I placed code on my common.js page that was on my vector.js page, and now that code is not working! I'm going to move the code back to my vector file until I find an answer. Please help. --Nathan2055^talk 00:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may get a better answer if you ask at WP:VPT which tends to attract more technical minded people. --Jayron32 01:16, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --Nathan2055^talk 02:21, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How come beautiful Bull Shoals Caverns is not listed in Caverns in Arkansas, was opened in 1960. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bullshoalscaverns (talk • contribs) 04:39, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Items are not supposed to be included in list articles unless they are notable enough to to have an article in in Wikipedia. (I removed a couple entries from List of caves in Arkansas which no articles.) —teb728 t c 06:22, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the contents of a user talk page (or any page, for that matter), if a section on a page (say, “TESTART”) is created with a title, say “TEST”, and someone else creates a section named the exact same thing, and someone puts a link for “TESTART#TEST”, which would it link to? Neither? An editor since 10.28.2010. 06:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that I completely follow what you're asking but if a page (Foo) has two sections titled the same thing (Bar), then a link to Foo#Bar will go to the first "Bar" section on the page. You can see this happen on the reference desks with some frequency. People will title their questions with "Question" and occasionally there will be more than one of them on the page. If you were to respond to any of them and save, when the page reloads it will automatically drop you at the first instance of that "Question" section. Dismas|^(talk) 06:12, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you try it out on a sandbox page in your user space, you'll see that if you create a second section with the same title, the anchor will automatically be modified to #Test_2 . - David Biddulph (talk) 06:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you An editor since 10.28.2010. 19:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have a question regarding the article i edited (National Bank of Georgia (country)). I received the following e-mail: "Dear Kakha123,

The Wikipedia page "User talk:Kakha123" has been created on 25 July 2011 by Grim Littlez, with the edit summary: General note: Removal of maintenance templates on National Bank of Georgia (country). (TW)

This is a new page. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kakha123 for the current revision.

To contact the editor, visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Grim_Littlez

Note that additional changes to the page "User talk:Kakha123" will not result in any further notifications, until you have logged in and visited the page.

Your friendly Wikipedia notification system

--

This email notification feature was enabled on English Wikipedia in May 2011 - see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Email_notification. If you would like to switch off your notifications, visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences

Feedback and further assistance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Content"

I am a beginner in editing wiki articles, so it would be very kind of you if you will help me and give me advice what am i supposed to do? and how to contact User:Grim_Littlez? Thank you in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.227.255.196 (talk) 06:21, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The easiest way to contact Grim_Littlez is to edit his user talk page. - David Biddulph (talk) 06:38, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

National Bank of Georgia (country) had maintenance tags: {{coi}}, {{notability}}, {{one source}}, {{primarysources}}, and {{refimprove}}, which indicate that the article has been edited by someone with a conflict of interest; it does not demonstrate the notability of the subject; and it does not adequately verify the content with references to independent reliable sources. You made an edit which removed those tags without correcting the underlying problems. Worse yet you inserted copyright violations copied from http://nbg.gov.ge/index.php?m=130&lng=eng. —teb728 t c 07:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sir, we are agroup of company and want to start a new ocean world or an amusement park here in orissa so we need your help to how and who are the company to help us to make our dream success . kindly response us with regards Mr. Robin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.19.250.183 (talk) 06:30, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.6 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. —teb728 t c 06:42, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the potawatomi word for waukegan does not mean little fort it means the bay, because of the bay it sits on.. I am a language teacher of the potawatomi nation we would like this to be corrected .. Thank you.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.199.39.218 (talk) 06:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the unsourced derivation as "little fort". If you have a published reliable source for "bay", you can add it to the article. —teb728 t c 07:11, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The official site for the town of Waukegan disagrees with you. Dismas|^(talk) 07:13, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the section as a long-standing copyright violation. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Hello! I'm Netraam, a user mainly of the Dutch wikipedia. I'd like to start contributing to the English wikipedia. For SUL reasons I'd like to usurp the account User:Netraam. However, this account has been used in the past, between 2006 and 2008. A total of 35 contributions has been made from this account, but it now seems to be inactive for over 3 years. Is it possible to usurp this account, eventhough a small number of contributions has been made from it in the past? nl:Netraam (talk) 07:34, 26 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.0.86.203 (talk)

Usurps are performed by a Bureaucrat, and they will consider any individual case - there's guidelines, but no hard-and-fast rules.

You need to make a request on the page Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations, and take it from there.  Chzz  ►  09:29, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Marking as resolved here, as request has been filed [1].  Chzz  ►  16:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where would I ask people to put Eatyourkimchi on their watchlist? There's suddenly a bunch of new edits, some of which might be tests. Cloveapple (talk) 07:45, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Posting here will probably do the trick. If the article keeps getting damaged by unregistered or newly-registered editors, you could try asking for protection at WP:RFPP. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just uploaded File:Boerse stuttgart logo.png. In the non-free media use rationale, there are some pieces of text that seem to be generated automatically when filling in information for one of the parameters. For example, the description currently reads

"This is a logo owned by Boerse Stuttgart for The image is placed in the infobox at the top of the article discussing Börse Stuttgart. The purpose is to help the reader identify the institution in question visually which could not be achieved with word alone.. Further details: The official logo of Börse Stuttgart."

Similar problems occur in the text for 'Source' and 'Purpose of use' parameters. However I can't seems to figure out, what the correct wording of text for each parameter is supposed to be in order for it to appear correctly. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 08:33, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have fixed the duplication. The fields marked "ADDITIONAL INFORMATION" can usually be left blank, because the template gives you sensible defaults. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:58, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) If you want to fill in all the fields, I would suggest using {{non-free use rationale}}. {{Logo fur}} was designed to provide boilerplate text (with limited overrides) for most fields. —teb728 t c 09:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@John: Thanks for fixing.

@teb728: I somehow didn't think of using these blank templates and instead tried to modify an existing one to fit that article. I will use the blank ones in the future. Thanks.

Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 09:14, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

I am the author of 95% of an article Price action trading that just received a Capitalization warning so:

"Helpful Pixie Bot (talk | contribs) m (34,141 bytes) (Dated {{One source}}{{Capitalization}}. (Build p613))"

I read through the Capitalization section in the style guide but nothing leapt out at me that I'm doing wrong. How can I find out where the capitalization error is? --Ahardy66 (talk) 09:10, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The easiest solution, when you're unsure why someone 'tags' a page, is to ask them. In this case it is a bot, but the bot is owned by Rich Farmbrough (talk · contribs) who is thus responsible for its edits, and should be able to explain the concern and reason for the tagging. (I know it's that user, because User talk:Helpful Pixie Bot redirects to his talk page)  Chzz  ►  09:22, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The bot only dated the tag. It was added by Yworo (talk · contribs), so that's the person you should be asking. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:30, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Sorry, quite so. Thanks, John of Reading.  Chzz  ►  10:11, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK great, so it was human, not mechanical. Still getting used to this stuff. Thanks. --Ahardy66 (talk) 12:11, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes; and I am sorry - I should've spotted that, and normally would have. Damned human fallibility :-) Thanks for your understanding.

I see that Yworo has responded on User_talk:Ahardy66#Capitalization, so I'll mark this 'resolved'.  Chzz  ►  16:34, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is this possible? Under the account settings, there are only 4 options, none of which I think would help. The last option "Email me also for minor edits of pages" suggests that there is a way to tell wikipedia to email me for edits of all my watchlist pages (like this page for instance!). Have I just missed the obvious? Thanks --Ahardy66 (talk) 13:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is not possible. I believe this is a MediaWiki feature that has been turned off at the English Wikipedia for performance reasons. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may be able to find a workaround that works for you using the RSS feed of your watchlist or any other page, and getting email alerts from that (try this search] to for starters). —Akrabbim^talk 14:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A frequent problem I am coming across is that a lot of editors, rather than spending any time working *with* an edit by someone else (let's assume the edit is reasonable or close to it), they almost act like any change is unlawful and reversible instantaneously. Is there a place in wikipedia to discuss what can be done about editors who squat and claim pages as their own? Is there anything that can be done about undo-revision tyrannys by editors: Their first order of action is to undo something instantly and not contribute and work with a change in the discussion: Just outright UNDO/DELETE?PeterHarlington (talk) 15:15, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to give Wikipedia:Dispute resolution a read. 図 (talk) 15:30, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Have you raised the issue on the article's Talk page? That is where the process should begin, and hopefully end in a satisfactory solution for all involved. Roger (talk) 15:33, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your account was created 2 hours ago, only had 7 edits before coming here, and you didn't yet know that new discussion sections go at the bottom or that Wikipedia uses a common time zone (UTC). Based on this I don't think you have enough experience for a general discusion of how Wikipedia works. See Wikipedia:Dispute resolution for ways to handle your specific dispute and DO NOT make threatening statements in edit summaries or anywhere else. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle and Wikipedia:BRD misuse.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 15:54, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would also mention that this editor issued what he himself called a serious edit-summary threat, "DO NOT REMOVE. IMPROVE THE MATERIAL, OR YOU WILL PAY. I AM SERIOUS", here. As an editor not involved in his dispute, it appears to me he is soapboxing and editing in heated, non-neutral language. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He also made angry responses to my above reply on my talk page (I'm apparently corrupt and should be punished), and added my "crimes" to his user page. Such tactics are likely to increase opposition to him and not scare people away. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

hello,

is it possible to remove the small image, which depicts a square and on the right corner of it a diagonal arrow, after an external link. Regards.--

♫Greatorangepumpkin♫_Never–^get–_out–^of–_these–^blues-_alive 15:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Link#External links, but it shouldn't generally be done in articles. Where do you want to do it? Or did you mean to do it for all links for your own account? PrimeHunter (talk) 15:49, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you mean in your signature. Have you seen Wikipedia:Signatures#Links? PrimeHunter (talk) 15:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict × 2) You might want to take a look at the WP:MARKUP#External links. Take a look at the last entry in the table where it says Image markup only. This should do the trick. If you are talking about your signature, see PrimeHunters reply above. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 15:55, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, your signature at User:GreatOrangePumpkin/Signature/Blues is already way over Wikipedia:Signatures#Length which says max 255 characters. You have 720 which takes up half the edit box. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone for the help. I reduced it, and will try to reduce it more. Regards.--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫_Hey^{it's me}_{I am dynamite} 17:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Even though this issue seems to be solved, it's still a good idea to actually answer the question. To remove the arrow coming out of the box, surround the text in <span class="plainlinks"></span> tags, like this:

<span class="plainlinks">[http://www.example.com/ example.com]</span>

This renders as: example.com. Quinxorin (talk) 08:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recently, the University of London changed it's logo.

The emblem was replaced on its wikipedia page but in JPG format which distored the quality. Therefore, it reverted back to the emblem.

Could somebody now upload the new logo in PNG format which can be found here (much better quality): http://www.freeimagehosting.net/7137a

The image that needs to be replaced is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:University_of_London_arms.svg

Thank you!

86.5.71.198 (talk) 17:43, 26 July 2011 (UTC) Daniel[reply]

I already uploaded that logo at File:UofLondon_logo.png. The image at File:University_of_London_arms.svg is of way too high resolution to comply with Wikipedias Non-free content policy, in particular it fails WP:NFC#Policy 3 b.. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 17:54, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also already added that image to the article. The addition was reverted however by another user. I think you should discuss this at Talk:University of London first. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 18:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I added a reply at Talk:University of London. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 21:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking for a template (presumably a userbox) that will show my exact number of edits. Can someone please give me a link to one? TomUSA 17:58, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is {{editcount}} what you need? TNXMan 18:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may also find something here that does what you want. TNXMan 18:04, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This Help desk answer from December says this can't be done automatically. If this were available, I guess it might lead to performance issues: the cached version of your user page would have to be thrown away whenever your edit count changed. -- John of Reading (talk) 19:09, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I mean something that shows the exact number of edits, like if I contributed to Wikipedia exactly 140 times, it could say This user has contibuted 140 edits to Wikipedia or something like that, and it keeps changing with every edit. TomUSA 20:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!! So i have just uploaded my first article, which was supposed to be the German version of the "Penrose process". I don't know how to indicate a page being the same but the translated version, but i uploaded it anyway, trying to read it up and add a link back to the English version. Sadly within 2 minutes, my article was removed due to it being rated a duplicate as the title was obviously similar. Could anyone please help me and tell me how i can get my article re-uploaded ( i didnt save it :( ) and maybe indicate somewhere that it is a version of one article but in a different language. Thanks very much!!! MadameBruxelles (talk) 18:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may have noticed that all articles and communications here are in English, that's because this is the English Wikipedia. If you want to write a German version of an article we already have you should do so on the German Wikipedia--Jac16888 ^Talk 18:09, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jac, as the deleting admin, you can access the deleted content to give to Madame Bruxelles so she can submit it to the German Wikipedia, can't you? —Akrabbim^talk 18:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have mailed a copy of the deleted article to MadameBruxelles along with this:

A German article should be created at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose_Prozess

See also http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%C3%9Cbersetzungen and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Interlanguage_links

PrimeHunter (talk) 02:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Tonge (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I tried to edit this yesterday to provide a list of more representative publications, but it has mosttly been changed back today saying I need a 'citation' - which is nonsense. The citation IS my own work???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jontonge (talk • contribs) 18:25, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jonathan. I know it seems odd, but the problem is that on the Internet nobody knows who you are. I could create an account called JonathanTonge, and post all sorts of nonsense about you, and claim to be you, and nobody would be able to disprove it except by reference to information which is publicly available. For this reason, the criterion for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth.

Where biographies of living people are concerned, we are even more careful to insist that data be supported by reliable citations. If there is information in the article which is false and unreferenced, you or anybody may remove it; but adding new information requires a higher standard of evidence.

There is a further issue: because of neutrality, people are generally discouraged from editing articles on subjects they have a close connection with. Not forbidden, but discouraged: see WP:conflict of interest for more information.

The course I would recommend is to post on the article's talk page explaining the information you want to change, preferably with verifiable references, and leave it to others to edit the article. --ColinFine (talk) 18:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

While you're at it also take a good look at WP:AUTOBIO about the perils of editing an article about yourself. Roger (talk) 19:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)x2

Original research (i.e. 'personal experience' and such) are not acceptable, sorry. A key policy to Wikipedia is verifiability, and in order to be verifiable, you need to use information from a reliable and independent source that is accessible by someone else other than you (especially since everyone is basically anonymous online). Examples of such sources include newspapers, websites, books, academic journals, etc.

Especially in additions like the ones you did which just might possibly be self-aggrandizing. Promotion of any kind is forbidden on Wikipedia. Praising or criticizing descriptions are used if and only if they are backed up by multiple reliable sources, hence why your edits were reverted. Even then, they are toned down as much as possible. Lists of actual products (like publications) are also frowned upon and are often removed when their presence are not essential to an article.

Additionally, if you are indeed the subject of the article then you have a conflict of interest. Whether intentionally or not, it would be hard for you to maintain complete neutrality on the subject. It is usually recommended you don't edit it directly. Try and post suggestions in the talk page instead, along with sources that can verify them.

More sources are also important in proving notability - an essential criterion for whether users decide to keep an article or delete it. As it stands, the article does not show notability (i.e. it does not explain why the subject deserves an article in an encyclopedia), adding more reliable sources fixes this.

Please also read Wikipedia:Autobiography.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 19:05, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Wikipedia!

We love and like you very-very much.

Thanks for helping us in Hindi Language (India). But we could not type in my favorite style like Devlys font or Kruti Dev fonts. Please help us to type in our languages in Hindi to contribute more in Hindi Language.

For example- We can select font Devlys 10 in MS Word and can type in Hindi easily but we are unable to type in the style of hindi provided in Wikipedia. Thanks. Jai Hindi. .... An Indian — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.201.57.23 (talk) 19:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. It's a bit complicated as fonts depend on a lot of factors, but this page might help: Help:Multilingual support (Indic). It has very specific instructions for whatever operating system you might have. You can also try looking for answers in the Hindi Wikipedia (मुखपृष्ठ) -- Obsidi♠n Soul 20:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I just wanted to know why did I get a forbidden 403 page when I tried to search here on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.202.243.109 (talk)20:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell us your browser name and version? Does it happen every time, or only when you search a particular item, or is it random? Does the problem go away if you bypass your browser cache? -- John of Reading (talk) 20:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I searched ".net" because I wanted to know what it meant and I got this page that said 403 forbidden you dont have permission to access this server. Then I searched "net" and I was able to find it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.202.243.109 (talk) 20:33, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'm glad you've found what you wanted. I've tried various kinds of search for ".net" without hitting the error; I'll watch out for anyone else reporting a 403 error. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:39, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Entering .net into the search field and pressing enter / clicking the magnification glass leads me to the article .net. What browser do you use and from where do you try to access the page (ie. from your home, from a public spot, from your mobile phone)? Are you sure you are viewing http://en.wikipedia.org/? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 20:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was on my mobile and went to wikipedia and searched .net and I got the error page 403 forbidden — Preceding unsigned comment added by 48azul (talk • contribs) 20:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC) Why did I get that error? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 48azul (talk • contribs) 21:03, 26 July 2011 (UTC) What does it mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.202.243.109 (talk) 21:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, there is indeed a problem with the search box used by the mobile version of the site. This search reproduces the 403 error. Thank you for bringing this to our attention. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:40, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to avoid the problem with a period at the start of a search by using quotes. When you said you searched ".net" I guess you entered .net in the search box and not ".net" including the quotes. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:17, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This was first noted in April; see bug 28510. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok Thank You — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.203.2.134 (talk) 22:05, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have another question. I just created an account but I asked this question before creating it. How can I hide my IP with my new username? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 48azul (talk • contribs) 21:38, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IP edits cannot be reassigned to an account. If a user is accidentally logged out when posting then they can request removal of the IP address from public view at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight but I'm not sure how an oversighter will respond to a request about an IP address from before an account was created. If your concern is others linking your IP address to your user account then a solution might be to abandon the account 48azul and create a new account without mentioning the connection to 48azul. This would not be a violation of Wikipedia:Sock puppetry when 48azul has only posted here. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Cardinal Mooney High School page (for the Sarasota location) says that Jim Morrison is the Principal. That is obviously not true. The Principal is Steve Christie. This information can be verified here: http://www.cmhs-sarasota.org/AboutUs/FacultyStaff.aspx.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.141.112.18 (talk) 21:35, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. The article had been vandalized. Jim Morrison was added by an IP address in Sarasota so I guess it was a student. I have reverted to a version saying Steve Christie. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How long will it typically take for a request at WP:THIRD to be answered? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 22:14, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Typically more than six minutes. --195.14.197.88 (talk) 22:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I will just wait then. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 22:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I need to discuss a special editorial request in a non-public forum. Can you refer me to someone or some place? --Ring Cinema (talk) 23:01, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. We will be able to help you better with more information. Is this a request for an edit to be made to a protected page? Do you have a conflict of interest with the edits you wish to make? Happy editing, hajatvrc with WikiLove @ 23:14, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some avenues from Wikipedia:Contact us lead to a non-public email option but it's not for all matters. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:25, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I can't discuss the issue here because that would draw attention to the problem I'm trying to solve. Suffice it to say it's a privacy matter and would require the assistance of an admin. --Ring Cinema (talk) 00:36, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Wikipedia:Requests for oversight is the place for your problem. I'm an administrator but not an oversighter. You can email me at Special:EmailUser/PrimeHunter but the response time may be more than 10 hours depending when you mail. There are other places where many volunteers can see mails and you may get a faster response. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that there are many pages that do not give a neutral point of view. In general there are 2 groups that oppose each others point of view and the result is in general that on of the group is hijacking the whole page, meaning that the page does not give proper information. A better sollution would be to give both groups their own page or part of that page so that the reader can make up their own mind. Thanks! Jorrit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.153.23.7 (talk) 23:10, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Wikipedia is a work-in-progress, meaning it still has many problems that the thousands and thousands of faithful editors have not yet been able to solve. This should always be kept in mind when reading a Wikipedia article.

On the other hand, you are encouraged to make changes yourself toward Wikipedia's ends as opposed to simply pointing out flaws on this Help Desk! Happy editing, hajatvrc with WikiLove @ 23:20, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]