Help desk
< December 22	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 24 >

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.

December 23

Sanctium Band

hello,

can you please add brackets around the word 'band' in the title. This is my bands wiki and i cant see how to edit the name title — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.8.3.160 (talk) 01:17, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's up for AFD. Dismas|^(talk) 02:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And has now been speedily deleted per A7 of the criteria. – ukexpat (talk) 15:42, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

many views one day

Why does an article usually have about 25-30 reads per day, then one day have 1,900, and then go back to normal, e.g. [1]? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 03:20, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Such things can sometimes be tracked to the topic being relevant to a current news event, or the article getting a link from a high-traffic website. I don't know the answer in your example. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Followup: do those stats count the number of different users (IP addresses), or does it count each time the same user reads it? Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 03:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It counts each time the same user loads the page. See http://stats.grok.se/about and http://dumps.wikimedia.org/other/pagecounts-raw/ PrimeHunter (talk) 03:54, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then someone could hold down the F5 key and it would register a large number of hits. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?}

PS - I've seen bumps caused by something in the news. They would spike for 2 or 3 days and then trail off for the next few days. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 04:00, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That specific spike might be because, on 11 December, an e-book entitled "The Chess Combination from Philidor to Karpov" by Raymond Keene was apparently made available on some websites. It might not be a legal copy, so I won't link to it.

Or, yes, someone held down F5. But why bother? We don't get paid by hit-count :-) Chzz ► 15:25, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That is most likely the cause of this spike. But I get paid twice as much if the number of hits goes over 1,000 per day. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 18:00, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why does Wikipedia overly promote the use of "ANYONE" can edit, create on their site when in actuality that is not true?

The Administration at Wiki seems extremely biased possibly to save space on their servers. Giving resources and well known facts do not come into play because of 1 admins actions (1 perons opinion) which to me a viewer of Wikipedia definitely destroys the integrity of the page as a whole. Will Wikipedia please stop advertising the use of "ANYONE" or "EVERYONE" instead replace it with something like - Wikipedia decisions are based singularly on the decision of 1 person (admin) whom might be considerably biased to any information submitted? Besides not "anyone" can understand even after reading the instructions every day until they die how to edit nor post any article on wiki. There is no ease of use either. It is poorly advertised the wrong way, the donations put forward to the site have all gone to the wrong places. Will Wikipedia please change it's ways before people take notice and something bigger and better comes along? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Botcrawl (talk • contribs) 05:42, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Although administrators are the ones who perform the actual deletions, it is the community who decides what is appropriate for inclusion on Wikipedia. The article of yours that was deleted did not meet the notability guidelines for companies, and had no reliable, third-party sources. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Create a definition

I think I may have coined a phrase and want to define and note it on Wikipedia. Can I create a new "pop culture term?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by JDStarek (talk • contribs) 06:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm sorry. A topic can only have a Wikipedia article once people have written about it in reliable sources such as newspaper articles, respected news websites, and such like. You can read more about this at WP:NOTNEO. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:44, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You could try submitting it over at Urban Dictionary - the website that is, not the wiki entry. a_man_alone (talk) 14:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wiki-cumshot.png

bellow File:Wiki-cumshot.png, there was a message saying: "To prevent the use of this image for vandalism, it can only be used on pages for which it is specifically allowed. To use this image legitimately, such as in an article about human anatomy or physiology, contact an administrator either directly or by posting a request on MediaWiki talk:Restricted-use image list." why can a vandal not simply download the image to there hard drive, then re-upload it? or get another image of the same act elsewhere? thanks for your time. Jake1993811 (talk) 06:54, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A vandal could do something like that with an autoconfirmed account (or right away at Commons) but most vandals don't spend that effort. If a file is identical to an existing byte for byte then upload may be rejected but I'm not sure about the details. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Help with policy concerning custom signature?

I wasn't sure whether I should post this here or on Wikipedia talk:Signatures. I am considering making my displayed signature "Batfish" when my username is "MsBatfish". I couldn't find any relevant policy on whether or not this was acceptable. Wikipedia:Signatures says not to use a signature to "impersonate" another user and not to forge another user's signature. While I don't think this change would be considered "impersonation", I'm not sure how others understand the issue. There is no active user named "Batfish", and no user page or user talk page with that name, but there was an editor with that name who made a total of 2 edits 6 years ago. I only found this out by manually checking Special:Contributions/Batfish. I don't think anyone would confuse me with that person, but I wanted to err on the side of caution and check whether there is any rule or guideline about this before doing anything. Would using this custom signature be ok, provided it meets all the requirements of a custom signature and I perhaps put some kind of disclaimer on my user page? Thank you. -MsBatfish (talk) 09:15, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds OK to me when the name is linked to the right account. Others do it. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:34, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not against any strict rule. However, best-practice is to include your user-name, in some form - simply because, it can cause confusion - for example, users might see your sig, and type in (at some point) User talk:Batfish and leave you messages there. Or similar. So I think it'd be better to live with something like <Ms Batfish>.

But, as I say - it's not against any strict rule. Chzz ► 14:39, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks PrimeHunter and Chzz. I'm still not sure what I'll do. Plenty of people certainly have custom signatures with names that are different from their usernames, sometimes vastly different, but I agree it can be a bit confusing, especially to new users who may not realize this. I just would prefer to get rid of the "Ms". -MsBatfish (talk) 08:25, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Users essays on Civility

I have an essay at User:Buster7/Incivility which I believe should be included on the list at Category:Users essays on civility. I believe it is an administrator-generated list. Is there some protocal to be included? Buster Seven Talk 12:47, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The name is Category:User essays on civility and it's not administrator-generated. Just add [[Category:User essays on civility]] to the essay. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:21, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thanks!Buster Seven Talk 13:42, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an easy way to move my wikipedia files to wikimedia?

The system for moving files seems quite complicated. Is there an easy way to move the pictures to wikimedia? Torqueing (talk) 14:11, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Easy way is, ask someone else to do it for you :-) You could ask right here. Or ask me, if you like, on User talk:Chzz.

Otherwise, it's as shown in Wikipedia:Moving files to the Commons - and yes, it's not that simple, but not terribly hard once you've done it a couple times.

A third option is to just put {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} - and eventually, someone will deal with it; unfortunately, that's a long "eventually" - there are currently 270,252 images waiting for such a transfer. Chzz ► 14:24, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, once done a few times, the moving process is fairly simple. The first few images I saw under your contributions though cannot be moved due to them being screenshots. Dismas|^(talk) 14:25, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If someone could move the two pictures of the MBE (the medal) and the pyometra that would be very useful. Thankyou Torqueing (talk) 20:14, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Leaked magazine scans

Ryulong is insisting that because a magazine (the February 2012 issue of Televi-Kun) isn't due to be released for another four days, scans from it cannot be used as a source yet, but can when it's released. But surely if it's in the public domain, it can be cited? The article in question is Tokumei Sentai Gōbasutāzu, and the scan contains a logo which confirms that Gōbasutāzu should be romanized as Go-Busters. Digifiend (talk) 14:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine that that scan is a copyright infringement, so no, we should not be linking to it. Also, the point of any reference is so that the reader can - if they want - verify the fact. If it has not been published yet, then readers can't verify it is true. I'm sure this is not the case here, but please understand - it's very easy for anyone to make a "fake" cover. Chzz ► 14:42, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You also seem to badly misunderstand the meaning of the term public domain. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't a cover, it's an interior spread. I'm not asking to upload the page to Wikipedia, that wouldn't fall under fair use, although it does contain other photos as well as the logo (said photos haven't appeared anywhere else yet either, so faking it is impossible). I only wanted to use it as a reference. The reader would be able to verify the information in that scan as long as they can read Japanese, and the magazine is out in three days (Dec 27) - I think this scan most likely came from a subscriber who got their copy early (and subscribers getting magazines before their shop release date isn't uncommon). Digifiend (talk) 00:24, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We don't reference sources in that way. Just use the {{Cite journal}} template. – ukexpat (talk) 05:10, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To the OP: See WP:NODEADLINE. Wait the four days for the magazine to hit the newstands. There's no iminent rush to get it out NOW. If trying to beat the rush causes conflict, wait a few days and any reason for the conflict evaporates. Everyone wins! --Jayron32 05:19, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit the biography of MK

hello, How can I correct the spelling of MK Nachman Shay's (- instead of "Nahman Shai")name in English Wikipedia. secondly, although he completed his PhD it's written that he still studying for his PhD which is not up to date Ronenl10 (talk) 15:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article is currently at Nahman Shai which appears to be the spelling used by the sources. – ukexpat (talk) 15:40, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article Feedback request

How can I obtain feedback on my new article creation? It is Charles L. Dufour. The request for feedback page appears to be inactive. Thank you. Nolabob (talk) 15:49, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:01, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reddit appeals to Jimmy Wales.

A plea from one like minded organisation to another. Can this please be shown to Mr. Wales? http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/nntxp/godaddys_response_to_the_boycott_go_daddy_has/ http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/nnv9l/wikipediaorg_is_with_godaddy_jimmy_if_youre/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.160.170.246 (talk) 16:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is being discussed here. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:39, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

new article "Robert Fanning"

Hi, I've added an article on Robert Fanning, but I need help getting the links to show up as hyperlinked.

Thanks.

Denise Fanning (poet's wife) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seedthievery (talk • contribs) 16:19, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Link and Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. If you still have problems then come back with a more specific question. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:53, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook as reference link

Can we submit facebook page as a reference link/webpage ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Za zealot (talk • contribs) 17:07, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Generally not. A Facebook page, like a blog entry, is rarely a reliable source. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:57, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For X, see Y

Hi, how can I create the following layout using the proper templates?

For A, see B. For C see D.

86.179.5.83 (talk) 18:06, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We call those "hatnotes". See Wikipedia:Hatnote. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:16, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I looked at that page before, but could not see any way of doing what I want. However, looking again I have now found that you can do it with "About", which previously I ignored, assuming it must be some variant of "for" that I needed. 86.179.5.83 (talk) 18:38, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If all else fails, there is always the generic {{Hatnote}}.

{{Hatnote|For A, see B. For C see D.}} produces:

PrimeHunter (talk) 22:43, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

{{For}} works a little better. – ukexpat (talk) 05:07, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Global account status "in migration"

I'm trying to unify my account, and there is an inactive user (no edits since account creation in 2008) on the Hebrew Wikipedia with the same username as mine. I've left a couple of posts on the Hebrew Wikipedia (one on a noticeboard and one on a steward's talk page) requesting usurpation of the Hebrew Miniapolis account. On my preferences page, my global-account status is "in migration". What does this mean? Thanks and all the best, Miniapolis (talk) 18:33, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I think that they are waiting a confirmation [2]. Cordially, -- Quentinv57 (talk) 22:13, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Status now "all in order". Thanks very much! All the best, Miniapolis (talk) 02:16, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Invention InfoBox

{{Infobox invention
| name              = No. 6,469 patent for<br /> "Buoying Vessels Over Shoals"
| color             = 
| bgcolor           = 
| Alternative names = 
| Creator(s)        = Abraham Lincoln
| Date invented     = May 22, 1849
| Place of origin   = Illinois
| Region or state   = United States of America
| other_topics      = 
}}

A. Lincoln's Patent Model

I am having trouble with an invention Infobox for the article Abraham Lincoln's patent. How can I get the additional information to show up and this picture to show up in the InfoBox? Is this the correct InfoBox for a Patent?--Doug Coldwell ^talk 18:59, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no scope for an image in the code of the current Template:Infobox invention. And I'm sorry, I do not know of any appropriate infobox; articles like telephone or television just have an image, no infobox. Even Featured Articles Manchester Small-Scale Experimental Machine, Atomic line filter and Autostereogram do.

It's something I've looked for before - an infobox for a plain "thing". I think we could do with one; perhaps it's worth asking at Wikipedia:Requested templates.

Unless anyone else knows better? Chzz ► 20:05, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've edited {{Infobox invention}} to support an image. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:59, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can Wiki change domains (from the pro-SOPA GoDaddy to something else)

Please see the request on reddit as well.

http://www.reddit.com/r/wikipedia/comments/nny4z/wikipediaorg_is_with_godaddy_jimmy_if_youre/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.231.42.218 (talk) 19:07, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anything is possible, but I do not think the help desk is the best place to discuss it; I suggest you join the ongoing discussions on Wikipedia_talk:SOPA initiative. Chzz ► 20:06, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox deletion effect

I wrote an article in my sandbox and them "moved" the article so all could see it. If I now delete my sandbox will the article now be deleted ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.210.63.130 (talk) 19:49, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When you move a page, it leaves behind a redirect on the old page - that is, a single line saying #REDIRECT [[pagename]]. That means when you go to the sandbox, it'll automatically take you to the article - but it'll say, just under the title, "(Redirected from User:Whoever/Whatever)" - and you can click on that to see the sandbox, and can edit it, remove the redirect, change it, etc.

This would be much easier to explain if I knew your user-name, but you are not logged in, so I don't know which page you are asking about. Chzz ► 19:55, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To answer the question, deleting the sandbox will not result in the article being deleted too. Mjroots (talk) 20:07, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, you can't delete your sandbox, although you can ask for it to be deleted.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 20:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

making many changes to a published article

HI, I created in my sandbox an article and "published" it for all to see. I now want to make large scale changes to the article but it will take me a few weeks to do all the updates. How can I do this without the "published" article changing until I'm finished with all my edits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.210.63.130 (talk) 20:01, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you create a user account, you can make as many user-space drafts as you like, and nobody will bother with them much. Otherwise... if anyone does edit a page, you could always see the old versions in the history and if you take note of one of those links, it will show the specific version of the page - for example, this helpdesk page is constantly changing, but at the time I wrote this, at 20:07, it looked like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=467388669 - and that is a permanent link.

The exceptions to the above are, if a page is against policies and guidelines - such as, a copyright violation - in which case, it might be deleted. Chzz ► 20:10, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References not showing up or in order

I thought it to be the case that references automatically ordered themselves chronologically and that they are also automatically added at the bottom. On the second point I may well be mistaken. The page I am working on is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Jason - I have added a sentence to the Personal Life section about him being a qualified helicopter pilot and also provided a citation, however the citation is showing up as Number 1 and so are some others, it is also not listed at the bottom of the page. Thedaveformula (talk) 20:12, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You used a named ref <ref name=DMail2074040> so the url you added was ignored. I assume you do want the Telegraph ref, not the Daily Mail ref.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 20:18, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it. Refs do not appear chronologically, unless, by that you mean the order they appear in the article.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 20:22, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I further improved it using a Wikipedia:Citation templates I personally find it very helpful to use the optional citation gadget. To install, go to "My preferences", select the rightmost tab "Gadgets", the check the box next to refTools (in the Editing gadgets section). Once installed, it will add a new button "Cite" to your editing toolbar. Click on it to add a citation. Makes it much easier.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 20:28, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you very much for your help. Thedaveformula (talk) 21:52, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Making many changes to a published article...........related question

HI, I am a registered user and the article was created in my "sandbox" in my user space and it was "published" for all to see. If I edit one word in my sandb ox and save the edit its instantly published for all to see. How do I make many edits over time and update the "published" article only when I want to show the world the new, updated version? thanks for your help and patience with a newbe — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jina2 (talk • contribs) 20:21, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To save is to publish. You can preview each change as you make it; but if you've saved the edit, you've by definition already published it. If you think an article still needed work, you should have left it in your sandbox, where articles are polished before being published. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:25, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't think it is yet ready, you can move it back to your userspace. If you don't know how, just ask and I'll do it for you.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 20:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The move to article space created a redirect from your sandbox to the article. I have removed the redirect so you can now edit User:Jina2/sandbox again. You can see how I did it at Help:Redirect#How it appears to the user. If you want to work on a sandbox version then you have to copy-paste the article to your sandbox. Note that anybody might edit the live article while you work on an old copy in your sandbox. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's just me but A Symposium of Six Perspectives on the Archaic Religious Period seems more to me like a thesis paper rather than an encyclopedic article. Dismas|^(talk) 22:52, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree regarding the title of this article. It is not how an article should be titled because no one in the world is ever going to, in the course of their research into this subject, type into Wikipedia: 'A Symposium of Six Perspectives on the Archaic Religious Period' - regardless of how well the article is written. I would therefore suggest that the article be incorporated into the page Evolutionary origin of religions. Thedaveformula (talk) 00:18, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or failing that, renaming it 'Archaic Religion'. Thedaveformula (talk) 00:21, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if this is a bit heretical, but I have created over 100 articles and have NEVER used my sandbox. It seems a waste of broadband. I just work on the articles in word until they reach Start(undeletable) class then paste them up. Does that make me a bad person? Tigerboy1966 (talk) 01:01, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Finding why an image has been deleted

There used to be a picture "Fobos-grunt_processing.jpg" at the article Fobos-Grunt. It has now been deleted. How can I find out why and by whom? (I assume it was probably because of copyright infringement but I would like to check.) The link that used to be in place now just takes me to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fobos-grunt_processing.jpg which has zero information. Shouldn't there be a log or something? 86.179.5.83 (talk) 20:29, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you go to File:Fobos-grunt processing.jpg and try to upload it, you see this log entry - it was deleted on 20 December 2011 by Fastily (talk · contribs) under WP:CSD#F7 "Violates non-free content criterion #1".

Another way to find that is, look in Special:Log and, in the target, put "File:Fobos-grunt processing.jpg" to see this. Chzz ► 20:40, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Table Alignment

This is a very silly question I know but any idea why the tables on my user page align centre in internet explorer but not in chrome? Mike 20:33, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which version of IE are you using? Digifiend (talk) 00:27, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

7.0.5730. I would like the tables to align centre in browsers other than IE. Do they align center for you? Mike 03:22, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted now thank you Mike 23:39, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

several sandboxes

Hi, I'm a registered user and have one sandbox in my userspace. I'd like to work on several different articles at the same time. Is it possible to have several sandboxes? I tried creating another under edit using /newsandboxname but all it did was replace my existing sandbox.......thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.210.63.130 (talk) 20:45, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but I can't find your sandbox [3]. If you log in, you should be able to start a new sandbox at Special:MyPage/Sandbox 2, for example. --N Y Kevin @935, i.e. 21:26, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can call user subpages whatever you like - it is common for people to work on an article under the title User:<username>/<eventual article name>. --ColinFine (talk) 21:38, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

wikipedia / wikileaks

is there any affiliation between wikileaks and wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.49.215.253 (talk) 21:31, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, see WP:NOTLEAKS--Hallows AG (talk) 21:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

outstanding money

I recently paid £28.00 to ask a legal question, but then decided i did not have to, so never used it. I recently got an email to remind me that i still have £28.00 in my account to spend on asking a question, but i dont need gto ask anything. I would therefore, really appreciate it if u could refund my money back into my account again, as i have no use for using it on a question. Could you please let me know if you can do this for me, as i would really appreciate it. Thanks jillian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.158.111.73 (talk) 23:04, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 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.--Hallows AG (talk) 23:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note however that Wikipedia does not give legal advice. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:08, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And Wikipedia does not answer questions for money. --ColinFine (talk) 21:39, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the story of Chanukha?

What is the story of Chanukha? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.189.117.151 (talk) 23:07, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Chanukha. Dismas|^(talk) 23:11, 23 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]