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

May 27

black and decker lawnmower s witch button.

how do i find the correctconnection from ablack and decker switch button lawn mower, so i could replace or substitute another type of swit6ch? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.0.228.145 (talk) 00:20, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

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. RudolfRed (talk) 00:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:Unusual requests. Who wants to do the honors? The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:48, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Purpose of a page?

What is the point of Template:Template sandbox? How is that page intended to be used and how is it different from WP:Sandbox? -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 00:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

According to the talk page, that page is for for experimenting with templates, where the other sandbox page is for experimenting with editing a normal page. RudolfRed (talk) 00:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

One can already experiment with templates in the regular sandbox. I mean, I can create template markup in the regular sandbox. Apart from that, for the purpose of editing a page, I doesn't really matter in which namespace a page is, a page in the template namespace is edited the same way as a page in the main namespace, Wikipedia namespace or any other namespace. Or is that page intended to be transcluded or substituted onto another page itself? I don't get it. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 00:44, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

If you prefer WP:Sandbox or a personal sandbox then just use that. I could quickly think of three potential advantages of Template:Template sandbox. 1) It's overwritten less frequently so you get more time to test transclusion of your code and may easier find it later in the page history. 2) You can transclude it with {{Template sandbox}} like normal templates without having to know how transclusion of other namespaces work (it's a small difference but lots of users don't know it). 3) It's in the template namespace so {{NAMESPACE}} and similar returns the same as if you later use the same code in another template. {{NAMESPACE}} might be used indirectly via a template without a user realising it and it could be quite confusing to some if a test in WP:Sandbox worked differently when the code was copied to a template. See also Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/Not deleted/July 2005#Template:Template sandbox (and others). PrimeHunter (talk) 01:27, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Okay, yes, that all makes sense. Thanks. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 01:44, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Bracket help

The 2012 SEC Baseball Tournament has been expanded to 10 teams from 8, so the current {{SECBracket}} won't work. I can't find a 10 team double elimination bracket template and I can't figure out how to edit the code to add another round. It will need to follow this format. Any help is appreciated. Thanks. ~ Richmond96 t • c 01:07, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Current available options are at Category:10-Team bracket templates (I can't currently view pdf files). Dru of Id (talk) 02:40, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Looks like someone has recently created {{SECBracket2012}} within the last few hours in attempt to address the issue at 2012 SEC Baseball Tournament. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:59, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

banks

Who has more banks Cleveland, Oh or Pittsburg, Pa? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.13.40.157 (talk) 03:18, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.9 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. Cresix (talk) 03:20, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Wikipedia:Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. Robert Skyhawk ^{(T C)} 03:27, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Terrence Deacon's page vandalized

The Wikipedia page about Professor Terrence Deacon (URL = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrence_Deacon) has been vandalized. Probably by a person (Michael Lissack) who has been systematically attempting to defame him in every possible venue. He appears to have placed self-serving and defaming information about Deacon on the Wikipedia page about him, specifically concerning his 2011 book "Incomplete Nature." To correct this vandalism his modifications should be removed and to prevent further vandalism Mr. Lissack should be blocked from making any edits to this page in the future. The other person who may also attempt to vandalize this page (Alecia Juarrero) is mentioned by Mr. Lissack in his edit. She may also attempt a similar self-serving vandalism so her ability to edit this page should also be blocked. 05:03, 27 May 2012 (UTC)76.206.196.80 (talk)

I've semi-protected the page for two weeks. If there are any further problems, please request re-protection at WP:RFPP. Mjroots (talk) 09:13, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I see no evidence of vandalism here – unless your definition of "vandalism" is "expressing an opinion that I disagree with". The material removed appears to be relevant, accurate, and supported by references. I propose reinstating it. Maproom (talk) 10:05, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

It seems to be a case of either parallel research or insufficient citation. A court may have to decide which. There is no outright claim of plagiarism. The one author wrote a book similar to two other books in content and it seems that irked a few because they thought the other two books should have been mentioned in his as sources.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:10, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Please see http://theterrydeaconaffair.com for a full background re this issue. I have no desire nor intention to "vandalize". There is a real academic dispute about this work and the dispute has gone on in the pages of Nature, the New York Review of Books, the Chronicle of Higher Education and the London Review of Books. To suppress the fact of the dispute is contrary to what Wikipedia is about (having gone through similar unhappiness re my own page I more than understand). Reword at will but the material should be reinstated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaellissack (talk • contribs) 16:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I do not think it would be right to cite either http://theterrydeaconaffair.com or The Chronicle of Higher Education. Both give the impression of being pages created with the sole purpose of pursuing this particular issue, rather than reputable independent sources. I have restored the Nature reference to the Terrence Deacon article. Can you give us references to the articles in the New York Review of Books (once it has been published) and the London Review of Books? Maproom (talk) 21:54, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

NY Review of Books see http://emergence.org/NYRBARTICLE.pdf London Review of Books see http://emergence.org/Fodor-Deacon-LRB.pdf as for pages in the Chronicle of Higher Education it is the trade newspaper for US academia. There is no reason to cite http://theterrydeaconaffair.com it was created by me to be a repository for the material re the controversy and is NOT intended to be an impartial third party source. The NYRB the London RB and the Chronicle all pride themselves on the quality of their journalism.Michaellissack (talk) 23:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Print size in Wikipedia

Why is the print size in Wikipedia so tiny. It is mostly almost impossible to read. Please work on that. Thank you05:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)05:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)124.182.98.172 (talk)

This is likely a product of the specific browser you are using, and can easily be adjusted. Which browser and version are you accessing Wikipedia with? --Jayron32 05:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Use ctrl and + to increase font size. Mjroots (talk) 09:10, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

BRP Gregorio del Pilar (PF-15)

Can someone help me please? I look to article for help with my paper. I find nothing on China incident in article, then I find this history section, with old copies of article, no? In history, I think China incident is there, but not when I look at article, so I put back. Then I go to tab to make talk about why I do this. Please check for me, is this right? I have used this Wikipedia lots to look and ask questions but I am not sure as to who is supposed to do what for articles. Thank you 31.186.86.42 (talk) 11:04, 27 May 2012 (UTC) (signature)

FYI - just to clarify, this appears to be about an edit dispute about the inclusion/exclusion of BRP Gregorio del Pilar (PF-15)#Panatag Shoal Standoff. Roger (talk) 11:49, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Not sure why this is here, but I will take a look at it.Desk Ref (talk) 14:30, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

The article on Verona NJ

Fails to mention the famous Uncle Wiggily series, written by Howard R Garis, was inspired by its authors walk through a woods in Verona (I was told this as a child): http://blog.readex.com/how-uncle-wiggily-taught-me-to-read — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.224.97.228 (talk) 13:12, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately "I was told this" is not a verifiable source. To be included in a WP article the information must have been previously published by a reliable source - a personal blog does not qualify. However, the blog quotes the obituary in the Chicago Tribune on November 6, 1962. If you (or someone else) can get hold of a library/archive copy of the paper it can be properly sourced. Roger (talk) 14:35, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Reference Tags

Hi there,

I'm not familiar with writing articles and the certain codes that need to be put into wikipedia.

I'm trying to write an article about my Father in law who competed in the 1960 Olympics, I got a message saying they were going to delete it and I have been trying all day to add the references they are asking for but keep getting errors.

I tried ==References= and also =References=

and tried to make sure the have the right tags for <ref> <ref/> but its not happening

Any help most appreciated http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Din

References are a pain for new editors, and not trivial for established ones. Try Referencing for beginners--SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:04, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

And sorry to report that Wikipedia does not qualify as a reference. However, does this link refer to your father?--SPhilbrick(Talk) 15:14, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Yeh that article is about Dad to, the main one I was trying to reference was outside Wikipedia from Marc Olympics which compiles all Olympic data I just can't get it to appear right, spent hours going through the help page but I am a total novice! It would mean a lot to him to be on here, especially with the Olympics coming up I'm just worried they are gonig to delete it :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onlygroup (talk • contribs) 15:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you thank you!!

I've had a quick look at the article, and it would appear that the notability criteria have been met. That is not to say it won't be nominated for deletion at WP:AFD, but is should survive and is not a candidate for speedy deletion. Mjroots (talk) 20:47, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

My Question: Who taught Al PAcino how to dance the tango in Scent of A Woman?

I would love to know if Al PAcino really danced the Tango in Scent of a Woman or if somebody else danced for him! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.244.153.104 (talk) 14:31, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. Rcsprinter (articulate) 14:40, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

American Wikipedia????

A user has just posted on my talkpage that because a show is american only american airdates matter and doesnt matter if the show airs elsewhere, can someone please ocnfirm if this is true??? if not where should i seek guideance for this because user is determine not to let me add the uk air date even though i said my source but did not provide inline citeation as it not really possible form teh source--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 15:07, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I can't find any specific guidlines on airdates, but I did find a similar discussion here. I've never seen an American tv show with UK air dates listed as well, and I think the problem with adding them would be that its likely to have aired in multiple countries. Where do you draw the line with the number of different dates, because adding them all would be a mess. Sarahj2107 (talk) 15:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

its not to do with teh uk air date it is to do with the fact it is airing in english outside america first regardless if it a american show, the user is claiming it is american wikipeida by not allowing the first airdate regardless of whete it airs--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 16:34, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

If its airing in the UK first then I agree, the UK date should be the one listed as the original airdate. Sarahj2107 (talk) 17:19, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

IMHO what matters is the date when it airs first, regardless of where it happens. Subsequent airing dates in other countries could be considered individually. Obviously shows that have been broadcast in dozens of countries should probably be treated differently from shows that have only been seen in one or a few countries. BTW being "American only" is completely irrelevant; this is not the American Wikipedia, it is the Global Wikipedia in the Enlish language. Roger (talk) 15:49, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

So does that mean the first airdate regardless of the show origins show be listed?--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 16:34, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

New article called Frederic Marcotte.

Hello all, can an experienced wikipedian look at my page and bring necessary adjustments. I'm not that good in english, and the french wiki is different from the english one. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Supergirl36 (talk • contribs) 19:03, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I assume you are referring to the page Frederic Marcotte.

I have made some minor changes to the article. This is not an endorsement of its existence, I know nothing about Marcotte, and have no view on whether he is notable enough to justify an article.

I note that you call it "my page". It is in no sense yours, it is a page which you created, but this gives you no rights over it. Maproom (talk) 19:25, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I'd strongly recommend adding some reliable sources to establish notablity as soon as possible, or draft the article outside of mainspace (at User:Supergirl36/Frederic Marcotte for example) until it has this, as it stands the article is a speedy deletion candidate. Яehevkor ✉ 19:45, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Editing Articles-Making Wikipedia a Better Site

Hi, I recently created a Wikipedia account and got to choose what topics I'm interested in (geography, math, etc.) and what I'm good at (searching the web, researching and writing, etc.) I would like to help in making Wikipedia a better site, but I soon discovered that I wasn't very skilled at what I chose. Is there any way to go back and change these settings? Thank you for your help! Catcrazy5 (talk) 21:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're referring to, but you can edit any article no matter what the subject is. Just find a page you would like to contribute to and be bold RudolfRed (talk) 21:32, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Was it MediaWiki:Customusertemplate-ACP2-Welcomecreation? No choices are stored. It merely leads you to pages where you can help. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:32, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

There are many more suggestions at Wikipedia:Community portal#Todo. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:53, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

May 28

Boolean operators & wild cards

I assume Boolean operators & wild cards are not available for Wikipedia searches, right? How about providing them? --- Allan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.227.154.219 (talk) 00:08, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Boolean logical AND and OR and wildcards are supported. See Help:Searching RudolfRed (talk) 00:25, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Adding related sites links

What if I am adding related sites link for different wiki pages, I am doing this to ease wikipedia readers about related websites / blog URLS so they may learn more. Is it wrong or good please do let me know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faheemvenom (talk • contribs) 01:34, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Blogs should normally be linked in an article about the blog. Links to a recipe are unnecessary; there are thousands for some recipes, so unless the article is about the chef, and it is their recipe, it fails Wikipedia:External links guidelines. Dru of Id (talk) 02:17, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

New film trilogy categories

Hi, I've created two film trilogy categories Category:Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy and Category:Spider-Man film trilogy (2002 - 2007). I hope I did not offend anyone by merging multiple categories. Also, I'm not sure if I named them properly. I'm also thinking about doing the same thing on Star Wars series, but afraid might offend people.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 05:10, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

It sounds like a poor idea to me to move three Batman films out of Category:Batman films and three Spider-Man films out of Category:Spider-Man films. The total number of films is small enough to need no subcategorization. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film would be a better place to discuss. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:55, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Can a notable person contribute to wikipedia?

I have a peculiar case regarding the contributions of a notable contributor in one of the Indic Language community. The said wikipedian is "notable" because he is a famous literary person and a historian. And he has many books to his credit published by universities or private publishers. And he has article about himself in wikipedia since he is notable. Now the issue is:

• A notable person is contributing to wikipedia (yeah, that is a problem for some wikipedians :))
• He is writing articles about the topics on which he has good knowledge.
• Unfortunately for some rare topics the only available reference is his own books.

Few community members have objections to his contributions. They cite various policies including original research.

My questions are:

1. Can a notable person contribute to wikipedia?
2. If yes, can he contribute on the topics of his area of expertise?
3. Can he use his own books (which are verifiable resources) on these topics as reference?
4. Even if other reliable resource are available can he use his own books also as reference?
5. Will these issues be non-existent if a third person work on the same articles and use the same books of this notable person as refernces?

Please let me know how we can handle this peculiar issue.--Shijualex (talk) 09:59, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't see a problem as long as he is keeping a neutral point of view and not trying to own the article(s). As you said, the books are verifiable. It's not completely against the rules to work on an article about yourself or a topic that you are actively involved in. It's just discouraged since people have a hard time writing objectively about themselves. The first Wikipedian with an article that pops to mind is Cory Doctorow who has done some work on the article about himself before and probably (I haven't checked lately) still does. Dismas|^(talk) 10:10, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Quick answers:

1. Yes, anyone can edit Wikipedia.
2. Yes, indeed, expert knowledge is greatly appreciated. See WP:EXPERT.
3. Yes, if they are published by major publishing houses with a reputation for scholarly output. Additionally, he could also use self-published works if he is suffiently well-respected as an authority in the field; see WP:RS.
4. Yes - although obviously, the more sources, the better.
5. Yes, assuming point 3 is met.

If the area in question is a contentious one and the Wikipedian in question is known for taking a polemical position or is closely associated with the subject, it might be more appropriate for him to propose changes on the article's talkpage rather than entering them himself. However, if it's a general historical topic, I see no reason why a published author should not use their own work as reference - as long as the information added is directly derived from the published source, it doesn't really matter who adds it. Yunshui ?‍? 10:15, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Also note that if these are scholarly works, they themselves should be full of citations which can be mined. Thus, if I am J.R. Jonesh, writing about Latvian literature, and my own work from the University of Riga Press, Great Monologues of the Latvian Stage references a 19th-century Latvian anthology Let's Lett!, then rather than provide references to my own work, I should provide references to Let's Lett! instead. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

This area has few hard-and-fast rules; we expect editors to use restraint and good judgement in situations where they may face a perceived conflict of interest. The conflict of interest noticeboard (shortcut WP:COIN) can offer guidance in these sorts of situations. Many Wikipedia editors tend to get a little worried when they see an individual who links exclusively (or nearly exclusively) to their own books and articles; we expect subject-matter experts to be broadly familiar with the important publications in their field, and to cite those other scholars' work in addition to their own. As noted at WP:SELFCITE:

"...Excessive self-citation is strongly discouraged. When in doubt, defer to the community's opinion. In any case, citations should be in the third person and should not place undue emphasis on your work, giving proper due to the work of others as in a review article."

If there are disagreements about the appropriateness of a source for use in a given article, editors should attempt to resolve their differences on the article's talk page. If that should fail, or if broader discussion seems required, editors at the reliable sources noticeboard (shortcut WP:RSN) can be invited to lend a hand.

Tension can be reduced or avoided altogether if an author proposes the use or addition of particular sources on the article's talk page before adding them to the article. Allowing at least a day or two for an article's other editors to comment on or consider a source (as well as to suggest reasonable additions or alternatives) can go a long way to smoothing a scholar's interactions with other editors—and can help to produce better articles, in the long run.

Obviously, the comments and advice you've received here are only general in nature, as you've declined to identify either the editor or the articles where these issues have arisen. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:09, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you all very much for the immediate replies for my query. The main query i faced is, can notable persons contribute to wikipedia on their area of expertise?

These answers will help me to guide the respective language community by providing the general guidelines for dealing with this issue. I haven't identified editor or articles because similar type of issues arised atleast from 3 language communities. So they require a general guideline regarding this topic. The above answers will help me to provide them the general guideline. Thanks once again for the timely support--Shijualex (talk) 16:32, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Redirect in place?

Hello,

I work for an organisation called London Elects, and I have just gone on to edit the copy I had put in place on 4th February 2012 (it was certainly still there and unedited until Monday 30th April) - and the page now automatically redirects to something else. Do you have any way of un-redirecting this page? The two pages should be separate so not sure why some user has done this.

The link is London Elects (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Thanks Claire — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claireachristie (talk • contribs) 12:09, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, The page was redirected on 4 May by the user Amisom with the edit summary 'all copied from webssite'. A quick Google search shows that it was copied word for word form the londonelects site [1]. This copyright problem would have to be fixed before the redirect could be removed. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:27, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

As you work for the organisation please read the guidelines governing conflict of interest. Roger (talk) 12:57, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

The page should have been reverted to the version before the copyright violating text was pasted in on January 26, 2012, not redirected entirely even though it had preexisting content going back to 2008, unless all of the prior content was also copied and pasted. I have searched and do not find any indication that that is the case. (If all prior versions were copyvios, then the article should also not be redirected, but speedy deleted under CSD G12.)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Is there a way to post on Facebook when editing Wikipedia pages?

I am looking for a way to post some of my edits to Facebook or another social network.

This may be a dumb idea, don't know, but since people can share the stupidest things, maybe sharing about an interesting edit or as a way to ask for help on a subject would be useful. Might even encourage people to get involved in editing Wikipedia.

Maybe there already is something like the Mediawiki Facebook extension?

--Kai Carver (talk) 12:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a social media website. If you've just expanded the article on Yuri Balashov, just post to Facebook as your status, "Editing Wikipedia article on Yuri Balashov; really think it's an improvement" and maybe cut-and-paste the URL for the article. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:49, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Sharebox is a script that reorders your toolbox. It adds new buttons that make it easier to mail, print or share an article on Facebook or another linksharing service. You must have an account to add Sharebox to the sidebar. See User:TheDJ/Sharebox for more information. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 13:57, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! Yes I guess Wikipedia is not primarily a social media website... though it is pretty social. I just wonder if it would benefit from being a little more fun, a bit more like a game. But maybe that would spoil it as people tried to "game" it in various ways, worse than they already do, to the detriment of content. --Kai Carver (talk) 21:31, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

How Ture Is This Office and the link {http://www.euro-resource.co.uk/?x=jobs_in_canada}

CONSTRUCTION RECRUITMENT AGENCY — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.26.46.169 (talk) 15:41, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

For the sake of keeping this page orderly, I took the liberty of removing most of what appears to be a copy and paste of a company's webpage. 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. Cresix (talk) 15:44, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

DOUBLE STANDERS OF "NOTABILITY" BEING USED FOR MY ARTICLE SUBMISSION

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Regional Airline Association My article on the Regional Airline Association has now been rejected twice on the grounds that the association it covers is not "notable enough". You have got to be kidding me?? I have linked its notability to PBS, Fox News, The FAA, United States Congress, AND Business Week magazine. Yet, you get these single airplane operations that only have their very own website as the only element of notability, like, Bimini Island Air and Air Cargo Carriers. Where are the short-sighted-reviews of my article failing to see this????--XB70Valyrie (talk) 16:06, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I'm getting so sick and tired of this I'm about to leave wikipedia!--XB70Valyrie (talk) 16:12, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I haven't taken the time to read the details about your submission, but you can create an article yourself. See WP:SAA and WP:HEP for more details. You might also read WP:ORG for notability guidelines for an organization, and WP:V and WP:RS for information about providing reliable sources. If the article is nominated for deletion, there may be some constructive criticism and improvement by other editors that could improve the article so that it remains. I added a welcome template to your talk page with a lot of helpful links. Best of luck. Cresix (talk) 16:28, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Cresix. I'll do just that to get around these little Napoleon's.--XB70Valyrie (talk) 16:44, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. BTW, you might want to be careful with the innuendo about other editors. We're all volunteers here. Cresix (talk) 16:48, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Strangely I was not offered the same kind of kid-gloves that are being suggested of me. One can be equally, if not more, personally insulted with the rejection of an article on such nebulous a frontier as "It's not notable enough". I've already been insulted.

I'm having trouble finding the part about publishing one's already edited article in the links provided. Whereas the articles you linked do explain a lot about tips with editing your article, my article is complete. I'd like to just publish it as-is.--XB70Valyrie (talk) 16:57, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

You can copy the raw article (including wiki markup), go to WP:WIZARD, follow the appropriate links, then paste what you have already written into the new article. Cresix (talk) 17:25, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Okay. I've seen this before. This was how I created this article. Somewhere along the way the language in this article and/or all subsequent articles has derailed me. There is ambiguity in the section where it says, "Create a new article (by-pass wizard)". I thought I want this wizard to create an article. No other option in that category has the option to create an article. It has options to create a new redirect page, but nothing about creating an article by USING the Wizard. The tabs along the top of this artcile creation wizard directed me to submit my article to this review board. I'm a pilot. I'm not stupid. But this, is overly complicated. I'm sure it's intentionally so to a degree so not every moron on God's green Earth is creating an article about how they mowed their lawn last week.

Here are the options I've followed to create the article being "reviewed" now. Create an article now (for new users)> I'm writing about a company, organisation or foundation > My proposed article is about a notable company and is not advertising > My proposed article has good sources > My submission is neutral, establishes notability, and is not copy-pasted from anywhere else > That brings me here Wikipedia:Article wizard/Ready for submission. Both options available lead to this "Review Board". ? --XB70Valyrie (talk) 19:47, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

The other route, Create something else (for advanced users) > I would like to create a new article (bypass wizard) ..this again takes me to Wikipedia:Article wizard/Ready for submission ...which merely expedites me to the review board. ? --XB70Valyrie (talk) 20:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Excellent point, XB70Valyrie. Look at WT:WIZ#Creating a new article in mainspace for a way to begin from scratch. If you need to, you could do step 1 in your sandbox, create the article, and then delete the link in your sandbox. I must admit this is very awkward; it seems to me there should be an easier way. Cresix (talk) 21:05, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, notability is not a nebulous concept, nor is its denial an insult. It is a fundamental policy of the entire endeavour. Claiming that something is not notable may be an error of fact, but it is not a judgment, and so should not be taken as an insult. --ColinFine (talk) 21:23, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I agree that "Notability" in itself, is indeed not nebulous. Look at my article which I just published with help from other wikipedians. Do you see an issue with the failure to establish "Notability"? Regional Airline Association. But when asked to explain why the article wasn't notable, even though I had citations, link, and references to the Federal Aviation Administration, United States Congress, Fox News, the Public Broadcasting Service no explanation was given by either declining Reviewer. People who remain silent are more often then not hiding something. These reviewers are not magistrates, they're not federal judges either. Their behavior as such, in the light of overwhelming "Notability", is impeachable.--XB70Valyrie (talk) 21:47, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Please assume good faith we are all volunteers here and getting angry with other contributors will get you nowhere.Theroadislong (talk) 21:53, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I rest my case.--XB70Valyrie (talk) 22:16, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Redirect pages for mispellings

Resolved

I've just stumbled on this page; one redirect for it being the bizarrely misspelled page "Boys' schhool of st. pauls'" Shouldn't this redirect page be deleted? I thought they were only for (WP:R) "likely misspellings" amongst other things, not completely garbled text... :) OrbiterSpacethingy (talk) 16:31, 28 May 2012 (UTC) Edit: never mind, I've just found Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion... OrbiterSpacethingy (talk) 16:34, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Christopher Hollis biograpy

A book entitled "The American Heresy" (1930) appears to have been omitted from the list of Mr. Hollis' works. Can you add it? You can observe a copy of it now for sale (used) on the Amazon website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whvineyard (talk • contribs) 16:36, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

 Done with this edit. Cheers, benzband (talk) 16:40, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

No flow text

I added an image of bids by state to 2011 NCAA Women's Division I Basketball Tournament.

When I first add it, the next sections flowed around it. I did not expect Sections to flow, just text within a section. I checked Wikipedia:Picture_tutorial which suggested adding |one as a parameter, but that did nothing.

It looks OK now because I added {{clear}}, but I don't think that's the right way to do it. What did I miss?--SPhilbrick(Talk) 17:59, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

The picture tutorial says "|none" not "|one". At least in Firefox 7, "|none" seems to work, having the same effect as your {{clear}}. -- John of Reading (talk) 19:19, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Very strange. This version clearly has "none" but doesn't render properly. However, it works now so I won't worry about it. But it will haunt me.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 19:43, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Favorites

Does Wikipedia offer a Favorites feature where a user could "favorite" a page for later reading or reference? Dryoung22 (talk) 18:26, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Sort of. There is a star up near the edit button. You can click on it and it will add it to your watch list. You can use that to watch of any changes to that article, but it can also serve as a list of favorites.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:30, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

To expand on what SPhilbrick said, on your watchlist, below the My watchlist heading there are several links looking like this:

(Display watched changes | View and edit watchlist | Edit raw watchlist)

Click on View and edit watchlist to see an alphabetical list of the pages on your watchlist. Those pages will be grouped by namespace and are listed in alphabetical order in each group. You can use that as your favorites list. Of course you could always simply create a page in your userspace, like User:Dryoung22/My favorite pages. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk-ctb) 18:47, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Collapsing multiple AFD templates

Hi - How do I do this again - Collapsing multiple AFD templates - I have forgotten - I want to collapse these three - Talk:Arthur_Kemp - Youreallycan 18:46, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Template:Old AfD multi has a parameter called collapse where you can specify the number of AfDs to show up collapsed by default or alternatively you can collapse all with collapse = yes. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk-ctb) 19:13, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for commenting - that seems like a fair amount of work - can't I just collapse them as they are, do I have to reformat them completely? - Youreallycan 19:54, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I see you already collapsed them using {{Collapse top}} and {{Collapse bottom}}. That seems perfectly acceptable to me, although other editors might argue it is not the accepted standard. I think it's not a big deal and I am not aware of any rule on that, as such a rule would possibly come over as some form of instruction creep. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk-ctb) 20:03, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Which namespace does a specific page belong to?

Is there a rule about when to create a page in the Help namespace rather than the Wikipedia namespace? I have a page in my userspace about a specific editing problem which I would like to move but I am unsure into which of those two namespaces to move it. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk-ctb) 19:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

There's no fixed rule. Wikipedia:Help namespace notes that there is significant overlap between the two namespaces. Practically speaking, you'll virtually never be wrong to put a page in the Wikipedia: namespace, and you can always create a redirect from the Help: namespace if it would be appropriate. (I suspect that a lot of editors have forgotten that Help: still exists....)

As a rule of thumb, I would suggest only using the Help: namespace for things that are entirely uncontroversial, and which focus primarily on the technical and mechanical aspects of how to accomplish a particular task or use a particular tool. In contrast, the Wikipedia: namespace includes the policies and guidelines and stylistic advice about how those techniques and tools should be used on Wikipedia. Compare the coverage and emphasis of Help:Table versus Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Tables, or Help:Link versus Wikipedia:External links and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking to get the idea. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:12, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

The page I had in mind is User:Toshio Yamaguchi/Help:Commenting out categories. However, I just found that there is already the page Help:Colon trick. Anyway thanks for your detailed reply, it is much appreciated. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk-ctb) 20:26, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, Help:Colon trick is better. A two-line help page is generally a bad idea. It's better to mention such short things on existing pages but it's already in several pages, for example the main help pages for links and categories: Help:Link#Wikilinks and Help:Category#Linking to category pages. Also, "Commenting out" refers to comment tags or possibly nowiki tags but not to adding a colon to a link. This may change the functionality of the link but it doesn't render the code inactive. Is it OK if your page is deleted to avoid confusion in readers who stumble by it? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:05, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It has been deleted. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk-ctb) 12:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Articles to long to read comfortably

I believe that the text of articles should be made into more narrow and multiple collums to make reading easier. As I scan across the articles, many times I loose my place. More narrow, multiple collums would be easier to read.

thank you, R. Rose — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.73.172.254 (talk) 20:18, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I believe you should post at the village pump's idea lab. 71.146.10.213 (talk) 02:47, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The trouble with multiple columns is where do they break - each section? each subsection? each paragraph? - whilst the reader has to do three times as much scrolling. Scrolling down, then scrolling up, before scrolling down again.
If you find the text lines too long for your comfort, make your page width smaller - the text will adjust to any page width.
Arjayay (talk) 10:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Naming conventions for Colombian government agency with very commonly used acronym

An important article in my work on Colombian television, Instituto Nacional de Radio y Televisión, has me baffled in terms of naming conventions.

• This was the state broadcaster, most known by its acronym Inravisión (indeed, the Spanish Wikipedia article is located there). All of their on-air IDs used the short name. I'm thinking the "unless almost always known by acronym" clause of WP:NC-GAL might mean it's best to use Inravisión.
• Almost all of the links to this article use Inravisión. Keep in mind that in the work I've done, I've added maybe just over half of those links. But even before my work the majority of the incoming links came through that redirect.
• WP:NC-GAL suggests an English translation for a foreign language government agency, but something tells me that that might not be appropriate here.

What is the best title for this article: full name as current, Inravisión, or English name (National Institute of Radio and Television)? Raymie (t • c) 20:34, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Does WP:TITLE help you decide? --ColinFine (talk) 21:31, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Here's what I'm thinking:

• Recognizability: Inravisión hands down. It was in the channel IDs, etc.
• Naturalness: The "actually called in English" bit here doesn't hold up. This is a topic for which all the major reliable sources will be in Spanish (which discounts the English name option). Searching the El Tiempo website (the best available reliable source in this subject area, with over 20 years of archives available for free) for the full name brings up 5,440 results; Inravisión turns up a whopping 13,000+ results.
• Precision: There was no other institute with a similar name or acronym, so it's a tie.
• Conciseness: Doesn't really apply because both are concise titles, though Inravisión is shorter.
• Consistency (WP:NC-GAL): See above.

Now that I want this done, I need an admin... Raymie (t • c) 00:23, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Nelson M. Cooke

I earlier submitted an article, "Nelson M. Cooke." This was rejected, and I prepared a total rewrite, specifically addressing the item cited for rejection (references do not indicate notariety). This has just been resubmitted, but the new text (as it appears on the Wikipedia page) does not have the same references that are in my resubmittal. Hwre is the correct list of references. Could this be attached to my latest draft as appropriate? Raymond C. Watson, Jr. (talk) 21:17, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

References

1. ^ ”Biography: Lieutenant Commander Nelson M. Cooke,” Office of Information, Internal Relations Division, U.S. Navy, 17 August 1967

2. ^ Cooke, Nelson M.; Mathematics for Electricians and Radiomen, McGraw-Hill, 1942

3. ^ K&E Type 4139 Duplex; http://www.mccoys-kecatalogs.com/KEModels/ke4139family.htm

4. ^ Cooke, Nelson M.; "Mathematics for Electricity and Radio," invited paper, Mathematics-Science Panel of the New York Society for the Experimental Study of Education, 23 March 1943. Published in The Mathematics Teacher, vol. 36, Dec. 1943, pp. 329-332

5. ^ Watson, Raymond C., Jr.; Solving the Naval Radar Crisis: The Eddy Test – Admission to the Most Challenging Training Program of World War II, Trafford Publishing, 2007, ISBN 978-1-4251-6173-6

6. ^ Letter of Commendation. From the Secretary of the Navy, 10 Oct. 1945, Service Record. Nelson Mangor Cooke, U.S. Navy

7. ^ Biography, U.S. Navy, op. cit.

8. ^ ”Cooke Engineering Files for Stock Offering,” Securities and Exchange Stock Digest, 13 Sept. 1961; http://www.sec.gov/news/digest/1961/dig091361.pdf

9. ^ ”Handbook of Naval Shore Station Criteria,” Cooke Engineering Company, Dec. 1956; http://www.virhistory.com/navy/manuals/92675/92675-00.pdf

10. ^ ”Buried Cable Radiation Study, Cooke Engineering Company, Defense Technical Documentation Center, 1959

11. ^ ”Power Line Induction Harmonic Tests,” Cooke Engineering Company, Defense Technical Documentation Center,1961

12. ^ ”Multi-circuit Switching Connector,” Cooke Engineering Company; http://www.ptodirect.com/Results/Patents?query=PN/3665129

13. ^ ”The Microtiter System,” Cooke Medical Research; http://jimmunol.org/content/88/3/local/advertising.pdf

14. ^ "Books for Technology," McGraw Hill Book Company, Catalog, 1962

15. ^ "Radio Data Handbook," Allied Radio Corp., fourth edition, 1947; http://www.repeater-builder.com/tech-info/pdfs/allied-data-handbook-4th.pdf Raymond C. Watson, Jr. (talk) 21:17, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Header added and References header demoted. --ColinFine (talk) 21:27, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Not as it stands, no, because while you have prepared it to look like a Wikipedia references section, that will be difficult to maintain if anybody edits the article substantially. You should edit the article to insert these references inline where they are used, as described in WP:Referencing for beginners. --ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

How are the shortcuts for this page displayed?

Resolved

As noted on the helpdesk talk page, the shortcut WP:Y leads here. I was trying to be bold and add it to the list of shortcuts listed in the box at the top of the page, but I can't tell where that box comes from. How does the "shortcuts" box get generated and how are new shortcuts added to that box? RudolfRed (talk) 22:06, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

It's from Wikipedia:Help desk/Header but I'm not sure WP:Y is a good addition because it's not very logical and has no connection to the page name. Many pages have several unmentioned shortcuts. See [2] for redirects here. Shortcut boxes are not meant to be exhaustive and we already list two more logical shortcuts. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:12, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It's an attempt at cleverness, perhaps too clever by half. Read it out loud WP:Y (WP:Why?). Too clever by half, because we are more about What than Why. --SPhilbrick(Talk) 01:42, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. RudolfRed (talk) 03:11, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

May 29

Request for Feedback: Appalachian State University

A few editors and myself have been slowly working on the Appalachian State University page trying to improve it. The article had not been substantively changed for a long time and failed to reflect a lot of recent changes. I know it needs improvement still but I'm not completely sure what changes can be made.

I intended to use the peer review process, but I realized that it is for articles approaching Featured Article status, and currently I am tryimg to improve a B-class article to A-class or better, so it doesn't really fit that category. And I tried to click the 'request for feedback' link, and it redirected me here.

So basically, I want to have a general idea of where the article needs improvements so I can begin an overhaul of it.

Thanks, DavidSSabb (talk) 01:58, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Any help at all? Or is there somewhere else I need to go? DavidSSabb (talk) 22:50, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Horse racing

For a horse race, which “sport” parameter should I use in the {{current sport}} template? Would “Athletics” be applicable? 71.146.10.213 (talk) 02:34, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

How about using the "image" and "event" parameters instead? Something like {{Current sport|image=Horserace 520133030.jpg|event=horse racing event}}, which displays as...

-- John of Reading (talk) 06:51, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

question

i submitted a new page and have no idea on whether it was accpeted or not...can you help?

thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mysunsetswithyou (talk • contribs) 03:11, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Your contribution record shows only your question above, so if you think that you submitted your new page under this account you were unsuccessful. - David Biddulph (talk) 03:23, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

To clarify what David Biddulph said: if you submitted your new page under this account, you did not succeed in submitting it, for some technical reason. This doesn't mean that it was rejected, but that it didn't get as far as being submitted. --ColinFine (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Image chosen for Facebook post

I noticed that a link to the Wikipedia article on the Strategic Defense Initiative (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative) posted on Facebook was accompanied by a portrait of Ronald Reagan, yet that particular image did not appear in the actual article. I was wondering how this image was chosen to be attached to the posting of the link on Facebook (and how the process is done in general).

You'll need to ask whoever made that post on Facebook. RudolfRed (talk) 04:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I own a Facebook account and stumbled upon this photo, and I was wondering if it could have something to do with what you were looking for. 71.146.10.213 (talk) 05:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Facebook works with Bing for their map results. So it wouldn't be surprising if they used a Bing cached copy of the article to get the thumbnail. These two companies, Facebook and Microsoft, have nothing to do with Wikipedia. So it's up to them to do things how they want. Dismas|^(talk) 05:47, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Facebook has many pages called "Strategic Defense Initiative" and you didn't post a link so I don't know which page and image you refer to. This stock answer may or may not be relevant to the unknown Facebook page:

Facebook community pages may incorporate content from Wikipedia— such use complies with Wikipedia policies on reuse of content. We at Wikipedia have no control over how the content is included nor can we help to remove it. Facebook does have a topic on Community pages and profile connections on their Help Center. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Short references for two books with same author & date

I'm working on an article that cites two books by the same author. Here's how they'll show up in the "works cited" section:

• Lichtheim, Miriam (2006) [1973]. Ancient Egyptian Literature, Volume I: The Old and Middle Kingdoms. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24842-7. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: checksum (help)

• Lichtheim, Miriam (2006) [1976]. Ancient Egyptian Literature, Volume II: The New Kingdom. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24843-4. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: checksum (help)

For the in-line citations, I'm using the Surname-Year format (e.g., "Lichtheim 2006, p. 1"). I'm not sure how, in that short format, I should indicate the distinction between these two books, as they both have a 2006 publication date. Should I do it by volume ("Lichtheim 2006, vol. I, p. 1") or some other way? A. Parrot (talk) 04:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I can't answer your question directly, but I did notice that both of the ISBNs that you quoted seem to be invalid. Try Template:ISBNlink and Template:ISBNlink. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:03, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I have problems with the difference between ISBN-10 and ISBN-13. Because many of the books I'm using only have 10-digit numbers, I tried to make the number of digits consistent by eliminating the first three digits from the 13-digit number. I suppose I shouldn't do that, because it works for some books but not all. A. Parrot (talk) 18:09, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

In many author-date styles of referencing, lowercase letters are used after the year numbers to distinguish different publications by an author in the same year (see the beginning of Parenthetical referencing#Examples). Your works-cited entries would thus be

• Lichtheim, Miriam (2006a) [1973]. Ancient Egyptian Literature, Volume I: The Old and Middle Kingdoms. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24842-2.
• Lichtheim, Miriam (2006b) [1976]. Ancient Egyptian Literature, Volume II: The New Kingdom. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24843-0.

and the inline refs would be of the form "Lichtheim 2006a, p. 1". Deor (talk) 15:25, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. A. Parrot (talk) 18:09, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Delete USER

I created a USER for myself but for legal reasons must delete it (copyrighted name shown in "View History") - how can I delete a USER so that it is no longer on search-engines - thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.218.245.99 (talk) 07:46, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

How can a name be copyrighted? Do you mean a trademark? Accounts can be renamed but not deleted. See Wikipedia:Changing username. A rename will also change the name shown in page histories. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

how can i use logitech keyboard singns

hi

i bought new logitech keyboard which has a rupee singn,how can i use it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.176.122.26 (talk) 08:50, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Why not? Press the key and get the desired result wherever it is needed. Dipankan ^{(Have a chat?)} 09:37, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Have you tried the Computing section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps.Template:Z38 Tell them which operating system you have and what happens when you press the key. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:05, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Submitting an article on a renowned individual with the same name as one who lived centuries ago

I'm about to write a biographical entry on an individual who is renowned in his field, but have been hamstrung by the fact that someone with the same name who lived hundreds of years ago is already in Wikipedia. Thus, when I enter his name in the "Is it new?" box, this other person's name appears, and I cannot get permission/authorization to write the article.

What should I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filmian (talk • contribs) 09:19, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

What is the name of the person? --kelapstick^(bainuu) 09:35, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

What you would do is disambiguate the two names. Dismas|^(talk) 09:42, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Give your article a different name. So, if you are writing about the singer Engelbert Humperdinck, instead of calling your article Engelbert Humperdinck you would call it Engelbert Humperdinck (singer). Maproom (talk) 09:44, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Disambiguating articles on people with the same name is a common problem in Wikipedia. The standard solution is to add a profession or job description to the article title, in brackets after the name (e.g. George Washington (inventor)). Other less common solutions are including a middle name in the article title (e.g. Charles Galton Darwin), including a title (e.g. Sir Peter Parker, 1st Baronet) or adding dates to the article title (e.g. Winston Churchill (1620–1688)). Gandalf61 (talk) 09:53, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Or John Sherman (Ohio).--Wehwalt (talk) 15:30, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Addition of an Article

Hi Team

I had recently uploaded an article to be added into Wiki.

I do not see this article being added. COuld you tell me the criteria / procedures for an article to be added?

The article I had requested to be added is titled Dr Sita Bhateja.

Kindly advise — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.241.124.195 (talk) 12:40, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dr Sita Bhateja.--ukexpat (talk) 16:11, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Please, change this SEMI-PROTECTED page?

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

Hello.I'm a citizen of Turkey.I request that you change the false information on the "Kurdistan" page.There is not a part of Kurdistan in Turkey, there wasn't and there never will be.Sorry to bother you but this isn't right.I'm even thinking to hire lawyers to change this situation.I hope that false information will get fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.233.85.26 (talk) 13:18, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I think you'll find there's fairly good evidence for the existence of Turkish Kurdistan. In addition, please retract your legal threat above immediately - per WP:NLT, such threats will lead to you being blocked from editing. Yunshui ?‍? 13:25, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

help

i am trying to add a page and cannot for the life of me do this...i thought i upoaded correctly, but i received a note i couldnt figure out, can someone please help? thanks! Mysunsetswithyou (talk) 13:34, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Your contribution history shows no edits other than to this page, so you indeed did not succeed in submitting the page. However, it is hard for anybody to know what happened without more information. However the problem might be simply that you are not yet autoconfirmed: in that case, make another eight edits (anywhere) and wait for four days. --ColinFine (talk) 17:26, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Submitted Changes but now not showing

Hi, I submitted my editing changes to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalahari_Resorts and then they were all there for a few days, but now it is the old information. How do I get the new info to stick?

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.13.156.125 (talk) 14:03, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

As the edit removing your changes states "removing blatant advertizing" - Wikipedia is not an advertizing medium and any such changes will always be removed. Arjayay (talk) 14:14, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Carpenter Bees

I would like to add a comment about a natural way to control Carpenter Bees. How and where do I make a suggestion that would be added to this category? Thx, Ed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.55.87.15 (talk) 14:41, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

You could add a new section to Talk:Carpenter bee, but please provide a reference to a reliable source for the information you want to add. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:11, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

You can also edit the article yourself. Go to Carpenter bee, click "edit this page" at the top. Good luck. Cresix (talk) 15:13, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It's not quite clear from your wording what kind of information you are wanting to add. If it is a discussion about a method of control that has been studied or used and reported in reliable sources, then you are welcome to add it. But if it is original research, or if it is in the nature of a "how to" section, please don't, as it will probably be swiftly removed. --ColinFine (talk) 17:30, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Redirecting

I created a new webpage today, when I went to go back and check on it, it kept redirecting me to a related webpage. Why does this keep happening? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amorrison24 (talk • contribs) 15:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It was redirected because her company is the only notable thing about her. You can see this. --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 15:51, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Spectreman production credits

On the Spectreman page there is a paragraph for the U.S. 1978 release of the show on TBS. I can't find any credits for the person or group who wrote the english language theme song either here on on the web. I thought that perhaps the person who originally wrote the article may have some ideas since they seem to have knowledge of other things the song writer(s) have done. How can I contact them? - dstaples111 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dstaples111 (talk • contribs) 16:02, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

A better place to ask that question would be WP:RD/E. Cresix (talk) 16:06, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Avoiding COI with new article

I work for a small non-profit organization in Philadelphia, PA called Federation Early Learning Services, formerly Federation Day Care Services. We run eight child care centers, four after school programs and, until very recently when our grant ran out, assisted other child care facilities to identify and assist children with developmental and behavioral difficulties. This non-profit has been in existence for over 100 years and serves approximately 1,000 children a year. When we commemorated our founding last year it occurred to me that such a long standing local institution should have a Wikipedia article. This is of course where a few concerns popped up for me. Firstly, I know that Wikipedia volunteer editors are very sensitive to bias and to information submitted by company employees for obvious reasons. Second my knowledge of the coding language used to make an article look complete, i.e. inserting images, creating references, etc, is practically non-existent and we don't have anyone who works for us at present who could step in to help me.

I can provide unbiased information, sans superlative adjectives and preferential statements as I take Wikipedia's neutrality very seriously myself. However I don't have the skills to get the information on there and I don't know how to ensure the article won't get blocked or deleted by an editor who feels I may be a nefarious person uploading inaccurate info en masse? The Article Wizard suggests: "If you feel you, your organization, or your friend, band, or site are notable, please consider asking a neutral third party (ideally an uninvolved Wikipedia editor who has edited similar articles) for their opinion before proposing an article on the subject." So how do I do this? Is there someone to whom I can submit documents detailing our history that could determine whether it warrants an article or can create one for us if deemed worthwhile?

Any assistance or advice would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CommCoor (talk • contribs) 16:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

See WP:Requested articles.--ukexpat (talk) 17:23, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Idea

I see Wikipedia uses PHP. Does it use a parser like the parser.php in punBB? if so, could we have:

//(.*?) <!--$1-->

in the WikiText parser? EDIT: the thing doesn't want to be shown. just click edit this section. I also hope I got the page right... Finding a page to talk about this is hard. Can't talk on the main page, or questions... 96.5.166.66 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:46, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

(I added 'nowiki' codes round your sample, so that it would appear). I don't know what you are trying to achieve by those - the first appears to be a regular expression and the second an HTML comment - but Wikipedia uses Mediawiki markup. It is completely irrelevant what language it happens to be written in, and what else might happen to be written in the same language. Mediawiki could be written in Perl, Java or .net and yet appear exactly the same.

If there is a specific technical enhancement you are asking for, WP:VP/T is a good place to ask. --ColinFine (talk) 17:35, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

My signature doesn't work

I recently changed my username from Hysteria18 to Arms & Hearts; I'm trying to change my signature accordingly but to no avail. My current signature is:

– [[User:Hysteria18|hysteria18]] ([[User talk:Hysteria18|talk]])

I'd like to change it to

– [[User:Arms & Hearts|Arms & Hearts]] ([[User talk:Arms & Hearts|talk]])

but keep receiving an error telling me: Invalid raw signature. Check HTML tags. Any ideas? – hysteria18 (talk) 17:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It's expecting the ampersand to be followed by a special character code. Try replacing it with & — Frankie (talk) 17:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah, brilliant, thanks. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:59, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Michele Marziani

I created a page on writer Michele Marziani by translating a page already exhisting on Wikipedia in Italian language. Why is mr. Dennisthe2 going to delete it by laking of sources ? isatam

Isatam (talk) 18:47, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

For that exact reason, there are no sources. You must provide reliable sources which establish that the person is notable. We can't just take your word for it. See also, WP:BLP. Also, if kept, the article should be moved to the proper title. Right now his last name is not capitalized. Dismas|^(talk) 18:51, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The source of translated pages must be attributed. I have done this at Talk:Michele Marziani. See Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. The Italian and English Wikipedia have different policies. The article will be deleted if no sources are added. I have moved it to the proper capitalization Michele Marziani and made some cleanup but it still needs work and especially sources. See Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. English sources are preferred but Italian sources are allowed. I don't know Italian. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Confirming a user is the subject of an article

How does a user go about the process of proving that they're the subject of an article? Who precisely do they need to email? I'm thinking of the recent edits that were made to the page Krista Allen. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 18:48, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

See WP:BIOSELF.--ukexpat (talk) 19:18, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

However, I don't think it makes any difference to anyone whether an editor is recognizes as the subject of an article. There's no privilege or recognition. Salvidrim! 02:48, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, Ukexpat. That got me in the right direction. I think that page has been tweaked since the last time I read it. I remember the path to get to an actual email address being more labyrinthine. And Salvidrim, I didn't suggest that they would get any recognition or privilege. I was thinking more about someone trying to WP:OWN an article because it is about them. Dismas|^(talk) 03:16, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

That was mostly my point -- someone trying to prove he is the subject of an article (as your initial question appears to imply) gives the impression he is trying to assert ownership, or at least some measure of control, both of which are not beneficial to the encyclopedia, hence my worries. As it was unclear from the question, I just wanted to ensure you weren't encouraging or enabling that behaviour, but I now see you're perfectly aware of the possible pitfalls and apologize for any assumptions. :) Salvidrim! 03:23, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 - Correct citation of a federal court order

I'm currently in the process of correcting bare url citations on the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 site. On source is an order issued by a federal court blocking the indefinite detention powers of the NDAA. What is the correct citation for this court order? — Preceding unsigned comment added by P3Y229 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Does {{Cite court}} help?--ukexpat (talk) 19:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Not really, because I am not from the United States and therefore not familiar with the U.S. legal system. In this sense I don't know how to use {{Cite court}} correctly. An example: Do I have to mention all plaintiffs and defendants or is there a short version? So: What is the correct citation for this court order? --P3Y229 19:36, 29 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by P3Y229 (talk • contribs)

Second opinion for images

I'm planning on adding an image to the Charlotte Regional Medical Center article, and I need a second opinion on which one to use. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 19:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The second one looks much better to me both as to composition and focus. The first is blurry, mis-centered and doesn't show the name clearly.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:38, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The second, but a cropped version focussing on the building itself. Let me know if you need help with that.--ukexpat (talk) 19:46, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Cropped version uploaded. Was that what you had in mind? PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 02:56, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Browsing History

Hello

Is there a way to view my browsing history on WP?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.82.5 (talk) 19:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, use your Web browser history. --Jac16888 ^Talk 20:46, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

edits being deleted

twice i have added info on Michael Sheards page and both times it has gone missing. Why is this happening? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chatanga1 (talk • contribs) 20:39, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It is being removed because it is unsourced--Jac16888 ^Talk 20:47, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

The answer to your question is in the History of the article. When your edits were reverted the editor left an edit summary. You can also use the history to find out who has removed the edits. GB fan 21:00, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Unauthrised Refacatoring

I received Rfc for Talk:Circumcision#1RR_proposal - I responded there!

I then found comments from Pass a Method on my talk page telling me that my response had been moved to Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#1_revert_proposal_for_circumcision.

It would appear that some are attempting to hold an Rfc by the back door and being naughty! I responded on the correct page as I did not wish to be dragged into the mess.

Who do I contact - and who gets a smacked bottom? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Media-hound- thethird (talk • contribs) 22:05, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Must we parse this in terms of handing out spankings? I don't think you're going to be sitting down afterwards if we do. The RfC at issue clearly stated, with a link, where you were invited to post to respond to it, which was not at Talk:Circumcision but at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#1 revert proposal for circumcision. You nevertheless posted at that wrong place. The RfC creator, in obvious good faith, politely informed you that you had posted to the wrong place and asked you to move your comment. When you did not respond after an hour, he or she moved your comment to the correct place, without changing it. You're reaction has been to post a nasty warning to the user's talk page of a "breach off [sic] Community Standards", linking to WP:Refactoring. Did you read that page? It talks about good faith, and that refactoring is for "Relocation of material to different sections or pages where it is more appropriate", and not that doing this is any sort of violation of the page which is a how-to guide. As far as I can see, no wrong was done to you at all, and no "breach" of WP:Refactoring occurred. Instead of looking for policies/guidelines/standards that have been "breached" (it's a bad idea to view and treat [most of] our policies and guidelines as statutes that can be breached), ask yourself what the intent was here. Even if the move was maybe a little too bold, because people can be sensitive to other people touching their posts, this was not someone changing your post to say something other than what it did or other chicanery – that's what people cite WP:Refactoring for, in the main. You should go strike your warning and apologize to the user for your overreaction. You could graciously register your disapproval by telling the user that though their actions were obviously in good faith, you really don't like to have your posts moved by anyone and to please not do so in the future. Meanwhile, you can always go remove your own moved post from the correct discussion page. Finally, please note that on Wikipedia we don't really vote exactly. We do have straw polls where people "support" and "oppose" and things in between, but it is intended as a discussion where you are registering your ultimate outcome first and then providing a rationale, evidence, etc. for that outcome. Accordingly, to post simply "support" as you did, means you might as well not have bothered as an unsupported "vote" like this is properly discounted.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:57, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Your response is most interesting - I ask "Who do I contact.." - and you do not answer that question.

I note that content has appeared on my user page that is out of sequence. I may have to deal with it through WP:Refactoring. P^)

May I question how long is an acceptable time period for another person to act outwith expected standards? Does that mean I can post on a talk page at 3.00 am and because by 4.00 am I have received no response I can do as I like? Where is the policy on WP:TimePeriod?

The hour referred to was my hour and not owned by any other person. Should I wish to ignore a message does that empower another wiki user to assume that I agree with them?

If I am not even aware of the message it is even more unacceptable and presumptuous. Is such presumption covered by WP:Presumptuousness?

Is that if someone has been about Wiki for a long time, they are defended even when they behave unacceptably?

What do I do about cleaning out the multiple unsolicited emails - parts of Rss feeds that I have had foisted upon me by the conduct of this person? My computer usage and automatic interaction with Wiki are my choice - and it is not acceptable to be buried under Dross because another wikian wishes to push an agenda. Where can I find WP:Unsolisitedjunkmail?

I also note they have been canvassing rather heavily! Jimbo Wales page too! Funny how they say "I need..." and not "Wiikipedia needs..". It does indicate a certain bias!

I asked where is the correct place to have the conduct addressed - not for an opinion, critique or view to be expressed. Could the help desk provide a direct answer?

I also note that the person concerned has not Apologised - but has told me that I was in the wrong! How interesting!

I did look for assistance through Wikipedia For Dummies - it seems that it had the right answer after all.

... and some wonder at the Parlous state of editor retention and concerns about cabals and bureaucracy across Wikiland ! I find it amusing that I was perusing some recommended reading within Wiki Land only today. A case study! There is so much more too!

Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 00:29, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

It appears I am wasting my breath. If you would like to know where to post about this "incident", my best advice is nowhere since you are in the wrong on your talk page and here. The refactoring of my post on your talk page is about the definition of disruptive editing to make a point. But if you want to know where you can report actual problematic editing, you can do so Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. That is where people seek administrative intervention for problematic editing that is not of the simple vandalism sort. You should not do so, and if you do it is sure to boomerang back on you because of the lack of merit and the increasingly tendentious nature of your recent edits, but that is actually the answer to "Who do I contact"?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:52, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the belated answer to the original question!

You're response has been so informative in my ongoing research into Wikipedia, and why it needs reformation.

Is the help desk subject to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution? I would like to raise a few issues and pointers with the right people! Where is the correct place to do that?

I have already discovered The wub.

Please note it is a direct question that requires no opinion - just notice of the correct WP:policy/practice/procedure and a link to the most suitable page. Simples!

I also would welcome any direction to the correct place to look up WP:veiledthreat - WP:bullyingInWikipedia - WP:Beurocrat - or any similar or even synonymous resources. Suggestions welcome!

Thank you for the link to disruptive editing to make a point.... but I already have read all about that. I also discovered this link too Advocacy Editing, for myself. It's a shocker!

And some wonder why there is a need to replace the WP:helpdesk with a better alternative?

Hi! Help desk, thanks for visiting the Teahouse! As an experienced editor, your knowledge is very valuable to new editors. Teahouse Hosts help new editors at the Teahouse and beyond. If you'd like to get involved in assisting new editors at the Teahouse, please learn more here

Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 02:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Look me up - you can find out more!

Look up WP:IRONY too ..... it does make me giggle! P^)

Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 02:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Please go do something constructive.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:48, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your enlightened response! So which option would you prefer? I walk away and write about just how Technocratic and Systemically biased Wikiland is..... or should I stay and make it batter it? OOPS why would I ask that question on a Brick Wall?

Have you noticed any issues around here with bias?

I did! Have a look here ... sorry if the WP:IRONY is lost on you!

By the way! Did you notice that ""You"" failed to answer the direct questions asked of you.....and you responded with a brick wall!

How telling is that? ... oh! ...and you are the Wikipedia help(?) desk.

WP:IRONY

Media-Hound 'D 3rd P^) (talk) 04:10, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Sigh. The Teahouse is not replacing the help desk. There are many help boards/pages here that are all used for different things. A place like the New Contributors' Help Desk, for instance, is for, well, new contributors. This help desk is a good place for anyone of any experience level here to ask questions about editing or using Wikipedia. The Teahouse is designed to have more of a personal feel. That's why there are "hosts" and "guests" there. The hosts have bios with info about themselves, which helps to foster the personal feel. It's geared toward new editors, I think, but I suppose anyone could ask a question there.

I don't feel this is the venue to continue this discussion, but why do you find Wikipedia (or, as you phrased it, "Wikiland") "Systematically biased"? - Purplewowies (talk) (How's my driving?) 05:34, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Format/style of Biographies—guidelines?

I see some biographies of living persons have a section called Biography while others don't and instead they have sections like "Early life", which would be found under other pages' Biography sections. Are there standards to follow in editing biographies? Or should I just go by featured articles that are biographies? Mrtea (talk) 22:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't mention your example but see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biographies. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:47, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

My practice is not to have a "biography" section - the whole article is a biography so in my view such a section is redundant.--ukexpat (talk) 23:07, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

sonac boom

Growing up in Chicago in the sixies i remember jet(s) flying over head breaking the sound barrier. Now my older sister (4yrs older) is saying it never happened. I grew up on Ridgeway ave 28 hundred south. So what I'am asking how do I find out who's right and who's just getting old. I'am sixty and remember things that my sister has forgotten.thanks foe any help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.90.96.219 (talk) 22:45, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

This page is for asking questions on how to use Wikipedia. You should post your question on the reference desk at WP:RD RudolfRed (talk) 23:10, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

May 30

List of municipalities in Rio Grande do Norte sorting incorrectly

In List of municipalities in Rio Grande do Norte, the Area column isn't sorting properly. How is this fixed? Albacore (talk) 01:01, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

It works if you take out the commas and add leading zeros to the sort template, like this. (Feel free to copy that to the article, but do check it over to make sure I didn't miss any.) Hope that helps. ^Avic_ennasis @ 03:59, 9 Sivan 5772 / 03:59, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

how to find wikipedia articles by size?

For example, if i want to find articles between 3000bytes and 10000bytes, what should i do?--Jsjsjs1111 (talk) 03:52, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

I don't think this is a standard feature on-wiki for searches, but I believe the CatScan tool allows to search articles by size. :) Salvidrim! 04:09, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Redirected ref no longer supports claim

I have an article in which one of the references has been redirected to a new version of the site. The new site no longer contains the details required to support the original statement inteh article. I have no doubt that the original site's version did support the claim when it was accessed. So how do I tag this? doesn't seem right, and neither does . Meters (talk) 04:00, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Try to see if you can find an archived or cached version of the proper material, otherwise an alternative source will have to be found. If the referenced URL is simply now redirecting to another target which doesn't contain any of the needed information, then it is a , theoretically speaking. Salvidrim! 04:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

If you do find an archived or cached version of the proper material, per above, you can then permanently archive it yourself at webcitation.org to gird against this happening again. It can then be added to the citation, which is supported by some of the citation templates. For example, in {{cite web}} you would use the parameters |archiveurl= and |archivedate=.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:52, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Non-admins editing Mediawiki pages

When was the MW software first set up to allow only admins to edit MediaWiki pages? Edits like this and this show that it's not always been that way. Nyttend (talk) 05:02, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

The ability to disable editing of MediaWiki pages is done through the $wgNamespaceProtection setting, which was introduced in MediaWiki 1.10.0 - which was released on May 9, 2007. My guess is Wikipedia updated to 1.10 around that time. ^Avic_ennasis @ 05:35, 9 Sivan 5772 / 05:35, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

A Request/Inquiry about a separate "Images" section ....

I wanted to know that why don't you have a separate section for the "images" like Google does ???

An anonymous and a well wisher.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.236.52.92 (talk) 05:37, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Images are in the File: namespace. - Purplewowies (talk) (How's my driving?) 05:42, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

You may also be interested in Wikimedia Commons where many of our images are stored. Dismas|^(talk) 05:44, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Recomending pre-requesite pages

I feel it would be highly benificial if a given page can can suggest a "pre-requesite" page for back ground information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.74.180.113 (talk) 06:50, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Can you provide an example? Nearly all articles have links to such topics (highlighted in blue) in their opening paragraph, and many articles have a "See also" section near the end for related topics.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:46, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

You might also find interesting the research reported in the "To understand a Wikipedia article, which others does one need to read first?" entry under Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-05-28/Recent research#Briefly. Deor (talk) 13:21, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Update URL in footnote

I need to update a URL in a footnote with reference to a page from 2010 now archived in the Wayback Machine. Can you give me the correct Wikipedia citation form for this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.139.26.233 (talk) 07:58, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

In a {{cite web}} template, you can just add "|archivedate=" & "|archiveurl=" parameters. :) Salvidrim! 08:02, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

It would help if we had the specific example so we know the format. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 10:08, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

The Chinese version of the article "Bradford University School of Management" is wrong!!!

Hi, the Chinese version of "Bradford University School of Management" is linked incorrectly!! When I click the "Chinese" version from reading the English version, it jumps to the Chinese version of "Lancaster University Management School", which is totally wrong. Woud you please correct it ASAP? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.48.153.2 (talk) 09:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Did some searching, but the Chinese Wikipedia does not seem to have that article. Removed the incorrect interwiki link. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 10:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

my account

someone has hacked my account and I have tried to regain access but I think they have changed email so I can't get a new password. what can I do to get it back? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MilfordBoy1991 (talk • contribs) 12:16, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

I guess it isn't the account you posted this from. What is the username? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:21, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

MilfordBoy991 — Preceding unsigned comment added by MilfordBoy1991 (talk • contribs) 12:24, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

User:MilfordBoy991 has no committed identity and far too many edits for usurpation. There is a stored email address but others cannot see it. Are you sure you know which address it should be? Do you still have access to it? It sounds like you have tried Special:PasswordReset. Have you checked any spam folders? Your ISP or webmail provider may have one outside your computer. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:28, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

yes I have and I have checked all spam folders and nothing came through — Preceding unsigned comment added by MilfordBoy1991 (talk • contribs) 13:36, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

1) When were you last logged in? 2) Have you tried another browser or computer? 3) Are you also unable to log in to wikiquote:User:MilfordBoy991? 4) Have you made any edits with information which could be used to verify your claim to the account? meta:Privacy policy says: "Users whose accounts do not have a valid email address will not be able to reset their password if it is lost. In such a situation, however, users may be able to contact one of the Wikimedia server administrators to enter a new e-mail address." I don't know under which circumstances this will be done. The account has no added user rights so you could start over with a new account and write on the userpages that you are the same user. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:59, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia Page for E commerce website

I want to create a Wikipedia page for my e commerce website , plz suggest how to proceed for this activity, what steps to be follow to make the proper page for my website which will get approved quickly that will help us to make our identity on Wikipedia asap.

plz suggest the steps and guild lines , content, or else necessary to make a valuable Wikipedia page asap.

my email : (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vaishnav2010 (talk • contribs) 12:50, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

You don't. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not an advertising website. The notability criteria for an organisation to have an article on Wikipedia are at WP:CORP. You should not, in general, try to produce an article about an organisation with which you are connected, see Wikipedia's guidance on conflict of interest. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:19, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

A little problem

What is up with the US flag at list of tallest people? AndieM (Am I behaving?) 13:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

It looks normal to me. Please describe the problem you see. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:30, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

I am having a hard time making a page go live.

I have been working on an article for a while. Initially it was in the sandbox, but then when I thought it was ready I moved it to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:David_R_Courtney this was a couple of days ago but it still does not show up in the wikipedia search box.

Did I do something wrong? Did I neglect to finish something?

Respectfully yours

Robert Bernstein