Help desk
< January 14	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 16 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

January 15

Accounts

Hi,

What are the benefits of creating a Wikipedia account and logging in, as opposed to browsing without creating an account?

Thank you in advance for your help!

PM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.66.25.248 (talk) 00:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try reading this: Wikipedia:Why_create_an_account lol (talk · contributions) 00:36, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You get the main advantages when you edit rather than when you browse. But having an account would enable you to set a watchlist and to set personal preferences. —teb728 t c 00:58, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And create user subpages, and add scripts to your monobook.js, and enable gadgets in Preferences. – ukexpat (talk) 01:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've used Wikipedia for years but only created an account a few days ago. So far, what I've noticed is that you get to add articles to a Watchlist. You also (eventually) get access to locked articles (although I don't really know the details of the exact policy of when I can edit locked articles). But this is useful because, for example, I wanted to make a change to the Vietnam War article but couldn't because it was locked. I had to ask one of the editors to make the change for me, which is pretty lame. But I guess Vietnam is a controversial enough topic to warrant a lock, although it sucks if you want to make legit changes. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To edit semi-protected articles, your account must be autoconfirmed, which means it has been active for four days and made at least ten edits. Autoconfirmation will allow you move pages and upload images as well. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 20:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Signature help

Can anyone help me figure out how to get this signature down to under the 255 character limit for signatures? It is at 260 currently including spaces. I think it is possible, but i could be wrong.

[[User:Account9000|WAT]] ([[User talk:Account9000|talk]] '''•''' [[Special:Contributions/Account9000|contributions]])

Thanks! lol (talk · contributions) 00:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use hex colourcodes instead of names: [[User:Account9000|WAT]] ([[User talk:Account9000|talk]] '''•''' [[Special:Contributions/Account9000|contributions]]) Algebraist 00:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Video conversion question

Hi. I'd like to upload a video in the public domain to put into an article about a Supreme Court case, Scott v. Harris. The video is in a RMVB format and I was wondering if anyone knows how to possibly convert it into an Ogg video so it can be played on the page. Thanks.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 01:42, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you can somehow use realplayer to convert to a common format (.rm, .wmv, .mpg, etc.), then you can use websites like this one to convert that to .ogg. Xenon54 (talk) 02:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

mistake on Larry Elder's profile

I was trying to read more about Larry Elder. Under Spouse column, it indicated he has two marriages. When I searched more and found out actually the names of those two ladies was/is Michael Reagan's spouses. Just FYI —Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.48.52.241 (talk) 02:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the names from the infobox (after a bit of research to verify that they were incorrect). You could have done that yourself, though. Deor (talk) 03:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"What links here" time lag

I've poked around enough to understand that, when I change a link in a template, there are a couple of tasks that get thrown into the job queue. The first is to update each page that transcludes the template, so that it shows the updated information. The second is to update the "What links here" for the article that used to link from the template, but now no longer does.

I also understand that the length of time before these actions get completed depends on the length of the job queue. Unfortunately, I don't have any context regarding that number. The job queue is currently at almost 1 million — is that long?

I'm asking because it appears to be taking a very, very long time for "What links here" to update, even though the transclusions have gone through. For example, back on December 20th, I changed a link in {{Template:Country Radio Stations in Illinois}}, from WAAG (FM) to WAAG, following a page move. Three weeks later, the "What links here" for WAAG (FM) still shows the pages that transclude that template. I have a number of similar cases. While this often happened in the past, it seems that the lag for this has stretched from a day or two back in the summer to three weeks and counting now.

So, is this normal? Aside from null edits at every single transcluding page, is there anything I can do about it? It's not a huge problem in that the correct information is showing in the articles themselves, but it makes the job of monitoring incoming links to disambiguation pages very difficult when links that have been fixed appear not to be. Mlaffs (talk) 18:33, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It may be me grasping the wrong end of the stick, but are you sure you've followed the redirect from WAAG back to WAAG (FM)? When I look at the "what links here" for the latter it only shows the following, none of which are transclusions, and all of which are links.

Wikipedia:Help desk (links)

WBWN (links)

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/WikiProject Illinois articles by quality log (links)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Illinois/Assessment (links)

User:AlexNewArtBot/IllinoisSearchResult/archive5 (links)

WLUV (links)

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Radio station articles by quality log (links)

Again, I may be missing something, but all of those appear to be correct, and wouldn't need to update following your change in December. _Gb^T/c 19:15, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my mistake, it's WBWN and WLUV that are the issue, isn't it. To clarify, then, the problem is the fact that WBWN and WLUV are still showing up as linking to WAAG (FM) even though the template transcluded onto those pages has been updated to point directly at WAAG? _Gb^T/c 19:19, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's the problem exactly. Here's an example that's a day older, and much more wide-spread. {{Template:Cumulus Media}}, edited on December 19th to change a link from KBED (AM) to KBED. There are a huge number of articles transcluding this template, all of which are showing the updated version — some of them have been cleared from the KBED (AM) "What links here", but a huge number of them remain. Mlaffs (talk) 19:34, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, well, just to double check it's not anything else, let me edit one of the two pages to see if that pushes it out of the links list for WAAG (FM). _Gb^T/c 19:35, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And it's just done that - WLUV is no longer on the list. Must be a job queue issue, then, I guess, although why it's taking so long is beyond me - I wonder if anyone else has any thoughts? _Gb^T/c 19:37, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bump — relisting in hopes that another crack at eyeballs will find an answer. Mlaffs (talk) 03:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can make the articles disappear from the "What links here" list, if you really want to, by making a null edit to each article (just open the edit page and click on "Save" without making an actual edit). I'm not sure that the presence of false leads in "What links here" is really much of a problem, though. Deor (talk) 03:19, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm aware of null edits, but that's a rather annoying solution when you're talking about 100 or more false leads to a single article. And you're right — in the normal course of events, false leads aren't a big problem. Where they are a big problem is a) when you're trying to clean up incoming links to disambiguation pages and b) when you're trying to make sure that you're properly revised all the appropriate links in the event of a page move, rather than just leaving a mess of redirects. I'm mostly trying to understand why this time lag is getting longer, and materially so, and perhaps about the possibility that there's something wrong. Mlaffs (talk) 03:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I missed your reference to null edits above. Some advice about the situation can currently be found at WP:Village pump (technical)#Transclusion errors?. Deor (talk) 01:59, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The whatlinkshere will be updated when the job queue clears, if you can't wait request a bot to do the null edits for you. --Commander Keane (talk) 03:12, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting my page

How do I delete my page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by FizzDoc300 (talk • contribs) 03:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your userpage, or a page you created? Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 03:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can place {{db-author}} or {{db-userreq}} on it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:40, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've initiated a discussion with this user at his/her talk page. --Dweller (talk) 15:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to amend the 'key people' listed on the Airlines PNG page

Hi there,

On the right hand side of the screen, it lists the KEY PEOPLE. This needs to be amended.

Key people was John Wild Sr. (chairman) was Simon Wild (CEO)

Key People now Simon Wild (Chairman) now John Fitzgerald (CEO and Managing Director)

Kind Regards

Vyvyen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Balusmeri (talk • contribs) 03:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evidently you refer to the key_people item in the {{Infobox Airline}} template in the Airlines PNG article. It looks like Airlines PNG has not updated their official Web site, as the About Us page says:

"Airlines PNG continues to be a family-run business with John Wild Senior as its Chairman and his son Simon D. Wild as CEO."

However, that page does not list its date of last edit (yet another example of how everything sucks compared to Wikipedia), and the copyright notice at the bottom says 2007. So maybe things have changed. Let's ask the mighty Google:

PNG Airlines chairman

This alleged press release confirms your claim. You can update the infobox template by clicking the "edit this page" tab at the top of the article. --Teratornis (talk) 04:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Setting cell size in tables

Resolved

This is a continuation from my question before (#Scrollable timeline). The template, Template:Holden timeline has individual boxes with numbers representing years along the second row. However, some are very narrow, while others are wide. Is it possible to make each cell equal in length? If this means that the timeline will become longer that is fine, but the current unevenness looks rather unsightly. Thanks in advance. OSX (talk • contributions) 04:42, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This should help. I'd place width attributes in that date row and remove them from other rows. I'd also use em as the width unit so the cell size expands with the user's font size. JBarta (talk) 06:04, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I can not get this to work. OSX (talk • contributions) 08:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made a few changes to the template. I'm not sure if "perfect" is possible given the constraints of HTML, CSS and Wiki markup... but you might like the change. If not, feel free to undo. JBarta (talk) 22:22, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Not only did you fix the cell width, but also the browser issues with the entire table width being suited to one resolution only. Thanks again. OSX (talk • contributions) 22:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting Numeric Fields

Ok I am working on getting a page up to FL standards---List of World Series of Poker Main Event Champions. Now here is my problem, the first numeric field, which represents the monetary winning in the Main Event does not want to sort properly. Any idea on how to fix this?---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloonCSD Survey Results 06:58, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is because of the commas in the numbers, the parser treats the values as strings not as integers. If you want it to sort right you will have to just remove them. I am afraid I don't think there is a way to keep the commas and have it sort correctly too. Icewedge (talk) 07:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is, I just don't know what the proper mark up is to do so...---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloonCSD Survey Results 07:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{sort}} should do the work? — CHAN DLER ^#10 — 07:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

or {{Nts}} or some other found in Category:Sorting templates — CHAN DLER ^#10 — 07:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Chandler, I think NTS is the trick I was looking for.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloonCSD Survey Results 15:11, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I was wrong. It seems it can also be done with a 'hidden sortkey', see Help:Sorting#Sorting_with_hidden_sortkey. I will try to apply this to table. Icewedge (talk) 07:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

....OK... so my solution didn't work. Icewedge (talk) 07:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Orphaned" image?

Hey there, The logo for the United States Democratic Party (File:Democratslogo.svg) appears to have been tagged by a bot today as being Orphaned (and indeed, its page lists no file links), yet it is obviously being used on the Democratic Party (United States) page.

This seemed odd to me, and I am wondering if there is some way to preserve this file? Cat1205123 (talk) 08:38, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the tag as invalid. According to the page history, the page was recently blanked, the job queue is really long at the moment, so it will take MediaWiki a while to realize that the image is back on the article. Don't worry, everythings fine. Foxy Loxy ^Pounce! 08:44, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

deleted posting

A while ago, I came across an article on Anna Dengel, a Catholic nun who was a doctor and started a Catholic order. She was good friends with Mother Theresa. The article said it was incomplete and I have a couple books which could serve as references for the article (eg. a book by Susan E. Smith, "Women in Mission"), but I can no longer locate the article on Wikipedia.

I have little experience with Wikipedia postings and am wondering if that incomplete posting may be around somewhere where I can add some helpful references. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.107.255.163 (talk) 16:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

you're looking for Anna Maria Dengel? — CHAN DLER ^#10 — 16:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And to cite books, have a look at this template {{Cite book}} on how to do it correctly — CHAN DLER ^#10 — 16:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Local holidays in Vijayawada

Can anyone tell me if there are any local holidays in Vijayawada (India) round about mid January.

Thank you Lurdenlaw —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lurdenlaw (talk • contribs) 16:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. Algebraist 17:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar needed for AGF

I would like to award a barnstar to a user who has done an admirable job of assuming good faith. Which would be most appropriate? Keepscases (talk) 17:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find a barnstar/award directly related to AGF, but there are several others from which to choose at WP:Award. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 17:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks--I am surprised there apparently isn't one specifically for AGF, but I am sure I can find something. Keepscases (talk) 17:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Or take the basics of one that you like, and modify it to fit your need, the code is pretty basic once you have a model.---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloonCSD Survey Results 18:09, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If this user assumes good faith, he or she probably has a forgiving, tolerant nature, and won't care whether you use the most "appropriate" barnstar. Just a plain old {{The Original Barnstar}} (whose title violates WP:TITLE#Lowercase, grrr) shows that you recognize the editor's efforts. The barnstar box has a space where you type some text to explain why you are awarding it. Some people like to fancy up the barnstars, but this creates more complexity to confuse people and raise questions (such as this one). Surely we have enough real problems to solve on Wikipedia that we don't need to create additional problems of worrying about which barnstar to use. --Teratornis (talk) 20:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm somewhat surprised nobody has written a scolding essay against barnstar creep. If people are going to complain about having more instructions, which are actually useful and essential, I'd think someone would complain about having more barnstars to choose from. I'm kind of joking and not joking at the same time here. --Teratornis (talk) 04:29, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

multicolumn format

Is there a way to convert the Good article subsections at User:TonyTheTiger/Reviews to a multicolumn format that depends on the screen resolution of the viewer.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, use the columns I'm using on User:MacGyverMagic/Young and set percentages for the width. - 87.211.75.45 (talk) 19:34, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

sortable tables

Is there a way to make the sort function reverse sort first at User:TonyTheTiger/Table?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dealing with Vandalism

The article on Council Wars was vandalized. I undid the vandalism. Am I obligated to insert one of those standard vandalism templates in the user's discussion page? The user has no account, just an IP address. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're not obliged to do anything - if you want to then you could use one of the templated warning messages you'll find at WP:UWT, but in this instance the one thing I would say is that the IP that vandalised the article did so three days ago. Since the assignment of IP addresses, particularly dynamic ones such as that address, changes, is entirely possible that the person who now has that IP isn't the same person who made the vandal edit, so I would be inclined not to bother warning them for this instance of vandalism. _Gb^T/c 20:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stacking Edits

Recently, I found that the page Command & Conquer Red Alert 3: Uprising was edited nine times in a row by the same user in the span of half an hour. Personally, I find that sort of thing very annoying, but I figured I'd look to see if there was some sort of official Wikipedia policy against this sort of thing before I contacted the user who made the edits. I looked at WP:EDIT and a few other places, but I couldn't find anything addressing this sort of thing. Is there any policy or guideline somewhere that discourages stacking edits in this way or is it something that I simply need to just get over? -Thunderforge (talk) 20:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no guideline against this, as long as the edits comply with other guidelines and policies. I have certainly made this many or more edits in a row to many article. Ohhh... a new expansion for RA3... shiny. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 20:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If a user is making lots of small changes to an article quickly (say, at a rate of ~1/min), then it can be worthwhile reminding them of the preview button. Nine edits in an hour isn't really that bad, though. Confusing Manifestation(Say hi!) 22:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at the edits and they actually look pretty good, the changes aren't all small, references were added and misspellings fixed and article was expanded in only 9 edits. I see no issue. Mjpresson (talk) 23:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{Uw-preview}} can be used but it doesn't seem required here. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've found on occasion that spacing edits out rather than doing all the changes in one lump edit is sometimes best when dealing potentially high-view articles to prevent edit conflicts. GlassCobra 01:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind nine edits in a row by the same user. I do mind the lack of edit summaries. I suppose when it comes to gamers we should keep our expectations low. --Teratornis (talk) 04:25, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's kind of uncivil don't you think? Maybe he doesn't know how to use an edit summary. Instead of making a snide remark, you could go to his talk page and explain that he should use the summary box and why. Theresa Knott | token threats 04:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've enjoyed my share of computer games and I think most gamers are (just) rational enough to admit that on some level, playing computer games is pretty silly. It's not like using computers to do something worthwhile like cure cancer or solve the energy crisis, after all. If I meet a gamer who can't take a joke, I'm not going to be deferential - no, I'm going to say All your base are belong to us (computer games are all about pwnage). I'd say the incivility is in Wikipedia's design. Here we have this stupefyingly complex system that relies on casual users to know a vast number of unintuitive policies and guidelines, such as the complex feature of edit summaries. (I noticed those fairly early in my attempt to learn Wikipedia editing - it took me about a month to use them fairly consistently. I remember noticing edit comments, and their lack, in the first few times that I looked at a history page. It seemed staggeringly obvious to me that every edit needs an edit comment, and I'm not sure how this is not equally obvious to every editor. But different things are obvious to different people.) As far as what I tell people, I've learned it's best to wait for some sign that someone wants information from me before I offer it, although I can't say I always do what's best. You never know with strangers - some people react very negatively to someone showing up uninvited with a lesson for them. Edit summaries are merely an optional courtesy we provide to other editors. Maybe some people don't care to be courteous - they can still contribute. --Teratornis (talk) 22:07, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I could add that Foldit is an attempt to harvest useful work from some of the vast amount of human brainpower currently wasted on unproductive computer games. (According to Clay Shirky, collaborative sites like Wikipedia are successful attempts to harvest useful work from some of the vast amount of human brainpower wasted on unproductive entertainments such as television viewing. Of course a lot of what we write about on Wikipedia happens to be television programs, so it's hard to call that progress. But it's a start.) --Teratornis (talk) 22:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In response to Mjpresson's comment, my issue wasn't with what the user added to that page (I'm glad he made those changes) but that he spread them out over nine edits rather than making one large one. The template PrimeHunter mentioned ({{Uw-preview}}) has a line about "clogging up the recent changes and page history," which is my concern when I see nine edits in a row made in half an hour. Based on what others have said, I guess the consensus is that it isn't an issue for most users, but I'm a bit confused why templates like the one PrimeHunter mentioned exist if it isn't. -Thunderforge (talk) 16:13, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Consensus" here may or may not reflect consensus among some other group of Wikipedia users. See Blind men and an elephant. Wikipedia has its share of internal contradictions, as do all other collaborative works (e.g., the law, the Bible, etc.). Different Wikipedia users have different editing styles. Some like to make numerous small edits (perhaps with no edit summaries), while others edit in larger chunks. Other users may disagree as to how much this even matters. For better or worse, Wikipedia has a large and unavoidable human element, as we have not yet reduced the task of building the largest encyclopedia in history to an algorithm. (I think ultimately we or our successors will, but not for several decades.) Perhaps as time goes on the diff feature will further improve, giving us better tools for analyzing what other users have done. For now, we remain at the mercy of other editors, who may or may not make their work easy to analyze with the tools at hand. --Teratornis (talk) 22:26, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hobartimus is some dictator .. or what?

my message on Talk:Hungary was deleted because was "unintelligble spam" ?!

can you somebedy explain why?

(message)
? Foudation date ?

Uhorsko and Maďarsko is not to same. (SK)
Uhersko and Maďarsko is not to same. (CZ)
Ugarska and Mađarska is not to same. (HR)
(see other wiki)
. . .

Hungarian language is simple with out of diferent between this two parts of history (before and after 1918) .. English language using to same simple interpretation .. (from Hungarian language)

"Hungaria" (Before 1918) .. (first king: Stephan I.) Multinalional kingdom (in 19. century just with 30% hungaria nationals)
Hungaria (After 1918) .. today
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Potocny (talk • contribs)

Probably deleted because it was unintelligble, spam or not. Grsz ¹¹ 21:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it's totally incomprehensible. If you want to contribute to the English Wikipedia, you'll have to do so in much clearer English. Algebraist 21:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree here. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 21:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone is interested, the relevant diff is here. TN‑X-Man 21:28, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ok sorry my (english is not very god) .. (I am just beginer)
what this? better?

Foundation data in infobox is disputed (see topic Hungaria on other Wiki .. Cz, Sk or Hr)
For many people (and in many laguages) is kingdom of Hungaria not to same like Hungaria after 1918.
See different in Cz language:
Kingdom of Hungaria is Uhersko (multi-nationals kingdom)
Hungaria (1918) is Maďarsko
Potocny —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.212.1.74 (talk) 21:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you are asking if your second post is more or less comprehensible than than your first. If so, they are equally incomprehensible. I suggest that you confine yourself to editing in languages where you have at least minimal fluency. —teb728 t c 05:41, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm following him now. He's saying that the pre-1918 "Hungary" was a multi-ethnic state; and the post-1918 "Hungary" is an ethnic (Magyar-majority) state. In many East-European languages and wikis, they are separate words, and separate articles -- Uhorsko and Maďarsko in Slovak; Uhersko and Maďarsko in Czech; Ugarska and Mađarska in Magyar. He feels that we should be doing the same, rather than implying a bogus continuity. (I have not idea who Hobartimus is or what he/she has to do with the question.) --Orange Mike | Talk 17:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to help you Potocny. Leave me a message at User talk:Commander Keane using the "new section" tab. Explain the situation the best you can.--Commander Keane (talk) 11:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Citing a court case

When Ray Ellis died, I knew someone needed to edit his biography because of the lawsuit over the Today Show theme. I did that, but I'm not sure I correctly cited the case. I put the information in the text, but it should probably go in the references.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 22:09, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Use {{Cite court}}. Xenon54 (talk) 22:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I need to put in the reference, and I'm not sure it fits that template.

205 U.S.P.Q. 1241 (1978) ; No. 77 Civ. 0008 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 4, 1978)Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 23:15, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I went back and read what those sections of the template meant. It actually does do what I want it to do.

I'm still not sure how much of the decision and details to include in the article.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 23:20, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

italy

italy was home to what empire in 285 ad

This desk is for asking questions about using Wikipedia. I suggest you ask at the reference desk or check out the article on Italy. Cheers! TN‑X-Man 23:18, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We also have an article about the History of Italy. What are schools teaching kids these days, that students can't figure out how to look up articles on Wikipedia? --Teratornis (talk) 04:43, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template help

I'm having trouble understanding how to make this into a transcludable link with the template brackets. Help? Mjpresson (talk) 23:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any page can be transcluded with the template brackets. In this case, use {{User:Mjpresson/Template: José Mojica Marins nbx}}. Algebraist 23:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks. Mjpresson (talk) 23:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you want it as a template and not in your user space just move it to Template:Navbox José Mojica Marins or something similar. If you do that, the vde links will work properly too. – ukexpat (talk) 15:25, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]