 21:44, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I think I've heard of some sort of tool that can pinpoint the revision/author of a given section of text withough having to trawl through the history myself. Does anyone know about this or where I could find it? Thanks, Oreo Priest talk 00:12, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Please could anyone interested review (with a fine tooth comb) the edits listed at Special:Contributions/Full-date_unlinking_bot. One bad edit has been account for at the BRFA, which is where any wannabe commentators should also go. Thanks, - Jarry1250 [ In the UK? Sign the petition! ] 10:55, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Between 15 May 2007 and 7 July 2008, the page Help:Transwiki was a simple soft-redirect to m:Help:Transwiki on Meta. On the latter date however, user:Yecril added the phrase "Note: According to User:John Broughton, incoming Transwiki content is not accepted and the relevant sections do not apply; just copying the content is recommended instead." [8]
To me this sounds very dubious and so I thought I'd check whether it is actually the case or not? I'm doing so here as this is a much higher traffic location than the talk page of a soft redirect in the help namespace. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
If you haven't seen it, Erik Zachte has just released the first public version of our monthly "Report Card", which is tracking key metrics (traffic, content quantity, participation rates, etc.) on an ongoing basis: http://stats.wikimedia.org/reportcard/
See more in his blog post about it here.-- Eloquence * 01:35, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Right. I know about the rules stateing that in most cases one is not allowed to revert edits by a user to thier own talk pages, but what happens if an IP removes posts? Do the same rules still apply? rdunn albatross 12:23, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
In response to several years of debate across many subjects, Wikipedia:Reliable sources may be non-neutral. Durova 322 17:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
This is about ta.wikipedia.org
I have read one problem about usage of right words. Some people (group1) prefer using common word which are in day-to-day usage (derived from some other language). Some others (group2) are in favor of using right words that are not in use, and little bit difficult to understand for a layman. Problem comes when these group2 people starts editing pages created by group1 people. How to handle this case ? Do we have any policies which could solve the dispute ? -- V4vijayakumar ( talk) 10:52, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
OpenMoko Inc. announced the WikiReader today - a portable device for browsing Wikipedia. It will cost $99, is powered by two AAA batteries, and reads a Wikipedia dump from a micro SD card which can be updated by the user. TRS-80 ( talk) 15:21, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Anyone here know how to suppress the leading space when cutting and pasting section titles? When running Firefox under XP, double clicking and drag-selecting over a section title to grab a word at a time causes a leading space to be included, but this does not happen with article titles. I know that this has got to bug other users as well as I've seen a fair number of broken section redirects and links caused by a space after the fragment separator. Triple clicking for the entire line includes the "[edit] " (and I've see a few of those in links as well). Single clicking and drag selecting certainly works, but less pointer precision is required for word at a time selection, making much it faster. -- ToE T 19:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi all,
The volunteer response team is looking for a number of English-speaking Wikimedia contributors to join their team to handle incoming voicemail enquiries. There has been a recent surge in queries left on the Wikimedia Foundation's voicemail service, which end up being forwarded to the volunteer response team for action. Unfortunately, the volunteer response team leaders have so far been unable to find sufficient cover to handle the increase in voicemail correspondence received.
If you would be interested in joining the volunteer response team to handle voicemail enquiries, and are comfortable volunteering your time to telephone people who have left voicemail enquiries, please leave the appropriate details at meta:OTRS/volunteering. Please make sure to mention in your nomination that you are interested in, and comfortable replying to, voicemail enquiries. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact one of the volunteer response team leaders listed at Wikipedia:Volunteer response team#List of volunteer response team leaders.
Regards,
Daniel (
talk)
13:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
The dermatologic-related content on Wikipedia continues to improve; however, we still need help to complete the Bolognia Push 2009! This is an effort to make sure that every topic found within this unabridged dermatology text is also found on Wikipeda. Please see the above link for more information, and, if you are interested in helping, e-mail me for the login information.
There are still hundreds of disease stubs and redirects to be made. We need your help! --- kilbad ( talk) 22:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I read a Chinese news report on a city in Northern Sweden that, according to the report, is the only female-only city in the world since 1820. However, the news only quoted the name in Chinese as 沙科保市, without its native name. Though "沙科保" ( pinyin:Shakebo) suggests a three-syllable name starting with S, no such article under the relevant wikipedia list and category contains the description of male-free. We should create a wikipedia article for it if it really exists, provided we know its name. -- Poeticlion ( talk) 18:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
If you have any ideas let me know. Thanks --TaRiX oF tAjUn 18:53, 14 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarix of Tajun ( talk • contribs)
Here are some more biographies that need to be written. Kaldari ( talk) 14:43, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Do we have an idea of stats for an average editor of Wikipedia? How long has s/he been registered, how many edits s/he has made, and so on? PS. Since we know how many editors there are in this project, do we keep the track of the total number of edits? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 19:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
The Philadelphia Inquirer article has an image of the newspaper’s front page, with indications that this is a fair use. I am writing an article on the ‘’The Public Record’’ newspaper, published weekly in Philadelphia, and I am being challenged on Wikimedia Commons on the copyright issue.
How do I make use of this kind of image, in the same way that currently The Philadelphia Inquirer and The New York Times are now appearing on Wikipedia? -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 18:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
I created a Happy Halloween Template.
Copy and past it to your user page. Have a safe halloween.-- Zink Dawg -- 00:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Could anyone please confirm if the PRC govt tightened the GFW again? I'm now getting blockedfrom accessing en.wp(by blocked I mean deprived of access to the entire site, not WP:BLOCK.) for 5mins every time after I make my edit. Initially, I could get the edit i was trying to make done, and occasionally I could escape the block. But nowadays, most of the time I get blocked w/o actually getting the edit done. It's not the problem of my comp - I'm now on a public computer and the problem still persists, and I'm struggling w/ a loooong proxy list trying to get THIS edit done. I'd really appreciate it if anyone know a mean to get rid of this ridiculous censorship, such as a regular proxy(instead of the random ones I'm currently relying on)... And prolly even happier if told it is actually not the problem of GFW... :P Btw, could anyone else who can translates Japanese into English help me get the article Japan Airlines Flight 446 done? I'm changing my connection now and this issue is making me almost impossible to make any useful edit at all. Thx alot. Blodance ( talk) 02:26, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Recently, adobe unveiled "incontext editing". It'd be nice to see if wikipedia could allow for similar editing. Smallman12q ( talk) 15:31, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
The process to appoint the three non-arbitrator members of the Audit Subcommittee is underway. If you are suitably qualified, please see the election pages for the job specification and application arrangements. Applications close 22 October 2009.
For the Arbitration Committee, Roger Davies talk 19:16, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure as to whether this is the best place to post this message. I have just received a rather strange e-mail:
Caro ACEOREVIVED, A página Cumbersa outelizador:ACEOREVIVED na Wikipedia foi criada a 09h29min de 11 de Outubre de 2009 por Chabi; consulte http://mwl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumbersa_outelizador:ACEOREVIVED para a versão atual. Esta é uma página nova. Sumário de edição: Criou nova página com '{{Bienbenido}} -- ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 19:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)' Contacte o editor: e-mail: http://mwl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contactar_utilizador/Chabi wiki: http://mwl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outelizador:Chabi Não haverá mais notificações no caso de futuras alterações a não ser que visite esta página. Poderá também restaurar as bandeiras de notificação para todas as suas páginas vigiadas na sua lista de vigiados. O seu amigável sistema de notificação de Wikipedia -- Para alterar as suas preferências da lista de vigiados, visite http://mwl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Watchlist/edit Contacto e assistência: http://mwl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajuda:Cuntenidos
I do not recognise this language. Can any one please help me? What is this all about? If
you understand what this is about, can you please leave a message at my userpage. Many thanks, ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 19:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Not sure where the best place for this is but anyway. Have you ever wished that pages accessed through the mini search form in the sidebar could open in a new window/tab so you could keep the current page open? I've written User:Anakin101/search-new-window.js. It changes the mini search form behavior so that it opens in a new window (or tab, assuming your browser is set to prefer tabs) if you hold down ⇧ Shift, as you press enter/click.
To use it add this to your custom script file:
importScript('User:Anakin101/search-new-window.js');
(which will be, as always, dependent on the skin, monobook.js or modern.js or vector.js etc.) (Alternatively copy & paste the code directly (it's short) or put it in a Greasemonkey script.)
I tested it in IE6/Firefox/Opera but I'd be delighted if others could test it and give feedback. • Anakin (talk) 06:44, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I look for to a assign, who know, how was permit to the Wikimedia for exam. the Samgotian wikipedia, inasmuch as the Samogitian dialect have not ISO code. Doncsecz znánje 15:32, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Slides by Phyllis Nicklin of Birmingham in the 1960s are "available to download and redistribute for non-commercial purposes". Is there a project who batch-upload such stuff? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:41, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
I have a history book that provides a brief biography of a certain viceroy and that may be useful for being used as a source to expand and check the article. But there's a point I'm a little confused. After providing the mere facts (did this, did that, was designated for this, died on such date, etc.) there's some analysis of the viceroy, but instead of analyzing himself the viceroy, the author quotes other historians and what do they said about him (in a style not unlike the one we would use ourselves here on wikipedia). It's clear who do the quotes belong to, but wich book should I cite? The original book of the cited author, wich I have never read, or the book I have read, where the cited author did not wrote anything, but is instead just being cited? MBelgrano ( talk) 02:32, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I linked the birth and death categories on a number of articles at the top of the page like this because I thought this would be a more helpful location for these links rather than stuck somewhere at the bottom.
Nobody objected to this for several weeks until User:John removed them saying that they were duplicate links, and sent me a link to WP:OVERLINK as a reason. However when I looked at this it appeared to support what I had done: To quote.
Repeated links
In general, link only the first occurrence of an item. This is a rule of thumb that has many exceptions, including the following:
This appears to apply to this case, so am I within the rules or not? Cabbawoo ( talk) 11:17, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
I keep seeing new articles with " prefix:<valid page name>" at the end of their titles, for example: Roblox prefix:Talk:Main Page. Here is a list of some. They seem to have been created by different people. Is there some article creation wizard that leads people to do this? Not a serious problem just a puzzle that I would like answered. — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 22:48, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Indeed, from the top of this page. Many thanks. If they start arriving faster than one a day, I might report it as a bug. — RHaworth ( talk · contribs) 23:37, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Time is rapidly running out. The closing date for completed applications is 23:59 (UTC) 22 October 2009. If you are interested in becoming one of the three non-arbitrator members of the Audit Subcommittee, see the election pages now for the job specification and application details.
For the Arbitration Committee, Roger Davies talk 17:39, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
This collaboration is in need for people to help, this message is also posted in the wikiprojects Typography and Writing systems as well as in user namespace. Wikiproject talks may be inactive for medium-to-long periods, so it´s also advertised here to atract contributor´s help. Any suggestions are welcome.
There is currently an oppened collaboration which aims in improving articles related to typefaces and font categorization. If you´re interested in this subject, please visit the collaboration page, add your self and see how you can help. |
- ☩ Damërung ☩ . -- 20:15, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Anybody know anything about Atlantic books [10]? One of their books [11] that I looked at on Google Books consists mostly of material copied from Wikipedia articles. Anyone know the dirt on them? Are they legit and just have poor editorial standards or is the whole operation a scam? Kaldari ( talk) 20:54, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 20#The Alphascript-Amazon-Wikipedia book hoax. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) talk 22:56, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
A significant editor to one of the feminism articles could send them the Standard license violation letter and go from there. -- Cybercobra (talk) 23:46, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Someone should contact Wikimedia's lawyer, User:MGodwin about this. -- Blargh29 ( talk) 14:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
I would like to create a workgroup on within the WikiProject:Pennsylvania that focuses on the politics and government of Pennsylvania. I have looked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Politics and government as a model for this possible workgroup, and I am wondering what it would take to create such a workgroup. Thank you,-- Blargh29 ( talk) 03:11, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Is there some estimation on how many active users does Wikipedia have? "Active" means performing at least a minimal number of edits each day (or at least without very big gaps between edits, and with the last one being somewhat recent). It's not needed to be an exact number, an estimation for getting the idea would suffice MBelgrano ( talk) 13:13, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I'd like to create a Google Maps window or API-like, like in http://routes.wikia.com (e.g. A36). Otherwise, I have to draw a map under Google Maps, hardlink it to the article, and nobody can contribute to modify it... Such a feature would be nice for wikipedia. I had a look at {{fr:KML}}, but it is rather limited (only points, not lines). Regards, Jack ma ( talk) 13:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
[12] - makes one wonder how they determine that an editor is reliable. Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 20:04, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Does this seem suspicious to anyone? Would it be worth emailing that address to explain that I see no problem with the loading of the image, or is it likely to be a spam/phish attempt? OrangeDog ( τ • ε) 15:31, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Has there been any discussion about random geocaching references being made to text as in Cleckheaton, please? I think these look a bit odd and out of place in an encyclopedia.-- Harkey ( talk) 21:12, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Do somebody have book "The Smithsonian Book of North American Mammals", ISBN 9781560988458. I need information of mustela erminea, I try that on featured article in fi-wikipedia. – EtäKärppä äl' yli päästä perhanaa 09:54, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello. With the proliferation of various flavors of sockpuppet and sockpuppeteer templates, I have worked on consolidating. When it came to {{ Sockpuppeteer}}, there were no inherent contradictions between parameter naming and usage between the variations, and I was able to adjust the existing template to be both backwards compatible and pretty much totally inclusive. However, when it came to {{ sockpuppet}}, that was not the case. I worked on a new template, which can be found at User:Avraham/Sandbox/SPOM with many (but not all) permutations of its usage. However, this would call for a re-mapping of existing parameters. The mapping can be found at WT:SPI#Single sockpuppet template. While it is not complete, it should cover >99.9% of the 49K+ instances of the templates. We have discussed this many times at WT:SPI (see Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Archives/Archive4#First stab at combined sockpuppet template, Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Archives/Archive5#New combined sockpuppet template, and Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Archives/Archive6#Are we giving up on the combined sockpuppet template? for examples. Recently, the issue arose again at WT:SPI#Sock template cleanup. At this point, we would like some more input whether or not there would be any serious opposition to a bot-driven replacement and re-mapping of the templates, that would break most of them while the process is in progress. Thank you. -- Avi ( talk) 16:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
The THUDD article, which is about a 10 second spoof of THX from Tiny Toon Adventures, somehow has avoided deletion for 4 years. It's like a throwback to the old days of Wikipedia when anything had its own article. See it before it gets WP:SNOWed into extinction. -- Blargh29 ( talk) 03:52, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
i left them messages but they ignore them and do not reply. They are also lazy and do not assess their pages i mean i found five with no effort which were not tagged at all and they have thousands unassessed. Pleas notify the local authorities and tell them that that Wikiproject's "members" are not improving this encyclopaedia and their project is a failure if they don't get cracking asap!--anonimous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.114.215.165 ( talk) 02:46, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Why is everyone ignoring my questions i though everyone is welcome here? Who do i complain to about not getting answers here? I tried Wikipedia:Police but it is not there. Are they out?--anonimous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.114.215.165 ( talk) 02:55, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
While conducting an academic study of Wikipedia, I have come into the possession of a large number of rewrites of Wikipedia articles by outside experts, as well as the notation of a great number of errors, omissions, etc. I have no particular interest in acting on the basis of any of this material myself, so please do not invite me to edit, however charmingly. I would, however, like to know if anyone would be interested in having this information with the understanding that the sources involved would remain entirely anonymous. If you would be interested in seeing some of these expert reviews, please leave your email address and I will get in touch with you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 163.1.214.112 ( talk) 14:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
I would be happy to see this. Could you send it to apoc2400@gmail.com -- Apoc2400 ( talk) 22:10, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
What is the status of the Flagged Revision idea? Has it been dropped? Is it still under discussion? Is a trial run being done (if so where)? Blueboar ( talk) 15:25, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Uncategorized biographies of living people/BLPPotential needs editors' attention. They are about 16,000 articles to be checked whether are lacking Category:Living people. This will help us to better protect BLPs. You can help. -- Magioladitis ( talk) 10:32, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Yes it's that time of year again. As many as EIGHT Arbitration Committee seats are up for consideration.
Timeline:
Potential candidates are advised to start thinking about their statements. Volunteers are also invited to sign on to help with the housekeeping involved in an election.
Manning ( talk) 16:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Currently we are placing way too much trust in Google to be the deciding factor in AfD discussions.. We come across an AfD on an unsourced article on a foreign subject we know absolutely nothing about. First thing we do is a quick Google search for any mentions in (mostly American) sources. And that's usually all that is done.. if nothing can be found we are most likely to !vote "Delete, cannot find any coverage, no hits on Google" The question I have is, can Google alone be counted on in all cases to be the definitive method to establish whether a subject is notable or not? What about really old references? subjects that have not been digitised? These sources cannot be found on Google, does this mean the article should be deleted for failing WP:V? What about foreign subjects in other languages? This ties in with Wikipedia:Systemic bias and Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Subjective importance yet there's no mention in either of these pages that Google is what's behind it all. I think anyone who participates AfD needs to be educated about not relying primarily on Google to determine how they !vote. Except I don't know how else it can be done?? -- œ ™ 08:10, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
btw, although I don't necessarily disagree with the result, this afd was what influenced me to write the above: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr Prabhat Das Foundation. -- œ ™ 08:14, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
The burden to show coverage of the article topic using reliable sources is on the editors, not the reviewers. Reviewers use a google test just to demonstrate there is, on the surface, a problem with the article topic which needs to be addressed by the article editors. It is indicative of a problem, not conclusive proof of the lack of coverage. Discussion above is drifting between the article topic itself WP:N and content within an article WP:V once WP:N is passed for it. patsw ( talk) 14:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
I noted something interesting about the article John Verbanac. I have evidence the Wikipedia article was used by a political campaign to develop a new campaign strategy. See the page view statistics.
For months, this article about a Pennsylvania lobbyist, received 1-2 page views at most. All of a sudden, from October 17-21, the page views jumped 300% up to around 30 per day. Then on October 22, Pittsburgh mayoral candidate Kevin Acklin launched a campaign attack against Luke Ravenstahl that focused on Ravenstahl's close relationship with Verbanac. The page views went through the roof and are still 200% higher than the average as this story continues to get traction in the media.
So, how can we explain the 300% jump in page views before Acklin campaign launched its missive? Those page views are his campaign staffers consulting the Wikipedia article for background information and sources before they attacked Ravenstahl.
Just an interesting observation of Wikipedia influencing the public debate.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 03:45, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
I keep getting a 404 error when I try to access Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomy. Does anybody have an idea what's up? Thanks.— RJH ( talk) 17:20, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Where are the messages that appear below the top bar discussed and approved? The current survey on Wikimedia Commons has got right up my nose as being a deeply flawed and insulting waste of time. I'm wondering where that can be brought up? Yes, I know I can just hide it but that's not the point. CrispMuncher ( talk) 17:08, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
The election, using SecurePoll, has now started. You may:
The election closes at 23:59 (UTC) on 8 November 2009.
For the Arbitration Committee, Roger Davies talk 07:31, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Note that this was moved to WP:RD/C#Xbox 360 backwards compatability. Killiondude ( talk) 03:26, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
I am not pleased about how the sister projects interlink: Currently, the template is
template:sisterlinks, which is rarely added and if it is it is out of the way at the bottom or in the text somewhere due to impagination constraints. Wiktionary's one (
Template:Wiktionary) is only slightly better as it is smaller and users are more happy to put it on top, but often clutter also dictates where it goes.Wikias, which also belong to wikimedia, have to go in the external link section due to policy.
There is a lot of discussion of people wanting to merge all into wikipedia, but that never goes nowhere. I think changing the location of the links to sister projects to outside the article space would be a good solution, see picture for a nice possible space to put it. Obviously no users can edit this in, but if there is a good support, the idea will float to who can internally change it. What do people think? (for simplicity, no discussion of merging the sisters projects nor policy changes, Thanks)
-- Squidonius ( talk) 16:24, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I find it hard to read plain text that spans the width of my browser window, and because I generally have Wikipedia open as a tab in my browser, I don't want to resize the window (and thus all my tabs). Some text-heavy sites used fixed width columns to better approximate the width of printed materials and avoid this issue (e.g., [15] [16]). Would it be possible to change the overall format in Wikipedia to make it easier to read? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agrantx ( talk • contribs) 12:35, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Sometimes it is needed to point small quotes from people when writing an article, such as "X the shouted 'This is a quote!' and then...". When writing topics that took place in a languaje other than english, it should be pointed both the origional quote and an english translation. But in wich order? I can be the original and "which can be translated as..." in brackets, or the translation and a "the original quote is...". Or other better explanations, the question is about the order MBelgrano ( talk) 13:44, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
This script often used in GA/FA reviews needs adoption by an active user or a WikiProject. Please see my comments here for a centralized discussion. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 21:50, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Everyone,
I am new to this section of wikipedia, as I created an account just today. I am a design student in NYC, and for one of my classes I chose to redesign wikipedia. I know, I know.. it's not easy! In my opinion there is a lot that could be improved, but I would be very glad if you could answer few questions that will help me to untangle the different realities behind wikipedia.org.
1) Most of users search wikipedia, read articles and leave. Other p[articipate in its editing and discussions. What kind of user are you?
2) name the most common actions you do on wikipedia (read articles and then take a look at the discussion, read article and leave, edit articles)
3) waht do you think wikipedia's design?
4) do you think it's easy to navigate?
5)what would you like to see improved? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gioru-chan ( talk • contribs) 23:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Please weigh in with your thoughts about having Razzie Awards templates at the bottom of film-related articles. Check in here: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Actors_and_Filmmakers#Gaining_consensus:_Razzie_award_templates_at_the_bottom_of_articles. Thanks! Cirt ( talk) 05:46, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I have completed a how-to essay, Wikipedia:Using WebCite, that describes how to use WebCite within Wikipedia. It is an analogue of Wikipedia:Using the Wayback Machine. Perhaps people can review it and proofread.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 01:51, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
This template should only be used on articles with stuff that should be removed: I have reviewed a few and found them to mainly be either sourced or non-controversial, and removed the tag. Obviously any un-sourced controversial material needs to go (and then the tag can too), but there is really no excuse for putting this tag on an article unless one is so unsure about the basic principles of editing that removing the material is "too difficult". Anyone has a couple of spare minutes, please help get the transclusions of this template (not very many) down to zero. Rich Farmbrough, 05:54, 5 November 2009 (UTC).
The article Playhouse Theatre (Seattle) which I recently started has been tagged with {{ essay-like}}. I requested clarification from the person who tagged it as to what he objects to, but none has been forthcoming. I don't see anywhere in the piece I have inserted an opinion of my own; the few opinions in the article are cited (and most are direct quotes).
All I can think is that someone is objecting because I'm not falling into the leaden prose style which has become so predominant on Wikipedia this last few years. The problem with essayistic content, as I understand it, is the injection of the writer's opinions and, secondarily, the problem of undue emphasis. It is not that it is detectable that the article was written by a human who has actually written something else in his or her life.
I won't remove the tag myself, but would appreciate it if someone else either can point out specific issues in the article or remove the tag. - Jmabel | Talk 05:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I've recently initiated an informal WikiProject which will, in theory, help to support the Wikipedia community and its volunteers. I'm looking for a few people to help me get it off the ground, so feel free to join up! Regards, – Juliancolton | Talk 05:17, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Just to let people know, I have started an event to tag that category as it can be shrunk with ease. Please feel free to join. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 02:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
This is an entry about the Wikipedia:United States Government Image Categorizing Week event.
If I go to the Category:United States government images, there are 38 subcategories, and this message before a series of images:
"The following 162 files are in this category, out of 3,521 total."
Today, (8 November 2009 (UTC)), the first image was: File:070310-A-4000S-001.jpg first file, U.S. Army National Guard photo by Spc. Gail Sanders
I was able to add the following category, United States Army National Guard
The second image was: File:19620220-JohnGlennMedical.jpg
I was able to add the following categories:
[[Category:United States Astronaut Hall of Fame inductees]] [[Category:United States Marine Corps officers]] [[Category:United States naval aviators]] [[Category:Recipients of the Air Medal]]
After doing this, I tried to remove the United States government image category from these images. This did not work. I get a message that says the category is not found, and maybe it is in a template. Well, maybe it is a result of a template.
So, my question is whether the Wikipedia:United States Government Image Categorizing Week event is doomed to failure, or whether I have somehow misunderstood my experiences with adding categories to these two images. Perhaps they are not representative of the 3,521 images (more or less by the time this is read). Perhaps these images should be in subcategories instead.
Any advice or assistance would be greatly appreciated. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 01:12, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
For clarification on Dthomsen8's post, I meant adding a template ending such as "-Military-Army, Navy, etc." You can also change the categories by changing what the template says. It's a common thing among these templates to be confusing, so I can understand where your coming from. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 01:45, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Nominations are now open for candidates to run in the Arbitration Committee elections of December 2009 ( WP:ACE2009). In order to be eligible to run, editors must have 1,000 mainspace edits, be at least 18 years of age, and be of legal age in their place of residence; note also that successful candidates must identify to the Wikimedia Foundation before taking their seats. Nominations will be accepted from today, November 10, through November 24, with voting scheduled to begin on December 1. To submit your candidacy, proceed to the candidate statements page. The conditions of the election are currently under discussion; all editors are encouraged to participate. For the coordination cabal, Skomorokh, barbarian 01:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Civility is expected in Wikipedia. Do I have any remedy if I am called foul names? -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 14:56, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
“If you can't answer a man's argument, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names” · Elbert Hubbard. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 14:59, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Defend Each Other. Don't defend yourself. If you think more defense is needed, go out and defend others. If a particular individual is upsetting you, ignore him. Wikipedia is a big place. -- SmokeyJoe ( talk) 21:36, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Over the past few weeks, several editors have revamped the Wikipedia:Linkrot essay. Please take a look.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 06:40, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
There's only one day to go! The Audit Subcommittee election, using SecurePoll, closes at 23:59 (UTC) 8 November. Three community members will be appointed to supervise use of the CheckUser and OverSight tools. If you wish to vote you must do so urgently. Here's how:
here.
For the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 17:01, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
According to the US Census Bureau, the state of Pennsylvania has 1,728 special district governments and municipal authorities. These are organizations set up by local governments with delegated sovereignty to perform government functions. Some examples are Housing authorities, or stadium authorities. Many have taxation and condemnation power, as well as some level of sovereign immunity. It is my understanding that municipal governments are pretty much notable, even without independent, secondary sources. So, here's my question: would special governmental districts be be similarly inherently notable? If so, is there a bot that could take data from the U.S. Census Bureau Census of Governments and make stubs for them? I think this would be very powerful material for the encyclopedia.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 16:12, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Here is my vision for how this would work. I have downloaded an .xls file with data on the operation of each municipal authority. It is my understanding that a bot can draw data from such a spreadsheet and plug it into an article template. So, here is a possible template: User:Blargh29/Elk Water2. Here is an example of how that could look after the bot takes the data from the spreadsheet: User:Blargh29/Elk Water.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 04:09, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
I have officially made this proposal at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Municipal authorities/special district governments, which is probably a better place to hash out the notability question.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 22:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Did the monobook font change today? I'm not in the beta usability rollout, but it looks.. different. Smaller or more serif-y or more compact or something. No, I didn't change my font size in the browser, it appears to be something unique to Wikipedia. Has it changed, and is there a way to change it back? tedder ( talk) 06:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
I've always had my preferences set to underline links, but today I noticed they're no longer underlined even though the option is still set in My Preferences. Is this something that was recently changed, or is it on my end? -- L P talk 05:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
What percentage of all the articles created by: a. Non-autoconfirmed registered users b. Auto-confirmed registered users get deleted via: 1. speedy deletion, 2. proposed deletion and 3. articles for deletion? Thanks! Fences& Windows 20:06, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
If anybody is struggling to find information to use to update or improve Wikipedia, a good website to use for this is Brittanica online encyclopedia : http://www.britannica.com/ Harls ( talk) 20:21, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Interested editors are invited to participate in the
SecurePoll feedback and workshop.
SecurePoll was recently used in the
Audit Subcommittee election, and has been proposed for use for the
upcoming Arbitration Committee election at this current
request for comment (RFC). Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.
For the Arbitration Committee,
Dougweller (
talk)
09:17, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
In a recent PBS program concerning a group of people that walked on all fours, it was discovered that there was an anomaly in the medulla oblongata that affected balance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.251.73.244 ( talk) 20:59, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
I was wondering if there are any open discussions regarding the Wikipedia logo, its appearance and so forth. Thanks. SharkD ( talk) 04:48, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
HAI2U! Policy-ish question... So, for many years several editors from many diverse articles have been dealing with a persistent POV-warrior who takes every possible opportunity to misstate facts, misrepresent sources, and misapply policy to service his agenda. We have let this go on literally for years, and several of us have come to the realization that additional assumption of good faith is pointless. A topic ban or community ban is likely in order, but it is going to take us a while to assemble all the evidence. However, I've seen plenty of editors accused of harboring "drop files" or "attack pages" and I want to check with the community before starting down this road. There is, in my mind, no doubt that we can put together a very compelling case -- we have editors and admins from multiple articles that have fought his bias for years -- but the patterns are so long term and the incidents are spread across so many articles that is going to take some type of coordination to put together a coherent and compelling case. In normal circumstances I'd just do it locally with vi and upload when done, however to really give the case justice we need to have a place we can gather and store evidence, and collaborate on assembling the case before presenting it to ANI and/or ArbCom for adjudication. What is the best course of action? Thanks in advance! // Blaxthos ( t / c ) 18:19, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
I look for Wikipedian in South Bethlehem, Pennsylvania. The cause: in South Bethlehem was work the Slovene tidings: Amerikanszki Szlovénczov Glász and if somebody look for archive tidings and if take a photo. Doncsecz znánje 20:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Where can I shop a Wikipedia shirt? I'm a contributor to wikipedia, and I though I do not must sent money, but I want to buy a shirt. Pérez ( talk) 09:18, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
can File:Eminem at DJ Hero Party.jpg be transfered to commons? i'd transfer it myself, but i'm not sure of copyright of that image -- SveroH ( talk) 14:44, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
There is a new shared IP template for use on corporate networks: {{ SharedIPCORP}}. Figured we needed one for corporate networks since we have {{ SharedIPEDU}}, {{ SharedIPPublic}}, {{ SharedIPUSMilitary}}, and {{ MobileIP}}. PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 21:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
There's a new essay at Wikipedia:Offline sources that explains the use of offline sources within Wikipedia, a frequent source of confusion among editors.-- Blargh29 ( talk) 06:12, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
A user whose only purpose so far on Wikipedia has been reverting my edits on this article, " Kitab al Majmu", has now taken the name of my old account (Funkynusayri), before I changed the name to the current one, and his account now sill redirects to mine! Isn't there some sort of protection against this? See revision history of the Kitab al Majmu article for more info. Furthermore, my old account name was rather unique, no one else would make it up themselves unless they wanted to harass me, so can't it be blocked for new users or something? FunkMonk ( talk) 06:45, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
I would like to get the attention of some moderators to the article about World Genseiryū Karate-dō Federation (WGKF). In the past, Peter Lee has caused some trouble on this and also on other articles, like Genseiryu, writing unfactual stories. In the recent months he has ruined the article on WGKF with name slandering, false accusations and so on, all without backing it up. Of course he cannot. The only thing he wants is to bring the WGKF and persons inside that organization into discredit. I don't care what you people know about karate or about Genseiryu, but if you would just have a look at what he write, you can clearly see that everything he says is totally against the policies of Wikipedia. I have reverted the story MANY times, but he keeps reverting it back, calling ME a vandal. It is Peter Lee who is the vandal, for he is turning a NPOV story into a personal ferry tale, full of unfactual accusations that is putting other people in a bad daylight. It's now like a personal vendetta to him, for he simply keeps going on with this. None of his claims and accusations he wants to back up with evidence. I warned him on his talk page, but he keeps deleting everything there. Please, point out to him that he cannot just slander somebody's name on Wikipedia, just because he doesn't like the person... Thank you for your help! MarioR 03:26, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
A discussion regarding the appropriateness of using unofficial logos in an infobox to represent a university has begun at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Universities#Using_.22unofficial.22_logos_in_university_infoboxes. Your input is welcome. Thanks, -- Hammersoft ( talk) 17:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I've posted some questions regarding new Wikipedia users on the talk page of the Welcoming Committee. If you have the time to help us out, please go have a look, much appreciated! Regards, Nettrom ( talk) 19:12, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
User:Youve's Talking Page Who's youve?-- Badbread123 ( talk) 06:07, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Would you please vote for the Friendly discussion here? Thank you. Btilm 01:30, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I recently brought up a subject on the FfD talk page, but noone responded. This seemed like a next logical place to point it out. Any input would be appreciated.-- Rockfang ( talk) 06:23, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Lawrence County, Pennsylvania#Historical markers is a copyright violation. See the talk page. I stumbled on this while doing updates to every Category:Pennsylvania counties entry for a county. Pursuing this copyright violation is beyond my interests or skills. Please help. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 01:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
What are we going to do about CAT:TEMP? It's an absolute nightmare. Most of it is old user talk pages full of auto-messages which can be safely deleted. It's apparently even got socks in it (which I can't confirm - the sock cats have the user pages, but this one has the talk pages). It's pretty useless as is. Any ideas? — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:19, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I found out that runcible has several WP entries, namely :
As runcible redirects to runcible spoon, I was at first going to make it a disambig page. Then I figured out that according to the article runcible spoon, runcible is an adjective used not only for spoons. Moreover, all other "runcible" articles are about the same thing. So I don't know what to do anymore, and don't really care, this is why I leave this message right there hoping that someone interested in it will do whatever he/she finds the most accurate. Skippy le Grand Gourou ( talk) 16:51, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
There has been an earlier attempt to come up with a logo for wiktionary. The Dutch wiktionary did not initiate this drive but we did loyally adopt its outcome, as did numerous other sister sites. Sadly, the anglophone wiktionary did what anglophones always do: if it is not your idea, you boycott it. (This holds for the metric system, for the Kyoto protocol and for many another occasion.)
So, this time we boycott you. The Dutch wiktionary will not adopt any logo that comes out of the current procedures. They simply lack democratic credibility and represent an imposition by en.wiktionary.
If you really want a different logo than the tile one this is the proper procedure:
nl:Gebruiker:Jcwf Jcwf ( talk) 21:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Ever want to engage in discussion of the subject matter of a topic, but can't because it's WikiChat ("text whose purpose is anything other than improving the related article—usually a comment about the subject an article, rather than about the wording or information in the article")? There's now a wiki in which to do it in which each entry is tied to an en-Wikipedia article: WikiChat. Give it a try! TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 22:42, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
This is a reminder that the nominations phase of the December 2009 elections to select new members of the Arbitration Committee, as well as the Request for Comment|Request for Comment on the conditions for the elections and the 2010 Committee, will close on November 24, in one day's time.
If you have been considering running as a candidate in this year's election to the Committee, now is the time to make the decision. It's worth noting that there are twenty-two candidates at the time of writing, six fewer than last year, and so with eight seats available the field is not as competitive as might have been expected. All editors who had made 1,000 mainspace edits by November 10, 2009, are over 18 years of age and of the age of majority in their nation of residence, and are willing to identify themselves to the Wikimedia Foundation are eligible to stand as candidates. You can declare your candidacy by following the instructions at the candidate statements page.
The Request for Comment on the Arbitration Committee covers the conditions for the elections and the Committee in 2010. Specific issues under debate include term lengths, number of seats, election methods, ballot transparency, the tranche system, threshold for successful candidacies and voter eligibility. If you want to participate in the discussion on any of these issues, you have less than a day to have your voice heard. For the coordinators, Skomorokh, barbarian 01:34, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Zzyzx11 ( talk) 05:57, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
How can one find the content and history of articles that have been merged into others? There was an article on-poetry. This was suddenly merged into digital poetry, and now I can't find what got merged out of exist'nce. Kdammers ( talk) 09:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
It should just link to Sanskrit, since Sanskrit language redirects to Sanskrit. -- 76.211.91.135 ( talk) 00:45, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Is this really an "official" Twitter account as it claims? – xeno talk 18:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed a number of novice editors and IP editors make the same error: They delete some prose along with its reference, but because other parts of the article may call for that same reference (e.g., like <ref name="fubar"/>, where the original "fubar" ref was deleted), it leads to lost information and errors. This seems to me like it's primarily a design flaw of Wikipedia, and it's difficult to explain to new editors what they need to do to prevent the issue or to fix it when it occurs.
Does anyone have suggestions for how best to approach this issue, or how best to explain it to new editors? — Notyourbroom ( talk) 23:22, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
There are 13,418 English places listed in the Domesday Book of 1086; and many of the wikipedia articles for English settlements make reference to their inclusion as this is often the first record of a particular place. These articles usually include a link back to the Domesday Book article.
There is a category Places listed in the Domesday Book which is an attempt to link and organise these pages - but the task of manually adding this category to every appropriate article is daunting.
There is not currently a bot to automate this task, so if editors reviewing English settlement/placename articles can add this category to pages where appropriate this will help with categorisation of these articles.
Josephus ( talk) 10:52, 23 November 2009 (UTC)