http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lara_weese_(name)

Please remove this site..I am being targeted by someone setting up fraud accounts. The police are involved with helping but I came across this this morning and tried to setup a account to delete it myself and I have no clue how to do that. If you have a IP address also from where this was setup I could use this to help prosecute this person. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funny1971 (talk • contribs) 00:57, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the page has already been removed, as when I clicked on the link it said the page didn't exist. It may have been speedily deleted, so perhaps an admin might be able to see when/how it was created. --McDoobAU93 01:01, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There has never been an article with that title here. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How odd. Funny1971's only edits (other than to this page) were to Talk:Lara weese (name) — she created the talk page to ask for it to be deleted, so her only edits are creating a talk page that asks for its own deletion, even though the associated article has never existed. Nyttend (talk) 01:19, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does Wikipedia have a place to discuss with other editors the viability of creating new articles, in terms of notability, significance, etc. (issues not involving technical matters)? In other words, where can someone get an opinion on a potential article from other Wikipedians ahead of time, so as not to devote time to something that will be deleted, moved, merged or otherwise not allowed to stand? Thank you. — Michael J 01:12, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We can discuss on your or my talk page, just drop me a note. – ukexpat (talk) 01:17, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do any other-language Wikipedias have a bot to welcome new users? I'm asking this because on the Arabic, and Baha Indonesia (perhaps more?) Wikipedias I have received a welcome message immediately upon navigating there, even when not logged in. Interchangeable|talk to me 01:21, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Indonesian Wikipedia appears to have one. I got a welcome message from id:Pengguna:TjBot when I went over there a few months ago. - Purplewowies (talk) 05:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, the other wikis I tried (every wiki where I had edits and a talk page) didn't seem to have one. At least not one that left me a message. - Purplewowies (talk) 05:59, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi in the article im creating i need to use the infobox for world war I but i dont want to show it in its entirety as it would overlap into my non-related sub-sections, so is it possible to have a show/hide option for the infobox?? --Hadseys (talk) 02:45, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure whether this is a question of whether it can be done, in which case you would ask here, or a question of whether it is permitted, which means you would likely ask here. I would recommend going to one of those two places and maybe they can direct you to the right place.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:12, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello:

Sorry if this is considered a "stupid" question, but I am having a problem editing the King Philip Regional High School page. Under Music Program, I recently edited the section so that it went from about 4 lines to around 10 lines long. However, some weird things are happening when I try to view the page. If I type in "King Philip Regional High School," or start typing it and click on exactly that on the drop-down, I get sent to that page, and the page looks fine. However, when I type in "King Philip High School," leaving out "regional" just because its less typing, or I click on it in the drop-down that appears when I type, I get redirected to the King Philip Regional High School page, BUT the additions that I made ARE NOT THERE. Ive been editing for quite a while now, and have found out solutions to quite a few problems on here, but I am completely at a loss as to what this could be.

Hopefully typing inexactly what I said will show the issue. Thanks for any help you guys can offer!

173.76.250.135 (talk) 03:56, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

King Philip High School redirects to King Philip Regional High School. Your edits to the latter are there, and the former is still redirecting to the latter. I believe you may have an old version in your browser's cache. Try following these instructions and see if that solves the problem. Singularity42 (talk) 04:13, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This may be another instance of this Wikipedia caching problem. Just in case, I have purged both pages. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your help! It works just fine now! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.76.250.135 (talk) 21:11, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Melbourne, Australia has a public transport ticketing system called myki. The m is lower case.

The article name correctly uses a lower case m, but the Talk page has a capital M.

Being the good pedant, I tried to move the Talk page from Talk:Myki to Talk:myki, and encountered a big, bold, red error message telling me "Source and destination titles are the same; can't move a page over itself."

What's going on? HiLo48 (talk) 06:13, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All pages technically start with a capital letter. {{lowercase}} is used to make the first letter lowercase in an article title. If added to non-article namespace, it lowercases the first letter after the name of the space, e.g. Talk:Myki → Talk:myki. I've added the template to the talk page for you. - Purplewowies (talk) 06:21, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks might apply in this case. Too stressed and tired to work through it right now. Sorry. fredgandt 06:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks HiLo48 (talk) 06:26, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect User:Vivvt/35th National Film Awards. Since you had some involvement with the User:Vivvt/35th National Film Awards redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Thanks. - Vivvt^Talk 06:31, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vivvt: You are addressing a page frequented by many editors. Who are you referring to as you? fredgandt 06:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. See my comments in the discussion. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 11:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I understand all the requirement to upload article, but I do not seem to be able to find the place that I can type things I would like to know how we can type a new topic in wikipedia I tried going to "my talk" "my preferences" "My watchlist" etc. but I cant find a place to type articles can someone please show me the path to type? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Developmentofficer (talk • contribs) 06:33, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from the blatantly promotional draft you created at User talk:Developmentofficer you do not understand the requirement to upload article. Wikipedia does not tolerate promotional articles. If you have a neutral article to create, a good start would be at Wikipedia:Article wizard. —teb728 t c 07:08, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. A Wikipedia entry exists for "Helen Landgarten" in the German language, but not in the English language Wikipedia. Although the name appears to be Germanic, Landgarten (deceased in 2011) was an American.

GERMAN Entry - http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Landgarten

When searching on the English language Wikipedia for "Helen Landgarten," the following pages come up due to citations:

ENGLISH - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frances_Anderson ENGLISH - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_therapy

And here is a link to the LA Times' article about Helen Landgarten's passing in 2011:

LA TIMES - http://articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/26/local/la-me-helen-landgarten-20110226

I'm sure that I could start up an English entry, but that doesn't seem to make sense since there is already an existing German language one. Is it possible for that to be translated to English? After which it could be edited by users?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curlygirl 3d (talk • contribs) 07:06, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It would probably be easiest if you just go ahead and start an English article, even if you cannot understand the German one - provided you have adequate sources of course. Other editors who do understand German can translate material from that article if they wish but there is no requirement for the different language Wikipedias articles to be "synchronised" - each one operates independently. Roger (talk) 07:17, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that information. I will try my hand at writing an entry in the near future then. -Curlygirl 3D|Ronda 09:19 (PST) 27 January 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curlygirl 3d (talk • contribs)

What do you do when you request a new password, your system sends an email with a temporary password, copy and paste the temporary password, and receive the message that the password is incorrect? Then you request it again and your system will not issue another password until 24 hours has passed. How inconvenient is that? Makes me not want visiti the site if it does not recognize a temporary password that the system created. Guess i won'T be able to get in until tomorrow at about this time. By then I will have forgotten what I wanted to do just like I forgot my password to this seldom visited site for this very reason.

William Reed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.61.121.82 (talk) 08:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe something went wrong when you copypasted? Like you missed a letter or maybe copied it with a space or something. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 09:46, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary passwords have always worked for me when I test them. Try again. Make sure to not copy spaces. If copy-paste fails then try to type manually. Make sure the username is right and has the right capitalization. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:19, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I keep seeing people say "lede" when referring to the lead section of an article. Is that incorrect or am I annoyed for no reason? — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 09:43, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From Lead paragraph- 'In the news journalism industry, particularly in the USA, the particular news-style of lead used is sometimes referred to as a lede. This spelling is no longer labelled as jargon by major US dictionaries such as Merriam-Webster and American Heritage.' The first entry at Lede (disambiguation) redirects to 'Lead paragraph'. Dru of Id (talk) 09:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Daayumm. Now I'm glad I haven't snapped at anyone. Thanks. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 10:19, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, interesting. I always figured it was just laziness, like "i" and "u" for "I" and "you". Nyttend (talk) 13:14, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More info of its origins at its Wiktionary entry: lede. -- Obsidi♠n Soul 13:25, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are however, a number of us who steadfastly stick with "lead" in this context. Now get off my lawn! – ukexpat (talk) 14:34, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And some of us who like "lede" because we hope it lends an aura of authenticity. :) --SPhilbrick(Talk) 17:36, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've just gotten the impression that people can't spell... — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 17:55, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

LOL @ Sphilbrick. I too prefer "lead". "Lede" always sounded faux french to me for some reason. *Gets off ukexpat's launne* -- Obsidi♠n Soul 19:01, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer "lede" because of the distinct, specific meaning within Wikipedia - it's a convenient way to succinctly describe "the bit before the first heading". Of course, we need to avoid jargon especially with new users, but a link on lede can resolve that.  Chzz  ►  15:48, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had a theory, which I will keep to myself as it appears not to have panned out, but according to this site, the term “lede” was invented to avoid confusion with “lead” (as in lead type), a very common term in newspaper jargon. It’s only a blog, but sounds plausible.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 20:58, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Help desk

For the article Underworld (film series), should I use Underworld (2003 film) intertitle? Because the DVD covers composed the images of the first three films, but now there is a fourth. To generalize it, either we could try to find an official logo of the series, or upload the intertitle of the first film.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 10:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you found a solution that (so far) no one has objected to.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:54, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why first section ("info") is not working on this page? Bulwersator (talk) 11:11, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need something before the first section - I've added a return (= blank line) and it works now. Arjayay (talk) 11:40, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Bulwersator (talk) 14:29, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiwoods is a new page, and I noticed that one of the references contains "[" and "]" - I've tried several different types of ref, but none of them work correctly.

Can a ref be correctly formatted if it contains a square bracket? a_man_alone (talk) 11:32, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

URLs containing certain characters will display and link incorrectly unless those characters are encoded. For example, a space must be replaced by %20.

Single apostrophes do not need to be encoded; multiples will be parsed as italic or bold markup

The link button on the enhanced editing toolbar will encode a link.

The URL must start with a supported URI scheme. http:// and https:// are always supported. gopher://, irc://, ircs://, ftp://, news:// and mailto: will create a link and an icon but require an agent registered in the browser.require an agent registered in the browser. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 11:40, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I manually changed them and all is now well within the Wikiwoods. a_man_alone (talk) 11:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thought we had to type &#91 and &#93 to get those characters; what's the difference between my suggestion and Gadget's, since both obviously work? Moreover, I know that I have to type semicolons after "91" and "93"; I didn't include them because I couldn't think of a way (despite trying nowiki tags) to display & # 9 1 ; as text instead of as a bracket, for example. How does one get them to display as text? Nyttend (talk) 13:55, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have to use percent encoding for URLs. To encode an HTML character entity you use ASCII encoding; either decimal such as [ or hexadecimal such as [. To show an ampersand use &. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 14:53, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are several websites that will encode a given URL for you.  Chzz  ►  15:44, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the article urticaria pigmentosa is needed in spanish to give to a patient without the use of an interpertor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.11.5.186 (talk) 14:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Urticaria exists on the Spanish Wikipedia, not sure if it's relevant. But please do not rely on Wikipedia for medical advice. – ukexpat (talk) 16:56, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Spanish article is about Urticaria, a different disease. But as ukexpat said, we cannot offer medical advice. Certes (talk) 23:25, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is the draft ready to be published? Edits have been made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editorck (talk • contribs) 17:05, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You already published it. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 17:20, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Which may have been a mistake; see the comments and questions posted so far. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:25, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If the article is published, then why does it not show up in the search box? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.136.191.25 (talk) 20:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you spelled it wrong? It's right here: Really Big Coloring Books. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 20:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've just slapped a Speedy on it under G11 and A7. It is an unsourced advert for a non-notable organisation. We've wasted more than enough time on this - the creator(s) of the article have not responded constructively to any of the advice given on a number of occasions. Roger (talk) 20:34, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So... are we blind to references that aren't given inline? Or do you think the coverage in the given references doesn't suffice? — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 20:37, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps if you cited the sources properly, we might be able to assess better whether they support notability. – ukexpat (talk) 20:40, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who, me? I don't care enough. I just actually looked at the links and it seems their publications are quite controversial. Notability may be debatable but it's not obviously non-notable. I think if the article is currently too favorable of the subject and deserves to be speedied, it might be a good idea to put it back in the user's userspace so the issues can be fixed. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 20:48, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Jeraphine. There are sources, though not inline. All of which do indicate notability if you follow them (Times, BBC, TV shows? I mean come on...), everything else can be cleaned up making this not an A7 or G11 deletion. This is the only other page the author has posted to other than the draft/article, and he's only done so yesterday, so I can't see where the "have not responded constructively" comes from either.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 21:01, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To Editorck — pages will not show up in the search box immediately after creation. It's frustrating, I know, but I don't think there's a way to make the search function aware of a page immediately. It becomes aware of new pages before long, but I don't know how long "before long" is. I'm sorry that there's no way to help you with this specific issue. Nyttend (talk) 13:06, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Normally, within 24 hours.  Chzz  ►  15:37, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm a new editor and got a DPL bot message for the first time, so I wanted to check what I'd done against Wikipedia and DPL WikiProject policy, as well as best-practice guidelines, in case I'd screwed up. In an article that I was adding some text to, I'd linked the first instance of some common abbreviations, such as [[e.g.]], [[i.e.]], [[Also known as|aka]], [[Et cetera|etc]]. This was so that readers who don't speak English as their first language can easily check what it means. With [[Also known as|aka]], the reader can achieve this just by putting the mouse-pointer over the word (without clicking). I feel this isn't detrimental to any readers, yet is useful to a minority. Since "Also known as" redirects to the disambiguation page "aka", this gets flagged by the bot (hence my DPL bot message). I want to check whether my new practice when writing of linking the first instance of an abbreviation is OK or not. I now realize that it can in rare cases (such as [[Also known as|aka]]) add to the list of pages that the DPL WikiProject (of which I was previously unaware) needs to sieve through, which is obviously undesirable. If it's against Wikipedia guidelines, or simply a pain for the DPL WikiProject, I'll of course immediately revert back to leaving them unlinked. What's the policy/guidelines on this and is there a way around the issue? For example, creating a stub article for "Also known as" seems a bad solution since it would remain a stub indefinitely and I imagine doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria for creating an article; it also wouldn't prevent the problem recurring with some other abbreviation. I read of the solution of linking as [[example (disambiguation)|example]] (which the DPL bot then ignores), but since the disambiguation page is "aka" not "aka (disambiguation)" the DPL bot might still flag it, as well as it preventing the nice property of [[Also known as|aka]] giving "Also known as" on mouse-over. Since I'm a new editor, I'd really appreciate any suggestions or guidance you guys can give me on this; thanks. :-) Annoy@mouse ☻⁾ 18:03, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need to wikilink words like "i.e", "e.g", "aka" and so forth, unless the article discusses such words. (In which case you may want to link to Wiktionary. Wikipedia is not a dictionary and doesn't have articles on word definitions.) — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 18:11, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See the Manual of Style section on "Linking". What should be linked are connections relevant to the average reader. One downside of overlinking is that it obscures which links will be of value. —teb728 t c 18:45, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am sympathetic to the point that some abbreviations might be obscure to people for whom English is not their native language. One thought that occurred to me is that some abbreviations, such as “aka” ought to be avoided, so rather than link them, look for a better way to write the sentence, including, spelling it out. I checked WP:MOS thinking it might have such advice, but I didn’t see it.

Asking the question at the MOS talk page might be helpful. I do not support linking, as I do think overlinking should be avoided, and this would be an example of overlinking. As an aside, I wish we had the option of right clicking which gave you an option to see the meaning. Ironically, I’m composing this in a word processor, and when I invoked right-click in there, one of the options was a dictionary look-up. That doesn’t seem to be the case in Wikipedia, but would be a better option than linking.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 21:17, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Abbreviations#Miscellaneous_initialisms recommends that we normally spell aka out as also known as, and not link it. Certes (talk) 23:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the great guidance and advice here:-) especially the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Abbreviations#Miscellaneous_initialisms link, I should of thought to look there first! I'll immediately revert to my original editing practice of not linking the first instance of acronyms/abbreviations (which is less hassle from editing perspective!). I'll also undo the couple I'd already done; it was just one or two in a single article, so hopefully not too much harm done. Thanks for the help.:-) Annoy@mouse ☻⁾ 20:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

yesterday i had sex with my boyfriend and the next day i noticed i had these small pimple like bumps on the inside of my thigh that hurt bad. what are they and is that normal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.74.216.80 (talk) 22:29, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot offer medical advice. Please see the medical disclaimer, and contact an appropriate medical professional. -- John of Reading (talk) 22:33, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I work for a non-profit organization and am in charge of updating their Wikipedia page. Currently, it has no photos on it. I would like to take photos my non-profit has provided me with and use them on our Wikipedia page, but I do not want to upload them to wikipedia commons because then they will become public domain. How do I upload my photos so they are somewhat protected? Do I need to have them copyrighted? And, if I do get them copyrighted, how can I edit our page and use the photos on my non-profits behalf? Any help would be greatly appreciated, I've tried looking through all the Wikipedia markup help pages and photo tutorials but can't seem to get a straight answer. Thanks,

Koulighan (talk) 23:17, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The photos are copyrighted the moment they're taken (unless they were taken in the 1970's or earlier). The first thing to figure out is who owns the copyright. In the absence of a written agreement between the organization and the photographer, the copyright belongs to the photographer. Whoever owns the copyright must grant the Wikimedia Foundation a free license; see http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing

The photos should probably be uploaded to Commons rather than Wikipedia.

Once they are on Commons, put a note in the talk page of the article suggesting the pictures be added, because it would most likely be a conflict of interest for you to do it. (See WP:COI. Jc3s5h (talk) 23:45, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not the question the user was asking for, Koulighan has already stated that he/she does not want to release it for public usage.

Koulighan, I recommend reading Wikipedia:Non-free content. Non-free media are acceptable in the English Wikipedia under the Fair Use provisions of the United States.^{See note} However, as Wikipedia strives to be completely free, you are strictly limited on the media you can upload.

The media you upload must meet all the criteria outlined in Wikipedia:Non-free content, which I can summarize as follows :

• They must not be replaceable by free alternatives even when such things do not exist yet. A copyrighted photo of spaghetti for example is unacceptable, as free alternatives can readily be found or made.
• They must be resized, cropped, or otherwise rendered at a lower quality so as not to impact the commercial usage of the media by the copyright owner. For example, a 2048x2048 photo can be cropped or resized to a 250x250 photo. Big enough to be recognizable, but not too big as to become a viable commercial product in itself.
• They must have been published elsewhere.
• They must be highly relevant to the article in question, i.e. impart information that can not be conveyed by text alone. The company logo in a company's article for example is acceptable as it is highly relevant and important to the article. A picture of the company's 2011 Christmas party, however, is not. You must also use the minimum amount of media possible. Do not upload multiple pictures conveying the same thing.
• It must be used in a mainspace article. They will be deleted otherwise.
• Full details of the author, source, a notice that the media is copyrighted, and a fair use rationale should be included in the details for the file. Guidelines on how to provide one is outlined here: Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline

If you have any additional questions, don't hesitate to ask them in Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. It's a noticeboard like this help desk but specialized for copyright questions.

Note: this applies for the English Wikipedia only, Commons, other-language Wikipedias, and other Wikimedia projects have varying policies on this.

-- Obsidi♠n Soul 00:10, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"I do not want to upload them to wikipedia commons because then they will become public domain" is not actually correct; most photo's on Commons are released under an appropriate Creative Commons licence, which is a form of copyright; it means anyone can use the picture for any purpose, but using the "CC-BY-SA" means that they must provide attribution to the copyright holder, and that any derived copies must maintain that same principle. See Commons:Commons:Licensing  Chzz  ►  15:40, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]