Well, I tried everything I know to make the article "Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Magnagate and the Infinite Labyrinth", which I recently created, to display an italic title. Since the article has the {{infobox VG}} infobox, technically it should be italicized by itself, but it doesn't work. {{italic title}}, doesn't work either, even "{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Magnagate and the Infinite Labyrinth''}}" has no effect. Can anyone please tell me what is going on? Thanks, Cyan Gardevoir ^{(used EDIT!)} 00:50, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has already fixed it and you were right about Infobox VG but did you read this part of the Infobox heading: "If this is required and the title is over 50 characters or contains text in parentheses that should also be italicized, add |italic title=force"? Dismas|^(talk) 01:40, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the reason for the 50 character limit: {{italic title}} checks the title for a left parenthesis to avoid italicizing it and the text that follows it (cf. Pokémon (anime)). Unfortunately, the template depends on the {{str find}} metatemplate to do so, which cannot handle strings longer than 50 characters. Hopefully, in several months the Scribunto extension to MediaWiki will be deployed here, and this issue and others relating to the limitations of traditional metatemplates will become history. PleaseStand (talk) 01:52, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For example, I would like to have "Today's Featured Picture" as the first item in the second column.

I am using the "modern" style.

Thanks in advance for any advice :)

Nivallah (talk) 04:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe so. The layout of the main page is determined by exactly like the layout of any page, in this case by the specific templates that generate each section, and I don't beleive that that is customizable on a per-user basis. Wikipedia:Main_Page_FAQ#How_are_templates_used_on_the_Main_Page.3F has a little bit of information on how this happens. --Jayron32 04:07, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help. That answers my question.

Nivallah (talk) 05:39, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You could make your own version manually but it requires a little work. User:PrimeHunter/sandbox2 was copied from Main Page with Today's Featured Picture moved up by just moving the whole code without changing the width. If the real main page makes design changes then they will not be reflected in my copy. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:12, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Wikipedia people,

I edited the Repas de bébé site.

I cleaned up the site (I am French Canadian).

As much as I tried, I was unable to edit the title itself.

How do you edit the title?

I read you. I am not supposed to put my e-mail here.

But how will I know?

Living dangerously, here it is:

>removed>

Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.80.241.201 (talk) 05:57, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid you have to come back here to check for your answer. This is for your own protection.
To answer your question, you change the title of a page by moving it. You should see "Move this page" in the links at the bottom. Rojomoke (talk) 06:14, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Except you need to have an autoconfirmed account to see/use that link. - Purplewowies (talk) 06:15, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise you can ask for a move at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Rojomoke (talk) 06:18, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir/Madam

Aritcle on Chandrika Balan was created sometime back. I wish to know how I can send her picture to be placed on the right hand side box as is shown of other writers. I have her photo. Kindly let me know how I can send it to you or how I can affix it myself.

I had asked the question before but the reply was not clear to me as the reply was to get license etc. and talking about images. I am making it clear that I want the photo of Chandrika Balan to be placed alongside her article.

Your help and cooperation is greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panank (talk • contribs) 15:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We MUST address the license issue, before you can upload the photo. To start with:

• Did you take the photograph yourself?
• If you did not, do you know the photographer, and are you able to contact them directly?

thanks, --Robert Keiden (talk) 15:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Robert Keiden,

The photograph was taken by Mr. C.G.Balan, Chandrika's husband and sent to me when I asked her for one to be uploaded. I don't think it requires any license as it is private and personal. I can provide my husband's email ID. If needed, you can contact him yourself and confirm. On the other hand, if you want him to contact you and confirm, just let me know.

Many thanks for your prompt response.

Regards

Chandrika Balan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panank (talk • contribs)

Practically every photo someone takes today is copyrighted, whether it has a copyright notice on it or not. Wikipedia and those who redistribute its content do not wish to infringe copyright, so we require the copyright holder (generally the person who took the photo) to grant a license giving us (and everyone else) permission to modify and/or distribute the photo for both commercial and noncommercial purposes. For articles about living people, exceptions to this rule are unlikely.

One such acceptable license is the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 license we use for Wikipedia's text. Have the photographer/copyright holder fill out Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries, attach a copy of the photo (and the filename you will upload it under), and send both to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Then you can upload the photo to Wikimedia Commons, putting {{OTRS pending}} in the "Permission" box. A Wikimedia volunteer will verify the permission and add the relevant information to the image's description page.

Alternatively, the photographer/copyright holder can create his own account and upload the photo himself. If he uploads the photo himself, and the photograph has not been previously published, sending the permission email might not be necessary. He can refer to Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information. PleaseStand (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On this page, what does "d. o. 995" mean? Him having died in 995 ("d. 995") would fit in with our article, which places him in the 10th century, and "d. c. 995" would make sense too, but I'm not familiar with the meaning of "o." in this case. Possibly I've misunderstood the whole thing and it's not a date of death at all. Can anyone shed some light? Thanks – Arms & Hearts (talk) 14:21, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Arms & hearts! The helpdesk is about how to use or edit Wikipedia. The correct place to ask your question is at the WP:Reference desk/Miscellaneous. With friendly regards, Lova Falk talk 14:39, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think? I suppose it's a borderline case. I guess I should've mentioned that I'm hoping to use the information in an article, namely 10th century in literature. (And that I try to avoid the reference desk like the plague.) – Arms & Hearts (talk) 15:10, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from the "Islandsk skjald" (Icelandic bard) preceding it, it seems to be either Danish or Norwegian, and then "d.o." would indeed mean "død omkring", which corresponds nicely with your initial interpretation (literally "died around").--Saddhiyama (talk) 15:21, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, brilliant, thanks. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 15:23, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My name was misappropriated by someone who tried to start a wiki page about my poetry. Now, when you search my name on google... all the drama of trying to get it removed on WIKIPEDIA appears. I would like it all removed as soon as possible, or I will have to consider other options. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Exitblur (talk • contribs) 14:36, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been deleted (this is the relevant extract from the deletion log: 20:36, June 19, 2012 The Bushranger (talk | contribs) deleted page Robert S. Prattico (A7: Article about a real person, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject). There isn't much else we can do.--ukexpat (talk) 15:15, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Exitblur, given that it was you that started the page [1], I suspect that you might like to reword that. As for what 'other options' you are considering, I've no idea, but you might well be advised to read WP:NLT. I'll also point out that we have no control over what Google does with your name.

Note: for the curious, see also [2] etc. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:21, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The first Google result for me was this. Apparently someone claiming not to be the subject and the article creator (but the same account as the poster above) requesting the same thing. My best advice to Mr Exitblur is that, if you don't want your name posted all over Wikipedia, would be to not put it there in the first place. I'm afraid most references, if not all, are probably going to be here as long as Wikipedia exists. Яehevkor ✉ 15:28, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With many people clamouring FOR a Wikipedia article, it is not encouraging that when one is written and then deleted, the author (or maybe the subject) of the article then complains that it is insulting that they can still find a trace of the deletion. If they had taken the time to improve the article, I'm sure they wouldn't now be here complaining. Astronaut (talk) 16:04, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now, when I use Google to search for "Robert S. Prattico", this page's archive for June 22nd appears near the top of the list. I predict that by Christmas, the archive for September 16th will appear there instead. Maproom (talk) 16:36, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you realize that every time you do this, it improves the odds that somebody will find this discussion (which you've started a couple of times before) in their search engine results? --Orange Mike | Talk 16:37, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A candidate of arbitration committee fi.wikipedia.org has blocked 91 154 53 180 for 24-hours [3] since he had been asked to explain his relation to another member of the society, who keeps blocking a vast number of the users. [4] Could it be possible to deliver this message to fi.wikipedia.org as an inquiry to unlock 91.154.53.180 and possibly and also to a before mentioned arbitration committee candidate - or just unlock 91.154.53.180 in http://fi.wikipedia.org . Thank you in advance! Flatearthfinn (talk) 15:36, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Also It would be kind to deliver a query of the reason on behalf of the same name, why there articles has been emptied partly, without explanation.
  • http://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Suomen_kunnat&diff=prev&oldid=12120660
  • http://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hair&diff=prev&oldid=12120661
  • http://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rovaniemi&diff=prev&oldid=12120664
  • http://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perussuomalaisten_Uudenmaan_piiri&diff=prev&oldid=12120666
  • http://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Siuntio&diff=prev&oldid=12120667
  • http://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pakaa&diff=prev&oldid=12120672

fi.wikipedia.org does not give any explanation. Asking leads into an immediate ban. Flatearthfinn (talk) 15:45, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is the help desk for the English-language Wikipedia. We have no control on what goes on at fi.wikipedia.org. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:02, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the "rules" for article assessment? Particularly, what makes an article qualify for A-class rather than start-class, and what makes an article qualify for top-importance rather than low-importance? I am suspicious of the motivations for this edit, considering the editor's self confessed desire to make F.R.Khan "a household name" (see the edit summary for this edit). Thanks. Astronaut (talk) 16:19, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Assessment - Purplewowies (talk) 16:45, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment is typically done by editors affiliated with the relevant WikiProject. In this case, the relevant projects are "WP:WikiProject_Bangladesh" "WP:WikiProject_Illinois" "WP:WikiProject_Chicago" "WP:WikiProject_Civil_engineering" . However, the editor does not appear to be a member of any of these projects, and this looks like a random edit instead of an actual assessment. I think it should be safe to revert.--Robert Keiden (talk) 01:02, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have concerns about a user who is incorrectly uploading images to Commons and adding them here, usually with the wrong rationale or none at all. However, I've no idea where to take this. Can anyone help? Paul MacDermott (talk) 17:39, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who is the user? What are the images? --Orange Mike | Talk 17:46, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Think he is referring to the one he removed from Amanda Holden's article . File:Amanda Holden3.jpg A probable copyvio requiring 'speedy'--Aspro (talk) 17:54, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. The user is ThomasB4412 (talk · contribs). Three he appears to have uploaded are File:Amanda Holden3.jpg, File:Amanda Holden Lying Down.jpg and File:Jessica Fox3.jpg. Amanda Holden3 suggests it is free use, though I have my doubts. Paul MacDermott (talk) 17:56, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, File:Samantha Womack.jpg was uploaded on 1 September, and is also in the deletion pile, so I'll remove that from her page too. Paul MacDermott (talk) 18:02, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question on who Founded the Hawaii Auduban Society and the Elepaio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.17.221.151 (talk) 18:42, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to ask your question at WP:REFDESK rather than here. This is for matters relating to how to edit Wikipedia. Paul MacDermott (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I served as a 2nd Lt. in the 136th Armored Ordnance Battalion of the 14th Armored Division. I have a history of the Division written by a Captain in one of the combat units and published about a year after the end of the war. It is not referenced in the Wikipedia article and I believe contains additional valuable information. Also I have a good memory of many events in the division combat history. For example, we lost 26 tanks immediately upon attacking the town of Lohr. In particular I commanded an advanced tank recovery unit at the battle of Hatten/Rittershofen and was responsible for the recovery of most of the 150 tanks as cited. Three of my men at this time received bronze stars for their brave actions in recovering disabled tanks under fire and saving the lives of the crews. I think I could contribute some information about this battle. I also went into the town of Dachau with the 14th Armored Division units and saw part of the concentration camp at that time. Here I think an additional line or two of text might be worth adding.

It seems to me that a few details, observed by people who were actually there, would make the piece more interesting. For example, we tried to break through the Siegfried Line three times, succeeding on the third try. The first attempt we were stopped cold by the tremendous firepower coming from the many pillboxes and bunkers. The second attack we went as far as we could but then pulled back and the line was bombed by over 1000 American bombers. This was totally ineffective. What it did was tear apart the fake houses that had been built over many bunkers, but the 2 meter thick reinforced concrete was still there. The third try some of the Engineers fastened 50 lb packs of TNT on their backs and crawled over the open ground before the line at night and with some smoke protection. With the TNT they opened avenues through the dragon's teeth so that tanks could rapidly get to the bunkers, if they could escape being destroyed by the fire from the bunkers. Then the bunkers were inactivated by our infantry putting grenades through the firing slots by hand. Needless to say it was not a fun exercise, but it worked.

I would like to be able to communicate with the principal author of the piece on the 14th Armored Division, as I think I could add some information that would improve the article. I do not believe that I should just do some rewriting without such consultation. I realize that the principal author, if he was a member of the 14th Armored Division, may no longer be living, as I am almost 90 and was young during the war. If some one knows of the principal author and that he is no longer around, I would appreciate being informed. Norman Beecher — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.93.152.214 (talk) 21:33, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no one principal editor of 14th Armored Division (United States). User:Tanker72 appears to have contributed the most, but that person has been asked in the talk page not to use copyrighted material by "Jim Lankford National Historian and Website Editor 14th Armored Division Association". You can check out other contributors by clicking on the history tab.

As for your personal remembrances, see WP:PRIMARY. Basically, unless they've been published, they're not considered really appropriate for the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:57, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But you could try to get your memories published in a reliable source and, if you are successful, the information could be added to the article.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:16, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]