Wikipedia:Help desk

Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)

• For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• If your question is about a Wikipedia article, draft article, or other page on Wikipedia, tell us what it is!
• Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).

Ask a question

June 1

Can't find link?

Resolved

 – – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 00:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

According to Special:WhatLinksHere/WikiProject_Albums/Article_alerts, WikiProject_Albums/Article_alerts is being linked to on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums, but for the life of me, I can't find the connection! Anyone have any ideas? It's probably right in front of my eyes, but I'm not seeing it. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 23:50, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

It is this code, nowiki>Wikipedia:Help desk/Article alerts</nowiki>, in this section, Wikipedia:WikiProject_Albums#Article alerts, I think. GB fan (talk) 23:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

(e/c x2) In the page you'll see the code "{{/Article alerts}}" When something is linked to with brackets or called with curly braces as /something, the "/" automatically links or calls the name of the page it's on. So {{/Article alerts}} on this page, for example, would result in the code calling Wikipedia:Help desk/Article alerts. Therefore, at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums the code calls Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Article alerts.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:59, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Ohhh okay. Thanks, both of you. I didn't think that was the problem. I've updated it now. And thanks for explaining why the / template was doing what it was doing : ) – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 00:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

2 articles that need work

Hi! I created 2 article about a city in Sierra_leone called Ballowharf and a mountain in Peru called Pitusiray. Both articles need work on them. Neptunekh2 (talk) 00:53, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Here's what you wrote on Ballowharf: Ballowharf is a community in Northern_Province,_Sierra_Leone. So effectively you're saying: "I wrote one short sentence on Ballowharf; please turn it into an article." -- Hoary (talk) 01:29, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Neptune, there are 3.6 million articles in Wikipedia. And every one of them could use some work. You're the only editor that routinely comes here asking for people to work on articles that you created. Perhaps it's time that you found a WP:MENTOR. Dismas|^(talk) 02:14, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Draft article

I started an article as a draft page (I think). It was my first article. Since I wanted to work on it to get the formatting correct and the footnotes correct, I kept it as a draft (subpage perhaps?). Now I cannot find the article anywhere. Please tell me where I can access it. Thanks.

My email is (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgthornton (talk • contribs) 02:05, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Pgthornton, forgive me, but I removed your email address; it's not a good idea to post it here - you might get spammed. It's best just to "sign" your name with ~~~~, which adds your username and the date/time. If you enable email in your Special:Preferences (Enable e-mail from other users), then people could email you via Wikipedia - but note, the most normal method of communication, for Wikipedia, is on talk pages (like this one) - so that we can link things, and so that others can add to the discussion.

As for the article - if you click on My contributions at the top of the page (when logged in), you can see everything you've done - here. But, I'm sorry, that only shows you've posted here - nothing else yet. (Admittedly, that does not show deleted contributions but, I checked with an administrator, and there's none of those either)

Did you write the draft when you were not logged in? Are you absolutely sure you saved it?

If you have a copy, somewhere, it might be best to do it again; perhaps use WP:WIZARD and, at the last stage, choose to "submit for review". Best,  Chzz  ►  02:28, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Pearl Harbor Survivers

My uncle survived Pearl, I am trying to find out what USS Navy Vessel he was on .Family says USS NEvada. Joseph Ianni, Lodi Ca.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.106.125 (talk • contribs)

This page is for help with using Wikipedia. Knowledge questions such as yours should be asked at the reference desk. However, if you do ask there, you will need to give the most basic piece of information anyone looking to help you would need: your uncle's name.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

andrew c, bloy page was deleted

the facts were not checked and it was deleted. a simple search on IMDB will show "The Essence of Depp" (credited as Drew Smith) and "sleeping with Snakes" is on Amazon for sale at $15.95. Thank you.Keene cents (talk) 03:54, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

IMDB is not a reliable source. Please review the notability guidelines, specifically WP:BIO. If you believe you can find appropriate reliable sources, try using the WP:WIZARD to make a draft. See also WP:VRS and WP:FIRST.  Chzz  ►  03:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

On the contrary, I believe the facts were checked. It doesn't seem as though Andrew Bloy is notable enough for inclusion in this encyclopedia. An actor must meet certain requirements (WP:ENTERTAINER) to be considered notable enough to have an article. Just having a page on IMDB is not enough. Dismas|^(talk) 04:00, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

checkuser question

So, I'm finding it hard to believe that an anonymous editor from the UAE with no previous edit history randomly stumbled into Joseph Farah, suspiciously vandalized it three times in 15-minutes (resulting it in being semi-protected), and then never edited again, despite not being blocked. Does the edit history of 2.49.188.233 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) justify a request for a checkuser to ascertain whether there were accounts logged in from the same IP address concurrently? 24.177.120.138 (talk) 05:05, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

It's probably not worth bothering, right now. The article is semi-protected, so that solves the immediate concern; accounts are only blocked to prevent damage to Wikipedia (not to punish). Most users IP address changes regularly - which is why we dislike blocking IPs unless absolutely necessary. And Checkusers will not confirm a link between user accounts and IP accounts, for privacy reasons.

If it becomes a longer-term problem with that article though, more action could be taken; but as it is indefinitely semi-protected, and certainly now several people are watching it, I doubt there will be further trouble.  Chzz  ►  05:09, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I guess my concern is less about vandalism to the article, and more about the semi-protection. The whole thing seems very convenient, as the semi-protection effectively precludes me from continuing to contribute to that article as well, which moots an ongoing discussion on talk and WP:BLP/N regarding some contributions I've offered to the article, but which have proven controversial. I also think it's suspicious that the vandalism itself was thematically similar to the contested content.

I'm still wondering: despite it being probably not worth bothering about right now, if one were to go to the bother of asking for checkuser, would this meet the criteria? If there was a link between that IP address and some user who's been involved in the discussions about Joseph Farah, that user has engaged in sockpuppetry and the IP is a sock, so the privacy concerns are obviated, and the checkuser could disclose. 24.177.120.138 (talk) 05:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I do not believe a Checkuser would accomplish this request. What you are asking for is a fishing expedition. Checkusers will only check against a suspected user, not against a list of possible users. This is the policy page for checkuser, Wikipedia:CheckUser and here is where it explains how you would request it, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations. GB fan (talk) 15:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

You can always request for edits to be made on the article's Talk page until such a time as the article is unprotected. 216.93.212.245 (talk) 21:23, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Kirup Western Austalia

The article on Kirup Western Australia states that the kirup syrup from the tavern is not the orginal reciepe, this is completly false- as it is the same reciepe its just now made under license to comply with the law. Please change this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirup777 (talk • contribs) 05:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

So, the best thing to do is, remove the unreferenced claim - that The current Kirup Syrup sold in flagons at the local tavern is not the original syrup.. Anyone can do that. I just removed it, but you could've done it yourself.

And now, I'll start a discussion, on Talk:Kirup, Western Australia.  Chzz  ►  06:14, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Writing an article.

Hello there,

I would love to know how to start writing an article and how to get there. You help would be lovely.

Thanks. :)

Rosiegirl555. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosiegirl555 (talk • contribs) 09:33, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I suggest reading Wikipedia:Your first article. In particular, note that you need "significant coverage in independent, reliable sources" (WP:VRS, WP:GNG).

When you're ready, it's best to use the WP:WIZARD to create it.

If you have more specific questions, please ask again. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  09:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC) This reply copied to the user talk page, for reference

User:Fext

Hi, I want to create an acount on Czech wikipepedia a use name "Fext", but there is another one. But he just created acount in 2006 and then don´t use it anymore (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&username=Fext&limit=1). Can you delete him? Or it is impossible and I must forget for this name? Thanks. (Apologize my English.) FEXT — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.213.41.2 (talk) 09:50, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

commons:User:Fext uploaded 3 files today. Is that you? If it is then can you log in to the Czech Wikipedia with that password? Do you want the English account Fext or only the Czech? Fext isn't registered at the Czech but the Commons Fext may be a problem if it isn't you. See Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations for requesting the English Fext. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it´s me :-) I´ve uploaded these 3 files (maps of Prague, Brno and Olomouc) today, because I made an account only in Commnons. And when I try to log in Wikipedia, it doesn´t work. Also when I try to make universal log in Commons, it say to me, that it is imposible, because there is already one Fext (on en.wiki). But I´ve tried now again, just to log in Czech wikipedia and it is working! And because czech account is really enough for me, the problem is solved. So thank you very much! --194.213.41.2 (talk) 12:40, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Good. http://toolserver.org/~vvv/sulutil.php?rights=1&user=Fext shows you have the unified Fext. This means the only place you cannot log in is the English Wikipedia where another Fext already existed. It also means nobody else will be able to "steal" Fext at a Wikimedia wiki where you aren't registered yet. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:31, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Infobox out of alignment

Please have a look at Mats Gustafsson. On my browser (IE7) the formatting has gone wrong probably because of the infobox. There is a whole lot of white space to the left of the infobox whereas the box should flow around the text. I have made a screengrab to show you what I mean, see here. I would be grateful if someone could inform me how this can be fixed – many thanks. --Viennese Waltz 10:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Fixed. The problem was the photograph immediately below the infobox, since this was forcing the text to wait yet further before starting. As it was better than the one in the infobox, and because the article isn't exactly short of photos, I moved that photo into the infobox and carried out some other minor surgery whilst I was there. Bencherlite^Talk 10:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Great stuff, thanks. The article still needs a lot of work, maybe I'll get around to it someday especially as the guy has just won a prestigious music prize. --Viennese Waltz 10:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Th e Warsaw Concerto

I would like to put matters right concerning the true composer of the Warsaw Concerto. Although all references in Wikipedia refer to the concerto being composed for the film Dangerous Moonlight by some other chap this is not correct. The Warsaw Concerto was in fact composed by a young Polish pilot who was flying for the RAF having managed to escape from Poland prior to the German invasion. He was reported missing following a mission and when his room at the Squadron was being cleared following after he had not returned from a mission the music was discovered amongst his few belongings/papers. The Chap was well know in the mess for his beautiful piano playing but no one, that is until his death, knew that he was also a composer! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.215.98.86 (talk) 12:57, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Re. Warsaw Concerto. These two books assert that it was written by Richard Addinsell:[1] [2].

Do you have a reliable source that contradicts them?  Chzz  ►  13:57, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

What was the name of the young Polish pilot? Wanderer57 (talk) 14:24, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Isn't the pilot/composer story actually the (fictional) plot of the film Dangerous Moonlight ? Gandalf61 (talk) 14:59, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

no internal links in signature

Hi, a user User:Mwhite148 in this section Talk:Ed Miliband#Opening Section has no links in his signature, he would like to correct it, and I said I would help him. Is the issue related to the my preferences/user profile/signature section? Off2riorob (talk) 13:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Most likely, in my preferences, in the "Signature" box, there is a checkmark in the box "Treat the above as wiki markup". The "Signature:" box should be empty (remove anything in it). That should fix the problem, restoring the default signature. There's also a page, Wikipedia:Fixing your signature, but to be honest it's a bit confusing and out of date. Just un-checking that checkbox, and clearing the signature box, should sort it out.  Chzz  ►  13:06, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, when hes back online I will try to correct that for him. Off2riorob (talk) 13:11, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Remember that if they test it by 'signing' on their own talk page, the (talk) link will not work as normal, so it's best to test in the sandbox.

Users 'fixing' their sig often try it on their own talk page, and wonder why the link to their own talk page does not work... it won't, on that page. Chzz  ►  13:51, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Adding an article

hello, I want to make an article with (link removed) content. How can I do that? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.148.190.66 (talk) 13:53, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

When I open this file, I see a list of people giving their names, phone numbers and E-Mail addresses. I see serious privacy issues with entering this content to Wikipedia, apart from other issues. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 14:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I removed the link to the file above and submitted an oversight request. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 15:18, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt submission of this. User:Fred Bauder Talk 15:48, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

You're most welcome, thanks for "oversighting" this. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 16:04, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Soliciting Administrator for Comment - WP:BLP

My notice at WP:BLP has neared the top of the notice list with no input as of yet from any administrator. I assume, at some point, it will disappear into the archives with no administrative opinion rendered. What is the best way to stimulate some response from a hopefully uninvolved administrator familiar with WP:BLP issues? Thanks. JakeInJoisey (talk) 17:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Well the article lists the things he purports that are considered conspiracy theories:

• alleged plans for a North American Government,
• the theory that President Barack Obama is not an American citizen,
• the United States government covering up information about the 9/11 terrorist attacks,
• the Abiogenic hypothesis of the origin of oil
• United States support of Iran in its attempts to develop nuclear weapons.

Those all seem to be cited, so I don't see a BLP problem. Anything else is a content dispute, and I'd advise you to follow WP:DR. Prodego ^talk 17:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, but you are appear to be overlooking (as has everyone else) the rationale and purpose of my query. A WP:BLP objection was raised by more than one editor...yet proponents of the disputed content have persisted in incorporating that disputed (and, I'd submit, defamatory) content while a discussion is ongoing over the WP:BLP propriety of that content. As I stated in my inquiry, this is a WP:BLP issue that should be resolved via consensus in the article talk, not by an edit-warring insistence on its incorporation prior to consensus resolution. THAT is why I am seeking an administrative determination. JakeInJoisey (talk) 18:08, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

You are correct that this is an issue that should be resolved via consensus in the article talk. However, because of the fairly strong sourcing of the 'conspiracy theorist' label I wouldn't consider this a BLP issue. It should be resolved, without edit warring, via discussion on the talk page, as with any other content dispute. But, at least in my opinion, BLP does not require the article be kept at a specific revision while that discussion is ongoing. Prodego ^talk 18:14, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate both your consideration and response and will forego any further discussion as to the merits in this space. However (and returning to my original query here), I'm still soliciting an adminstrator response within the designated WP:BLPN notice in which I will not feel constrained from responding. If you elect to do so there, that would be fine with me. If not, can you suggest a better means of stimulating an administrative response in that space? JakeInJoisey (talk) 18:31, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I suggest removing the subsection you copied in, as this makes the section very difficult to read, and specify what action you want taken. Prodego ^talk 18:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The "subsection" was created by an editor in opposition...not to address the nature of my inquiry but rather to debate the merits of the content in question. That being said, I'm not inclined to throw more fuel on the fire by "removing the subsection (I) copied in" (though I'm not very clear on your meaning here or how that would better foster administrative input). JakeInJoisey (talk) 18:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah sorry then, it appeared to me that that subsection was identical to one on the article talk page. The reason no one dealt with that notice is because it is extremely confusing to read and doesn't ask for anything to be done. Prodego ^talk 18:56, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

...it appeared to me that that subsection was identical to one on the article talk page.

It was...and it was inserted into my BLP noticeboard query as, IMHO, a distractor...apparently successfully.

...no one dealt with that notice is because it...doesn't ask for anything to be done.

I sincerely believe my original submission was rather clear as to the BLP issue at hand and shouldn't really require further elucidation. That being said, I won't waste any more of your time here. Thanks. JakeInJoisey (talk) 19:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin

To say Abiogenic Oil Theory is Discredited is a Very Subjective Opinionated Stance. It has Not been discredited with any authority or Proof that it is not true. It CANNOT be Disproven with the current technology that Mankind has. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.90.135.72 (talk) 19:11, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

It's a fringe theory with no support among actual scientists. We report on fringe theories; we are under no obligation to cater to them or pretend that they are intellectually defensible in cases where they are not. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Correct spelling of my first name

I find that my name is misspelled when I look it up on yahoo. My fist name is spelled Dolores. You have my first name spelled Delores. That is not my given name, nor the name I have used for 63 years. If you cannot correct this error, please remove my name from your records. I use the name given to me on my birth certificate.

Thank you,

Dolores P. Conley <address removed> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.31.204.75 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 1 June 2011

I can't find your name on Wikipedia. I have searched; Dolores P. Conley, Delores P. Conley, Delores Conley and Dolores Conley. Can you tell us what article your name is used in? GB fan (talk) 20:07, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "look it up on yahoo". We are not associated with Yahoo. In which records do you see the name?

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.5 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. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:25, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

How can I edit the title of an article?

I am trying to edit the article page of International Peace Games. The organization recently just changed its name to Peace First, so I've been trying to find ways to change the article title as well. When I searched on google, a website told me that I have to have had a Wiki account for 4+ days and have made 10+ edits to be able to do this--is this true? I've made an account solely for the purpose of updating the said article and have no intention of doing edits for anything else (hence I may not be making 10+ edits).

Please help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by DevinternPF (talk • contribs) 20:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

To do it yourself you would need to be a registered user for 4 days and have at least 10 edits. You can request non-controversial page moves (rename) at WP:RM, or use the instructions on that page for requesting potentially controversial moves. Normally the article text would need to be edited first to show the new name. Also we would need reliable sources that show that is the name that is generally used as the name, not just what they call themselves. You can use their website as a starting point to update the article with the new name since it does specify that they have changed their name. Hope this explains the process, if you have any questions please ask. GB fan (talk) 20:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I've moved it for you. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Album

How do I create the album list section. Im trying to create a new article for an atrist and I am unsure of how to create the section which just simply lists the album name and date in a chronological order, typically found towards the end of a wikipedia page. Jim Rupert (talk) 21:15, 1 June 2011 (UTC)Jim Rupert

Please specifically link to an example, so we know for sure what you are talking about. CTJF83 21:23, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

There are different ways to format discographies. Tables look better but are harder to make. If you click "edit" in an existing article then you can see how that article did it. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies and Wikipedia:WikiProject Discographies/style. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

problems with people searching for the page I have just completed.

Hi, although I have used Wikipedia a lot, I am new to contributing and I have just created a page: 'Inés Medina-Fernández'. she's a upcoming composer I quite like. One of the problems that I'm struggling with is that I can only find the page if I search under exactly the right title. Any variation, such as not bothering with the accents for example, means I can't seem to find the page. How can I get around this? I want people to be able to find the page by searching, but clearly English people, like me, when they search won't bother with the accents, but yet her name has the accents. It's a Spanish name.

Is it possible somehow to put a number of aliases into the code, so that I can suggest other variations that will link to the page?

Thanks for your help. Chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goldfinchwhisperer (talk • contribs) 22:52, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

See Help:Searching#Delay in updating the search index. If the exact name is entered then it works without searching as you have noted. You could make a redirect at Ines Medina-Fernandez. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:59, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Before you spend a lot of time on the bio, please read WP:COMPOSER, and consider if she is notable enough yet for an article. Wikipedia does not accept bios for people who are upcoming but not yet notable. Sorry —teb728 t c 23:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

"Upcoming" means about to happen. What you are talking about is somebody who is "up-and-coming"! As to articles on "up-and-coming" subjects, see this essay on up-and-coming/next big thing topics. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:23, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2

Book Creator Problem

I am trying to make my own book in Book Creator. I have added several articles & several Chapters. However, the program is suppose to allow you to drag & drop to put them in the order I want. It will not let me drag & drop!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.95.189 (talk) 03:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6.8 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. Roger (talk) 20:33, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

There does seem to be a Wikipedia:Books page, but I have no clue how it operates unfortunately. doomgaze (talk) 20:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia cache isn't flushing out older image file

I made some changes to the following image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jpba-logov.png . However, although the image itself updated okay, uses of the image did not. In this article, the older image is still being displayed. Also the "current" thumbnail in the image's page is also not updated. I thought at first it was my browser, so I flushed the offline cache and such, but no change. I then tried a different computer, and it too showed the older image. Studying how Wikipedia works, I tried inserting the "action=purge" parameter at the end of the URL to purge the cache, but it doesn't work either. Can someone please see if the cache for the article can be purged? Thanks! Groink (talk) 04:56, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I made a dummy edit which appears to have fixed the issue.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 06:01, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I think that worked! I was even able to upload another update to the same image, and the article immediately ripped the new image. Thanks! Groink (talk) 07:03, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Largest talk pages?

I am trying to look at the development of Wikipedia's most controversial articles. I think articles with the largest talk pages are likely to be among the most controversial. Is there any way to find the articles with the largest talk pages?Polyquest (talk) 05:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

"Largest talk pages" taken literally doesn't capture what you're after I think because talk pages are archived periodically. I think you're looking for articles with the highest number of edits to the talk page and maybe the most archives, though the latter might not necessarily correlate because archives can be set at larger or smaller sizes. Not sure of a method but Talk:September 11 attacks has got to be up there with 55 archives and 19,335 edits. Wikipedia:Most-edited talk pages does exist but its data is as of November 2003.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

You may wish to also look at the most dispute resolution heavy articles (Palestine & Israel, Climate Change, Eastern Europe). These may often hide the volume of talk content by hogging space at AN/I, WQA, RS/N, OR/N, ARB, AE, etc. Fifelfoo (talk) 05:54, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. I'll check the areas you suggested Fifelfoo. I wonder if one of the tech whiz's could be convinced to update that most edited talk pages list. Polyquest (talk) 06:33, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Also look for talk pages that have their own FAQs. E.g. Talk:Muhammad/FAQ and other pages in Category:Wikipedia article FAQs. When an article has its own FAQ, that suggests the topic has issues that come up repeatedly. The writing of such a FAQ might be a key milestone in "the development of Wikipedia's most controversial articles." See Wikipedia:List of controversial issues and Wikipedia:Controversial articles and their talk pages. The people who know the most about Wikipedia's controversies might hang around there. WP:EIW#Dispute has more links where you might find something that gets you closer to your goal. See also Denialism - there are several areas of "mainstream" knowledge that are rejected or heavily questioned by what are organized or semi-organized dissenting movements, often fueled by their own online communities (derided as "echo chambers" by proponents of the mainstream views). Naturally Wikipedia has articles about most of these topics, and folks who reject the mainstream views can edit Wikipedia as easily as anyone else. --Teratornis (talk) 06:59, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:EIW#Statistic might give ideas about how to get a recent list of the most edited talk pages. --Teratornis (talk) 07:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Database reports/Talk pages by size. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you all for being so helpful. That database report is exactly what I was looking for. I'm not terrible surprised that after the main page, the intelligent design talk page is the most active. But 14.4 megs of text is still impressive. The listings of article with FAQs is also proving useful. Who would have guessed the Monty Hall problem was so contentious? Polyquest (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:29, 2 June 2011 (UTC).

A quick favor

As it's 2:30 in the morning where I am right now, and I can't be bothered to figure out how to manually list an FfD, could someone list File:Smalling v2.jpg at PUF? It's already tagged, but Twinkle seems to want to fight me, so it hasn't listed properly. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 06:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Done [3]  Chzz  ►  06:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

ありがとうございます。 The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 15:56, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Haleh Sahabi.jpg

Hello! Is it possible to upload this picture to Wikipedia Commons, that every Wikipedia projects could use it? --Cary (talk) 08:44, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

The source link is broken; so it is not possible to look at the page to determine copyright/licensing information. But the fact that the photo is hosted on the VOA website does not indicate that it is in the public domain, for the standard VOA copyright statement says, "All text, audio and video material produced exclusively by the Voice of America is in the public domain. Credit for any use of VOA material should be given to voanews.com, Voice of America, or VOA. However, voanews.com content may also contain video, audio, images, graphics, and other copyrighted material that is licensed for use in VOA programming only. This material is not in the public domain and may not be copied, redistributed, sold, or published without the express permission of the copyright owner." Since the subject lived in Iran, it virtually impossible that a VOA employee could have taken the photo as part of his/her official duties, which is what it would take to make the photo PD. —teb728 t c 09:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Christie Whelan

A Wikipedia page was created about me last night and people are writing rude and untrue things. I either want this page removed or blocked from people writing these things about me. I have edited this page and they keep editing it back to nonsense. PLEASE help me fix this, i am very VERY angry. Christiewhelan (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:29, 2 June 2011 (UTC).

Weren't YOU the article's creator? Sp33dyphil ^{Ready • to • Rumble} 09:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

The article was vandalized by an anonymous editor. The disruptive change have been reverted to a state near to your last edit. —teb728 t c 10:05, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Rather ironically, the semiprotection means that Christie Whelan cannot now edit the article that she herself created. doomgaze (talk) 11:00, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it seems to me that 3 months of semiprotection is rather much when apparently there is only one anon vandal, who deserves a block anyway. —teb728 t c 11:10, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

When is a Encyclopedia not an encyclopedia?

Extended content

The information below titled "jim DiEugenio, May 2011" is from a website called www.ctka.net - I hope you are familiar with this site. Information from the above site raises some important question about how wikipedia does business and who indeed are the overlords of factual and not-so-factual information in regard to what wikipedia includes as "relevant" information or not. CTKA is a site concerned with the "factual" information on certain assassinations of interest. What is clear about this site is its' claim to provide "factual" information in a manner that is scholarly. Their ability and scholarly leaning is to provide the "actual" documents within footnotes providing said documents provenance and, more importantly, the context in which the information is framed. It appears Wikipedia on the other hand, does not. Your handling, specifically the JFK Assassination, can only be described as a white wash. A reliance on Gerald Posner and his book Case Closed is folly, unless you proscribe to the now ridiculed Warren Commission Report. And given the information known in 2011, from new revealing documents, the Warren Commission Report was and is, a bloody disgrace. The same can be said of Vincent Bugliosi tomb Rewriting History. jim DiEugenio, May 2011 As with many aspects of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, when one enters the term “Warren Commission” into Yahoo, the first site that comes up is the citation on Wikipedia. This is unfortunate. For as JP Mroz has delineated in detail in two previous articles, Jimmy Wales invention of the so-called “People’s Encyclopedia” has not worked out quite as one would expect. In fact, to those interested in the assassination of President Kennedy, it has pretty much been an echo of the MSM. That is, it has been protective of the Warren Commission, selective in its source material, and as Mroz proved in his first article, it even used false evidence to connect Oswald to the alleged murder weapon.[1] When Wikipedia was exposed on this, they then tried to cover their tracks.[2] There are two things quite odd about this stance. First, it does not at all accord with being a “People’s Encyclopedia”. Because the great majority of citizens do not believe the Warren Commission, it does not accurately reflect public opinion.[3] Second, it does not accurately reflect the most recently declassified material on the Commission either. For with the work of the Assassination Records Review Board, the criticism of the Commission has become even more heated.[4] For instance, Commissioner Gerald Ford arbitrarily moved up the position of the wound in Kennedy’s back[5] to align with the Commission’s most controversial invention: the Single Bullet Theory. As recent books have shown, the Commission’s performance in accurately recording witness testimony has been shown to be even more problematic than most thought.[6] Because of all this, Wikipedia has resorted to censorship in order to keep up its show of deference for the Warren Commission and its now thoroughly discredited 888-page report. As Mroz pointed out in his first article, the man in charge of the censorship office at Wikipedia on the JFK case is <redacted>. is most proud of his (disgraceful) Lee Harvey Oswald page—a page that seems to have been composed with the cooperation of the infamous John McAdams.[7] As Mroz further pointed out, the censorship at Wikipedia on this subject is pretty much total. And it is conducted in three ways. First, the sources used in the footnoting are severely limited in their scope. The vast majority of the footnotes come from either official sources, or those who support the official story e.g. Vincent Bugliosi’s book "Reclaiming History."[8] This of course severely impacts the contents of the articles. Second, the “Back Talk” pages (where people try to comment and edit articles) are patrolled by the staffers who work for Wikipedia. Since the organization is a hierarchy, these staffers ultimately enforce Gamaliel’s line. In his articles on Wiki, Mroz detailed his interaction with one of these staffers, which very much illustrated this point. John McAdams is perhaps the most frequent party involved in these discussions.[9] The fact that his site is often used in the final articles contributes to the traffic flow at his (abominable) web page. Third, although the actual “References” or “Further Reading” category at the bottom of the article may contain certain books critical of the official story, this is, for all intents and purposes, simply a fig leaf to disguise the actual control of the contents. For, as we shall see here, there is very little relationship between the titles listed in the Reference section and the actual sources in the material, as none of the reference book’s information seems to be utilized on the page, perhaps this section should be labeled “Find-the-Relation-Yourself Reading.” Additionally, there are valuable sources that you will simply never see listed even in the Reference/Further Reading section e.g. John Armstrong’s "Harvey and Lee," or articles from "Probe Magazine."[10] As the reader can see, far from being a “People’s Encyclopedia,” regarding the John F. Kennedy assassination, Wikipedia is nothing but a tightly controlled, one-sided, and unrelenting psy-op. Jimmy Wales might as well have turned the editorship of these pages over to say, former Warren Commission counsel Arlen Specter, who must be quite pleased with Wales and Wikipedia, who have done little more than cover up for him. I All of JP Mroz’ work in this field provides good background for the Wikipedia entry on the Warren Commission. The best thing that one can say about it is that it is relatively short. But in every other aspect it is a typical Wales/Gamaliel production. It begins with the actual appointment of the Commission by President Johnson.[11] It deals with this very important decision in—get this—one sentence! So in other words, one never understands a key point about Johnson’s decision: He originally did not want to appoint a so-called “blue-ribbon panel.” This decision was imparted on the White House by forces that were not even in the government at this time. As Donald Gibson exposed so magnificently for “Probe Magazine”[12] there were two men who were responsible for suggesting the idea on the White House staff: Eugene Rostow and Joe Alsop.[13] They began their siege right after Jack Ruby killed Oswald.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.151.239.206 (talk) 12:34, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.5 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.Template:Z25 TNXMan 12:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Not sure that's the right reply: it looks like a anti-Wikipedia conspiracy-theory-based rant to me. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 13:05, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Coincidentally, I just happened to read a fair chunk of that site the other day. It purports to show how WP is complicit in keeping certain information hidden; written by someone who "attempts" to show the inner workings of Wikipedia, but who shows that s/he didn't do much homework. Did you know, for example, that a watchlist is a list maintained only by admins, and contains the articles over which the admin exerts authority? You, too, can learn such nonsense by reading that site.--SPhilbrickT 13:14, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I removed the possible real life details of User:Gamaliel from the text and requested oversight. CaptRik (talk) 13:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Not quite the way to do it. Dougweller (talk) 13:23, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, that worked. Never a good idea if you are requesting oversight to say that you've done it. Remove something you think needs oversighting by all means, with an edit summary that doesn't say that's what you are doing, and don't mention it on the talk page, etc. Even when an Admin uses Rev/Del prior to oversight they are asked not to use suggestive terms. I'm wondering if all this should be zapped, it doesn't belong here anyway. Dougweller (talk) 13:28, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Footnoting the article about myself with specific citations

The stub article about me currently has two footnoted references. I can add references to other assertions in the article, but I'm unclear as to how to do it without confusing the footnote structure.

Loring Mandel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.189.209.178 (talk) 14:05, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Please read Autobiography. It would be best if you added the suggested material to the Talk page (click on the "discussion" tab near the top of the article). Then editors can review it and add it themselves.--SPhilbrickT 14:31, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I've added the Loring Mandel article to my watchlist. If you could post the references onto the article talk page I would be happy to add them to the article, assuming of course that they are reliable sources. doomgaze (talk) 14:36, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Urdu Language

Urdu language not listed as a choice, the language which is the used by around 180 Million Pakistanis and over 200 Million people in India are not used. Why is this? What criteria is used to add or remove any language? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.172.139.145 (talk) 16:03, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

If you were trying to ask whether there is a Wikipedia in Urdu, the answer is that there is, and it is at ur:. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:10, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

And the complete list of Wikipedias is at meta:List of Wikipedias. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:12, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Are you talking about a specific article? If this is the case, then maybe that's simply because no one has created the article in Urdu yet. A language is only listed as a choice on the left side, if the article exists in that language. List of Wikipedias by language group says the Urdu Wikipedia has about 16,588 articles, which is much less than what the English Wikipedia has. Therefore, a lot of articles on the English Wikipedia do not have an equivalent on the Urdu Wikipedia (Deutsche Börse as a random example does not). Also please note that Wikipedia is a work in progress, including all of the existing versions in languages other than english and some Wikipedias simply grow faster than others because they have more active contributors. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 20:57, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Another possibility: In the list of ten Wikipedia's surrounding the puzzle globe logo at http://www.wikipedia.org/ Urdu is not listed because the list includes the ten Wikipedia's with the most articles. As noted by Toshio above, the Urdu Wikipedia has far fewer pages than many others, which is tied to the interest of those who speak Urdu to create articles, and not any prejudice against its speakers or users.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Most needed article by redlinks?

Is there an easy way to get the information on what the non-existent page that has the most links to it?Naraht (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Take a look at the wanted page. – ukexpat (talk) 17:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanx, good place to start, but not exactly up to date. Some of the links from there also sort of answer my question. Gets hit by one of the same *really* requested features in Wikipedia, the ability to remove links in templates from "What links here".Naraht (talk) 17:57, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

references and using reflist template

In trying to insert a reflist template I seem to have lost the edit function to my References and can not see the references at all now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awilles (talk • contribs) 20:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

It looks like you are trying to reference the same thing in two different places? In which case you would instead put <ref name="name"> in the first instance and then <ref name="name/> in subsequent instances. Let me know if you want me to do it for you. CTJF83 20:49, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I assume you are referring to User:Awilles/Chard Festival of Women in Music?  – ukexpat (talk) 20:49, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I have moved a few of the references into the body of the article. If you are trying to use the same ref more than once, see WP:NAMEDREFS. – ukexpat (talk) 20:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, CTJF83 20:55, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

threatening edit summ - what to do?

I've recieved a couple of non-polite edit summs when my contributions have been deleted from a discussion page. That I've asked for editor assistance with. But now the editor has used a edit summ that I find threatening. This no longer seems to be a case of dispute. Where do I go from here? 122.151.96.51 (talk) 20:43, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Relating to edits at Talk:OPV AIDS hypothesis? – ukexpat (talk) 20:46, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Away. --Floquenbeam (talk) 20:48, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes Talk:OPV AIDS hypothesis thats the one. What do you suggest? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.151.96.51 (talk) 20:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Although nonconstructive summaries, they aren't really personally attacking you. I'd personally ignore it, but if it bothers you that much you could just post on the user's talk page asking them to be a little more polite in their summaries. CTJF83 20:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Wiki article of Dick Fuld contains ethnicity field listed as Jewish. Other Wall Street players so not have this descriptive element.

I cannot find another major player in banking who has an "ETHNICITY" listed. Dick Fuld's religion is Jewish. His ethnicity is NOT. This appears as being a "Jew baiting" statement. I don't like Dick Fuld, but that entry is beyond the pale. Fix it please.

Denise Lai — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.101.253.42 (talk) 21:44, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I have removed your email address to protect your privacy -- John of Reading (talk) 05:51, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

The poster has a good point. I see someone removed that, and I removed the infobox statement that he was Jewish - not just because it doesn't seem to meet our BLP policy as there is no evidence in the article his religion has played a notable part in his life, but also because we would need a reliable source where he talked about his religion, not a casual statement about something having nothing to do with several people, including Fuld, being Jewish. Dougweller (talk) 08:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

June 3

Lower case titles, upper case titles...

I came across an article which is full of lower case titles. Shepherds' Crusade (1251) This is some of the text, taken from the Dispersal section: "Some of them went to Rouen, where they expelled the archbishop and threw some priests into the Seine river. In Tours they attacked monasteries. The others under the Master arrived in Orléans on June 11. Here they were denounced by the bishop...." Heaps of lower case titles! I think that "archbishop" should have a capital A, since it refers to a particular archbishop. Similarly, the "bishop" refers to a particular bishop, so a capital B is required. Am I right? Boscaswell (talk) 03:34, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Try asking at the Language Reference Desk. People who patrol that desk are very good at answering these sorts of grammar questions. --Jayron32 03:49, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Also see WP:Job titles. —teb728 t c 04:07, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, I've asked the question on the Language Reference Desk. Boscaswell (talk) 13:27, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Petición

Les ruego me faciliten el correo electrónico de Enrique Bañuelos de Castro de PDG Realty en Brasil. He leído varios articulos en Wikipedia pero no encuentro dicha dirección. Atentamente. Juan Andonegui — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.13.193.99 (talk) 09:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

This helpdesk is for questions about using Wikipedia.

We cannot help you contact Enrique Bañuelos. Sorry.  Chzz  ►  09:08, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

QUI - settings

Hi, I have this QUI online offline button and it used to show in my contributions as an edit when I changed and I used to like that to let any interested users know/see if I had just gone offline or whatever but this has stopped showing now although it is still otherwise working. Is it possible to get the settings as previous? Off2riorob (talk) 09:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Dunno, still works fine for me. Steven Zhang ^{The clock is ticking....} 09:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

(e/c) The last edit to User:Off2riorob/Status was on May 30. Has anything changed at your end - a browser upgrade, perhaps? I suggest you post at User talk:TheDJ/Qui. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Oops, ignore me its working again now..duh! - should have tried it first. If I get anymore issues I will ask TheDJ, thanks for the link John. thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 09:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Convention for disambiguation pages

I just reverted these two edits by a new editor.[4][5] What's the convention for disambiguation pages. Did this editor correctly redirect the disambiguation page using the name Twister to the article Tornado and remove the redirect of Twister (disambiguation), such that it then became the main disambiguation page? Thanks. (I guess I didn't completely trust this person's edits, given that he introduced some small errors into another article that he edited.) TimidGuy (talk) 10:27, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

The edits were bold but incorrect. This ended up being a cut and paste move. These should not be done because we lose attribution to who wrote the article. Also since the primary name for tornado is tornado and there isn't any primary topic for twister it should remain the dab page with the (disambiguated) tagged name redirecting to the clean name. If they feel the names are wrong they should propose a move. GB fan (talk) 10:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

I think that your reversion was fine. I don not think there is a clear "primary topic" in this case - ie, I do not think that the vast majority of people searching for "Twister" will be looking for information on Tornadoes. Therefore, Twister should be a disambiguation page - as it is, following your 'undo'.

It'd be good to explain that to the (presumably new) user, linking to that, explaining it - and that, if they still believe it should change, they should start a discussion on Talk:Twister. (A welcome message would be nice, too).

Out of interest only: if Twister was redirected to Tornado, then we'd probably add a 'hatnote' to Tornado, {{Redirect|Twister||Twister (disambiguation)}}, making;

"Twister" redirects here. For other uses, see Twister (disambiguation).

...but note, that's purely 'out of interest', and I do not think any such thing is needed in this case.  Chzz  ►  10:44, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Great. Thanks so much to both of you. I'm done in WP for the day, but will leave the editor a welcome tomorrow and a note regarding this. TimidGuy (talk) 11:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

need to remove wiki page from facebook

My client asked me to help her to remove a Facebook account based on her wiki page. Her former PR person set it up for her and has lost the account username and password. Can you advise me if it would be directed to facebook through Wiki, or would facebook have requested it from wiki Hope you can help Thanks 78.149.97.118 (talk) 11:59, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

You'd have to ask Facebook. We can't help with it.

Anyone is free to copy/reproduce content from Wikipedia (subject to conditions). We've got no control over other websites.

Facebook is probably just showing the Wikipedia article. If you need help editing the article - on Wikipedia - we can help with that; tell us what you need. And possibly, if Facebook is just showing a copy of our page, that might help. If you do want the article changing though, please ask, due to the conflict of interest concern; see the business FAQ.

But, sorry - we can't help with anything that appears on Facebook (even if they copy it from Wikipedia); you need to ask them.  Chzz  ►  12:15, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Question

Hi. I have a question. I would like to create a new page called Ghostbusters (comics). What I would like to do is then combine these 2 seperate pages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Real_Ghostbusters_(comics)

and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghostbusters:_Legion

into that page. I think it would be best to have one page explaining the various ghostbusters comic book series (there are more series from different publishers that are not discuused on the Wikipedia which I would like to do write-ups on) into one page covering Ghostbusters in comics in general. I know how to create a new page. the question I have is how would I combine those other 2 pages I listed into that new page I'd like to create?Giantdevilfish (talk) 13:19, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Why not creating a disambiguation page? Merging so big articles doesn't make sense (I do think) mabdul 14:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

No need to do anything. Both of those articles are listed on Ghostbusters (disambiguation). – ukexpat (talk) 15:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, the reason I wanted to combine them all into one page is because there have been various series from different comic book publishers that featured the Ghostbusters. Why have seperate pages for seperate mini-series? The article about Ghostbusters Legion is waaaay too long and could be reduced by half since most of the info is much too detailed, repeated and irrelevant (It was a 4 issue mini-series. Why does it need such a detailed and overlong page?). It would be more organized if we had one page that had sections devoted to the various different series from the various different publishers throughout the years, so it can all be within one article rather than scattered around. (Kinda like Godzilla (comics)). It covers all the series from the various publishers through the years without having to give each series its own page.Giantdevilfish (talk) 17:55, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there isn't a good proposed "Merge and Move" template. I would bring it up on the talk pages of both articles and see if you get any response. I think a merge would be better first, so that at least one article's history would be kept and then move the result with both current article names redirecting to them.

I wont get any responses. I already brought this up over at the wikicomicproject page and no one responded. Those pages hardly get any traffic as they are not popular articles. Anyway how would I do what your suggesting? I create Ghostbusters (comics), and then I would click "Move" on the top of the page I want to merge (for example The Real Ghostbusters (comics)? Is that how you do it?Giantdevilfish (talk) 18:25, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Olympia Meida Group Title isn't capitalized

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympia_media_group

Please change the title to Olympia Media Group not Olympia media group — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.15.23.106 (talk) 14:24, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Done - Olympia Media Group - but please note, because it has no references, it is likely to be deleted. Please see WP:CORP, Wikipedia:Your first article, Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations.  Chzz  ►  14:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Clearly spam and tagged for deletion as such. – ukexpat (talk) 15:08, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Physics article

I added a bit of a casual discovery and a question to the article. I asked the question 'cause I made a discovery - a relationship between the number of the period and the number of elements in it (Chemistry: Periodic Table) but found that it had been discovered by a couple of people in 2006. But I can't find a record of anything like my device. Could it really be original? - something idly designed by a bored 9th standard girl while studying for her half-yearlies? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.203.46 (talk) 14:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

The question you asked in the article itself [6] was removed [7].

The article is not the place for this type of question; we do not permit any kind of original research in articles.

You could ask on the reference desk instead.

Here on the help desk, we can only help with questions about using Wikipedia.  Chzz  ►  14:31, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

P.S. That article, Least count, is in poor shape - with no references. I've asked for help to improve it, over at WikiProject Physics.  Chzz  ►  14:36, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Paul Haber Hot Hands,Hot Nights Handball/Racquetball Documentary movie

I met Paul at an AAU handball Tournament he won in 1971.In the mid 70's we met again and became friends at a Spalding/Gatorade Handball Tournament in Austin, Texas. After graduating from University of Texas I brought Paul to Houston, Texas many times to play handball, attend parties and teach handball and golf.In the late 80's I made a handball instructional film with Paul to help the esoteric and little known sport of 4-wall handball.Paul as always was great to be around and was full of life. While earning my Master's degree and having just talked to Paul 10 days before he passed away Sports Illustrated wrote a brief paragraph focusing on his money problems.I decided he deserved better and made a journal,audiobook and now a documentary and tribute DVD on his life.During research for his tribute I found out my friend was buried in a charity cemetery with no tombstone and graffiti around the unmarked grave.I stopped the film and raised money to get Paul a tombstone. The purpose of the movie is to raise awareness of Paul's incredible life and get more people into Handball and Racquetball which are inexpensive and fun games to play.My friendship with Paul was priceless.I have spent over $25,000 on his tribute DVD. Please have your Wikipedia volunteer Bearcat from Canada retract his blatant advertising block on the Paul Haber Hot Hands,Hot Nights Handball-Racquetball Documentary Movie. What gives him the right to try to disrupt the memory of a great champion and my friend.Paul deserves better.Thank you,Andy Hollan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.30.108.237 (talk) 14:42, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

The article entitled "Hot Hands, Hot Nights: The Paul Haber Documentary" was deleted as blatant advertising. Nothing has been 'blocked' (yet) but I strongly suggest you read some of our help files before continuing -

• The Business FAQ
• Wikipedia:Notability (films)
• Wikipedia:Your first article

 Chzz  ►  14:58, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

While you are at it, please see WP:NOT#MEMORIAL and WP:COI. In short, we don't care if your documentary is about a hero, or a villain, or a Ghandi, or a Gretzky. We're here to build an encyclopedia, so we do care whether there are established publications of wp:Reliable sources that can wp:Verify what the article says and independently establish that the topic is notable. LeadSongDog come howl! 18:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

No "Move" Option

Resolved

Hello,

I have been using Wikipedia for 5 days now, trying to set up a page for the company I work for, eBeauty.ca. I have made 13 edits in total and should qualify to be able to move my page out of user space and make it go live and yet I still have no "move" option on my page. Please help! My boss wants this live like NOW!

Thanks, Caitlin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ebeautyca (talk • contribs) 14:44, 3 June 2011

I already answered your question at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page/questionsmabdul 14:47, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Please remove prophet Muhammad's physical picture's.............

Hi,

I kindly request Wikipedia website to remove prohet Muhammad's picture as it is not recommended. Also, I need to inform you guy's that this the best website to get any information.please consider this as Humble request from Islamic community.if no one has taken initiative to inform you guy's as this is resulting in hurting Religious feelings please change them to relics or any other pictures which show his birth place Etc. Really appreciate because there is lot of information about Islam which is very precious.please consider guy also request you to remove any picture on statement that would hurt any religion or community because ultimate goal is peace and prosperity.

cell phone (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.248.163.3 (talk) 17:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but we're not going to remove those pictures. It has been discussed at great length, and our consensus is to keep them. Please see Talk:Muhammad/FAQ.

If you wish to voice your opinion on the matter, see Talk:Muhammad/images - but, please note the extensive previous discussions.  Chzz  ►  17:29, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree with you with respect to this matter. You should never give up, of course, what is wrong is wrong, but it has been discussed at great length and a change in policy in unlikely in the short run. User:Fred Bauder Talk 17:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

How do I correct reference errors in citations?

I have written an article that has not been posted yet, and I am trying to eliminate the errors listed, correct the method of citing references, and correct listing references in the refererence section. I used the list method of references because I wrote the article in word, and listed the thirty nine references at the bottom with numbers corresponding to the reference.

I am stumped at this point, could someone help me?

Errors: Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; invalid names, e.g. too many; see the help page tags Cite error: <ref> tag defined in <references> has no name attribute; see the help page.

The sentence and multiple citations are listed below:

Dark adaptation times vary from about fifteen minutes to overnight. Some researchers will only use pre-dawn values.<ref name=Maxwell K., Johnson G. N, (2000)</ref><ref name=Baker N.R. (2008)</ref>

These are the references from the reference section:

<ref name=Maxwell K., Johnson G. N, (2000)/ref> Maxwell K., Johnson G. N, (2000) Chlorophyll fluorescence – a practical guide. Journal of Experimental Botany Vol. 51, No. 345, pp. 659-668- April 2000</ref>

<ref name=Baker N.R. (2008)> Baker N.R. (2008)Chlorophyll Fluorescence: A Probe of Photosynthesis In Vivo, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.2008. 59:89–113</ref>

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Quantify Stress (talk • contribs) 18:21, 3 June 2011

Have you taken a look at WP:Referencing for beginners? If you create your draft article in a user subpage (User:Quantify Stress/Sandbox maybe) we can take a look at it and help you fix it. – ukexpat (talk) 18:27, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Capitalization of fraternity or sorority

Just to confirm here (Because if I'm wrong I'm going to have to undo a lot of stuff) I think this is correct after looking at MOS:CAPS and WP:NCCORP.

• incorrect: John is a member of Rho Sigma Tau Fraternity Incorporated.
• incorrect: John is a member of Rho Sigma Tau Fraternity Inc.
• incorrect: John is a member of Rho Sigma Tau Fraternity.
• correct: John is a member of Rho Sigma Tau fraternity.
• Incorrect John is a member of rho sigma tau fraternity.

Right? (and if Rho Sigma Tau has a wikipedia page link appropriately)Naraht (talk) 18:58, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

That's how I would do it. – ukexpat (talk) 19:01, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Me too. I'd probably stick a 'the' in there;

• John is a member of the Pi Lambda Phi fraternity.

In that example, Their actual registered name is apparently Pi Lambda Phi Fraternity, Inc., but I don't think we care about that detail in a thing about John; the wikilink provides detail. And I'd do it just like that - I wouldn't link Fraternities and sororities, because the first link covers it.

It is a bit of a 'style' issue though, with no particular right/wrong, and might come up for discussion on any specific article talk page.  Chzz  ►  10:40, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Images immediately beneath headers

I thought I read somewhere that images should not be left justified immediately below a header. In the "Forced left justification" subsection of Wikipedia:Images#Using_images, nothing is mentioned, and nothing is mentioned at Wikipedia:Images#Image_choice_and_placement either. Anyone know where this guideline can be found? I figured I'd get more responses asking here than on the WP:IMAGES talk page. Thanks! – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 19:17, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I haven't looked closely but is there anything useful at Wikipedia:Layout#Images or MOS:IMAGES? – ukexpat (talk) 20:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, incredibly, no. But MOS:Images would be where I should ask about this as well, so I'll go ahead and do that. I know that in the creation and recreation of MOS and similar pages, guidelines get dropped and things change. Maybe it's not a big deal any more. Thanks for the reply! I won't tag this resolved just yet in case someone else has any other info. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 02:25, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Not sure what proper etiquette is here, but I split off (?) this discussion over to Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style#Images_directly_beneath_headers. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 02:29, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Who may implement new features (options) in the preferences?

Would it be possible, for a knowledgeable, skillful, helpful, yet "ordinary" wikipedia-administrator, to implement a (new) preferences option in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences ?
Or would this require the attention and time from one of the limited number of (I suppose rights-privileged), payed, Wikipedia staff?
In other words: Who do I have to convince? (I intend to propose a new feature, later, at the village pump WP:VPR).
--Seren-dipper (talk) 19:44, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

A Javascript or CSS Gadget can be added by administrators. Other options require changes by the software developers. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 22:57, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I see. What is the best way to reach the software developers with a feature request?
--Seren-dipper (talk) 01:17, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

It'll be easier if you briefly tell us what the idea is; then we can direct you to the appropriate place.  Chzz  ►  10:35, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Hotmail

Hi my name is claire davies, my hotmail account has been wiped out for no reason, I cant get my emails & I need them for personal & job wise, can someone please call me back with an answer asap? (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.101.223.89 (talk) 20:29, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.5 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.Template:Z25 I have removed your phone number. GB fan (talk) 20:34, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Semi-Protecting my own user talk page.

Sorry if this is covered somewhere and I was just too dense to find it, but here's my question: Is there a way for me, as a user, to semi-protect my user information page and user talk page? I'm delighted to receive feedback, answer questions, or engage in good faith discussions with registered users on my talk page, but occasionally non-logged-in users will post SPAM and general garbage to my talk page. And although it hasn't happened to me yet (knock wood), I've seen some vandalism, sometimes vicious, to various users' user info pages. It seems that setting these "personal" pages to a semi-protected mode ought to be a preferences setting. Is there an easy way to do this? Thanks in advance. Fish Man (talk) 21:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

You cannot do it on your own and takes something before an admin will do it. See Wikipedia:User pages#Protection of user pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. Problems happen seldom enough and are easily enough deleted/reverted that it's not that big of a deal. I just thought it would be nice if it were an available setting. Fish Man (talk) 22:10, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Most pages cannot be protected "ahead of time" or with foresight. Several attempts at vandalism have to occur before a page is usually protected. The goal of Wikipedia is to let anyone edit any page, more or less; otherwise, every page would be semi-protected ahead of time. In fact, IPs would just be blocked, but many IPs actually contribute healthy amounts of good faith edits. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 22:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

how do I left align a portal template?

Hate how they look junky floating off to the right like a picture. Want them inline (and in a bulleted list). This is possible, for instance with the Commons template. This article (Fluorine contains a floating ugly portal template. This one (Painted turtle) has a slick inlined, bulleted Commons template. Help moi? TCO (talk) 23:25, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. See this edit for how I did it. When you see one article with a result you want, click edit to view the code that was used to obtain that result (which is all I did here). Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:22, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I lubz you. TCO (talk) 00:59, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Slick! I hate that floating box look also. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 05:19, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

June 4

Ethnic group naming

Hello, a page on my watchlist, Eyak people, just got renamed from, "Eyak". The Eyak are an ethnic group in Alaska. My question is whether this rename was warranted and if there are any naming conventions on ethnic groups. --Vedrfolnir (talk) 01:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

The move makes sense to me: “Eyak” by itself might mean Eyak people or Eyak language. Similarly English might mean English people, English language, English studies, and probably other things. —teb728 t c 06:35, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Where a common name exists in English for both a people and their language, a title based on that term, with explicit disambiguation, is preferred for both articles, as with Chinese people and Chinese language. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people)#Articles on peoples (ethnicities and tribes)  Chzz  ►  10:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Image upload not working - MIME error?

Resolved

What does it mean when i'm trying to upload an image file and it doesn't go through, instead saying in red, "File extension does not match MIME type."? What do I have to do to fix this? I was trying to upload the cover image for Lone Star Dinosaurs. Silverseren^C 02:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

MIME error can be odd and confusing, so forgive me for not actually working out what the issue was; instead, I simply uploaded it myself - File:Cover of book Lone Star Dinosaurs by Louis L. Jacobs.jpg - and added it to the page [8].  Chzz  ►  05:44, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

That's what I was hoping someone would do, which is why I included a link to the article. Yay, thanks for the help. ^_^ Silverseren^C 05:50, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

confirming biography data re: another person

I have come across some information about a person I know where there is a "citation needed" posted by his name. I have personal knowledge of the issue and can confirm the information cited in the article. How do I do that?Emerysf (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:58, 4 June 2011 (UTC).

References should be from verifiable sources and not original research. Can you find a book or periodical where this information is confirmed? That would be best. Dismas|^(talk) 04:28, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Syntax help. I screwed up

Resolved

 – – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 05:39, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm doing the L/R: Licensed by Royalty article and I screwed up the syntax where I'm doing the notes subsection. Ominae (talk)

It was because the phrase "Japan Episodes" was still being used like so: {{Reflist|group="Japan Episodes"}} in both Notes sections. So I changed it to Note and Remark and it works fine. I also switched {{R}} parameters around in accordance with the examples shown on the {{R}} template documentation. I don't know if this helped also. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 05:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Ominae (talk) 05:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

No problemo. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 05:39, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Assessment process question

Hi, I want assess article for improving wikiproject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.70.150.18 (talk) 07:28, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Please clarify what you are asking for. CTJF83 07:46, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Osama bin Laden

hey i nwas just wondering, how come there is a "Osama Bin Laden's compound in ...." and that even his death is given a article to itself, can't there just be one article for bin Laden? and i don't really see the point of listing the conspiracies of that attack... isn't that just rumours, or even fancruft. It seems that wikipedia is trying to get rid of the needless articles in some of the entertainment stuff.Archivist12 (talk) 08:03, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad and Death of Osama bin Laden are too long to be part of the article Osama bin Laden. When articles get long, they are split into separate articles. See Wikipedia:Article size. CTJF83 08:10, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Promotional Help

I have been in the processes of removing, what I think are promotional sections from a number of Law firm articles, some of (but not all) have been edited by members of the firm.

The sections in particular are :

• Lists of offices, with colourful flags, that mimic sections of a corporate brochure and in my eyes do not have a place in an encyclopaedia
• Lists of non-notable "awards" that the firm has "won", again which do not have a place in an encyclopaedia.

However someone (User:Rangoon11) disagrees with me on the following :

• Linklaters
• DLA Piper
• Norton Rose
• Clyde & Co
• Clifford Chance
• Berwin Leighton Paisner
• Allen & Overy

Is there a noticeboard or like I can ask for someone who is more knowledgeable in this field to give advice on what is promotional and what is content worthy of an encyclopaedia.

Thanks

Mtking (talk) 09:34, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I think Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard would be the best place for it.  Chzz  ►  10:21, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Can i create my own personal Wiki project ?

On my User:Penbat page i have a manually edited highly truncated version of Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychology/Popular pages just listing those articles which specifically interest me. Is it possible to tag articles required to be included with a special non-visible category called "Penbat" ? That would allow a bot to generate my list automatically, see: http://toolserver.org/~alexz/pop/ It requires a specified project name.--Penbat (talk) 09:59, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I think that's a bad idea; that's not the intended purpose of cats, and I think it'd be deleted; Do not create categories based on incidental or subjective features (Wikipedia:Categorization)

Most of us bot-operators would just keep a list of the pages on a userspace subpage, such as User:Chzz/Pict0611.  Chzz  ►  10:10, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes a simple file just listing the article names is an obvious alternative, although the way http://toolserver.org/~alexz/pop/ is set up it expects a recognised project name to operate on. --Penbat (talk) 10:20, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

I do see what you mean, and I notice you've asked User talk:Mr.Z-man#Project Penbat - I think that's the best chance for an answer.  Chzz  ►  13:48, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

how to get the W icon on the browser

how can I get the wikipedia icon on my browser to be able to look up words? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alegioste (talk • contribs) 13:38, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Depends which browser you are using. If you're using Internet Explorer, try searching for "explorer toolbar wikipedia" - there's several free ones. On "FireFox" (version 4) I think it's one of the built-in options in the 'search' box; see picture.

But mostly...I think if you just search "<name of your browser> Wikipedia search toolbar" or something like that, you should find help. Otherwise...please tell us which browser and version you're using, and perhaps someone can give more specific help.  Chzz  ►  13:46, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

OPANA ER

WHAT WILL OPANA ER SHOW UP AS ON A DRUG TEST? I KNOW IT'S OXYMORPHONE BUT IT'S HIGHLY MISUNEDERSTOOD, SO DOES IT SHOW UP AS MORPHINE OR JUST AS SOMETHING LIKE OXYCODONE? I THINK THE OXYMORPHONE WILL SHOW UP AS MORPHINE. THANKS SO MUCH... S