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

January 16

Term of art vs. common usage

Someone has asked (via OTRS) that the linked term "interior designer" be replaced with "designer" in the Colleen McGill article because "interior designer" is a term of art in Ontario, where the article's subject is from, referring to members of the trade association. While the trade association (ARIDO) is a voluntary organization, Ontario's "Titles Act" apparently prohibits people from referring to themselves as "interior designer"s if they are not a member.

In my decidedly non-expert opinion, "interior designer" does seem to be the commonly-used term for what McGill does. However, the other person's point that use of the term may mislead people into thinking that McGill is a member of ADIRO and authorized to use that title there is a fair point as well.

The talk page was blank, so I thought I'd ask here. Any thoughts on what to do? (I've notified the ticket filer of this discussion.) – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 00:03, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Interesting question. I can see how this might be considered a grey area by some, but I come down firmly on the side of keeping the common usage description. First, all this is based on the assumption that Ms. McGill actually isn't a member of ARIDO; is that just alleged in the OTRS ticket, or is it established? Second, assuming for the moment that she is not an ARIDO member: if you look at the actual law [1], Ms. McGill is prohibited from marketing herself as an "interior designer", but there is no rule - even in Ontario - prohibiting me (for example) from describing her as one. Not describing her as an interior designer, if thqat is in fact what she does (with or without the title) would be a disservice to the reader. Describing her as a "designer" provides no useful info. This is primarily a marketing scheme. Anyone can legally do interior design in Ontario, but only an ARIDO member can call themselves an interior designer. On Wikipedia, Ms. McGill isn't calling herself anything; we are calling her what she is. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Alleged by the person who opened the ticket, and before any article change was made, obviously we'd want an RS. That said, I have no reason to doubt the ticket filer at this point. That last distinction that you make is relevant but not at issue, I think, as the OTRS discussion has focused around issues of what Wikipedia "ought" to do, not what it "must" do. I see 2 issues here: 1) term of art vs. common name and 2) will people casually reading the article be deceived by the use of the wrong term. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 01:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I suppose I should say that I'm leaning in the same direction as Floquenbeam, but brought the discussion here because I think it is a valid question. And because I'm not sure. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 02:03, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

To be clear, I think using "interior designer" is both what we can do, and what we should do. But I do have some concerns about the tone of that article, and (perhaps) the notability of Ms. McGill. Lots of puffery, no inline references, and most of the external links are useless. If someone more capable hasn't looked at it by tomorrow, I may try to prune some of it myself. It might be a moot point in this particular case; it's possible this should go to AFD if some good sources aren't found. But my opinion stands on the general point raised here. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I think this is comparable to describing a person from Texas as an engineer. Texas actually restricts a person from applying the term "engineer" to him/herself unless licensed as a Texas professional engineer or having an engineering degree and working under the supervision of a Texas professional engineer. But I can't imagine Wikipedia paying any attention to that restriction. Jc3s5h (talk) 04:03, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Is there any reason we can't provide a piped link like this: [[interior designer|designer of interiors]] so the browser renders the link as designer of interiors but it leads to the interior designer article?

Actually, strike that. I think Floquenbeam has provided the right course of action here. Astronaut (talk) 13:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Margo Feiden

To Whom it May Concern,

Hello! Two weeks ago, I was looking up Margo Feiden on Wikipedia. She is a famous art dealer/author that I am familiar with, and her name is Margo F-E-I-D-E-N. However, in the search results, although the references that came up were clearly to Margo Feiden, the question “Did you mean Margo FeiTen?” appeared on the screen. This morning I made the the same search, wondering if Wikipedia's error had already been corrected. Now, although the references that come up still are clearly to Margo Feiden, I get the question, “Did you mean Margo FeiLen?” In other words, it looks like an attempt was made to correct the mis-spelling, only to introduce a different one Of course, Margo Feiten and Margo Feilen are both wrong, but out of curiosity, I went looking on Google to see if there were really such people as to warrant that kind of suggestion by your search engine. But, no, there are no Google results for a Margo Feiten or a Margo Feilen. But, of course, there are many Google results under Margo Feiden ( by the thousands).

Do you think you could change something or other so that Wikipedia is not suggesting the wrong spelling when someone searches for Margo Feiden?

Thank you very much, Rachel Wonderling--a great Wikipedia fan! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwonderling47 (talk • contribs) 00:35, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I have no idea where the search suggestions come from - you may want to ask at the technical village pump if you want to know that. But if you look below the search suggestion, you'll see several articles listed where the name is spelled correctly. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 02:06, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I think she's talking about Wikipedia's search function: if you go to Special:Search/Margo Feiden, you'll get the "did you mean Margo Feilden" suggestion she's describing. That's not anyone at Wikipedia trying to fix a misspelling; it's just how Wikipedia's search function handles it sometimes when there's no article name that matches the search term. It's odd; there's no "Margo Feilden" article either. --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:14, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

"Margo Feiden" in quotation marks does not suggest an alternative. If you don't use quotation marks then each word may be considered separately. There are 35 hits on Feiden alone, 153 on Feilden and 160 on Feiten. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

And now I know where they come from - the higher hits on the words taken individually. Good to know. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 05:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

joel yanofsky is not dead...

this is from me, Joel Yanofsky. i am reported as dead on my wikipedia page. i am not, also my year of birth is wrong along with lots of other things -- it's 1955 -- but maybe we could just bring me back to life first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.162.65.144 (talk) 00:36, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I'm posting here (and I'll copy the message on your own talk page just in case). I've removed the information pertaining to a death from the article Joel Yanofsky as it was unsourced, and I've opened a discussion on the article's talk page in which you're welcome to take part. Do note that there will be a need for external sources for facts such as a moment of birth. If you are indeed the article's subject, it would probably be preferable to avoid editing it directly, in accordance to our guidelines on dealing with articles about yourself, although you are encouraged to post on the article's talk page. :) Salvidrim! ✉ 00:44, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

We commonly assume good faith when it comes to birth date, as long as it is not controversial.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 14:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

please help me...

Dear sir/madam,

I am writing in regards to the page on Vandana Vishwas, that I had created in 2009. It had been flagged for COI and I had satisfactorily addressed all concerns by Wiki editors, following which all objections were removed. Recently, in December 2012, I updated it again, and some issues have again been flagged. I have now removed all content that may be taken as promotional or 'Fan's point of view'. Can someone please review the page and remove those tags?

Best regards, Vishwasthoke (talk) 03:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

How should war crimes be defined?

Should it be something that looks cruel or crimes confirmed by trials? Recently I just have had some issues in Chinese wikipedia about what events should be included in categories or articles on war crimes. I also mentioned that there do exist many "war crimes" that are not yet brought to trial, for example Soviet war crimes.--Inspector (talk) 07:33, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

You wouldn't exactly say it as "something that looks cruel". Technically, war crimes are "crimes committed against an enemy, prisoners of war, or subjects in wartime that violate international agreements or, as in the case of genocide, are offenses against humanity", according to dictionary.com. Epic Genius 13:35, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The answer to the OP's question is "whatever unbiased reliable sources say". If reliable sources call an event a war crime, Wikipedia does too. If reliable sources do not, we do not, even if we think we can make an argument that it really is. Making our own arguments is against the rules at Wikipedia, per WP:SYNTH. We report what reliable sources say here, we don't interpret events ourselves. --Jayron32 14:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

A variety of international treaties and a substantial body of case law do a pretty good job (IMHO) of defining "war crimes". Roger (talk) 18:05, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Does it mean the defining of crime is not only dependent on trials, but also other criticisms?--Inspector (talk) 05:06, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

YRC Group or YRC Weblink Articles are being continously deleted?

Dear Admin,

From last 1yrs whenever i write about the Students company or Software i.e. YRC Weblink web browser it gets deleted stating the reason as Advertising but if Wikipedia will not accept the articles how will people know about how the software is used, what language is it used etc etc

Please Help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.199.196.58 (talk) 09:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The articles at YRC Weblink had several problems: First, they didn't demonstrate that they met our notability policy, which tells us which subjects to include in the encyclopedia. Second, they had an inappropriate tone and failed to maintain a neutral point of view. Third, they didn't provide reliable third-party sources for the information contained in the article. Because of the repeated problematic recreation of the article, further creation has been prohibited (by salting).

It may help if you request an article at Wikipedia:Requested articles instead of writing one yourself, as you are having difficulty overcoming your conflict of interest when writing. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 11:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

YRC Weblink was deleted because it did not have any references and sources and YRC Weblink was apparently not notable. Ruslik_Zero 11:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

There were also YRC Group Inc., which generally failed to meet the policies and guidelines noted above in its two versions, and was twice deleted under section A7 of the criterion for speedy deletion as failing to assert the importance of the subject. Wikipedia will not accept the article until such time as it contains content that meets our policies. It may be that this company cannot have an article, as at least from what is indicated by looking at Google book and News Archive searches, there does not appear to be sufficient reliable third party sources to sustain an article.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:36, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

You say "how will people know about how the software is used ... ". This question suggests that you do not understand what Wikipedia is. There should be no information in Wikipedia that has not already been published somewhere else. See WP:V and WP:OR. --ColinFine (talk) 21:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Manish Sharma, Panasonic India is a Corporate Executive NOT a Businessman

This is in reference to the Wikipedia page of Manish Sharma: Manish Sharma (businessman).

Manish Sharma is a Corporate Executive and not a businessman. The URL is miguiding as it gives a wrong information. There is nothing wrong with the article as such as it clearly mentions that Manish Sharma is a current employee of Panasonic. I request you to please edit the URL to Manish Sharma (Corporate Executive) for better understanding and make it factually right.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gadgetsgigs (talk • contribs) 10:49, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Any corporate executive is commonly considered a businessman. Ruslik_Zero 12:49, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

You already moved Manish Sharma (businessman) to Manish Sharma (Corporate Executive) two days ago. The word in parenthesis is usually to distinguish an individual from other people with similar names - in this case Manish Sharma is a disambiguation page with links to the individuals. The businessman page is just a redirect from the old name that was created automatically when you moved the page. An admin can delete it if you request it. Astronaut (talk) 14:08, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I have moved it back to Manish Sharma (businessman) on the basis that disambiguating titles should be as general as possible.--ukexpat (talk) 15:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Having looked at this more, I am not convinced that he meets the notability guidelines at WP:BIO. He is a regional managing director of a large multinational. Doesn't seem like a big deal to me.--ukexpat (talk) 15:31, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Moving a page into its redirect page.

Hi! I tried moving Nucleus Accumbens Core into Nucleus accumbens core but the move failed because "a page of that name already exists". I removed the redirect on that page but the move still didn't work. Should I ask for an administrator's assistance, or can I do it myself? If I can do it myself, please don't move it for me, but tell me instead, so I learn how to do this. Thank you! Lova Falk talk 10:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The redirect page actually needs to be deleted for the move to take place, so you will need an admin to do it, I'm afraid. I'll shift it for you. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:01, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Moved, but on consideration I think this would work better if merged and redirected to Nucleus accumbens. I'll propose a merge on the talkpage. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:03, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Lova Falk talk 12:50, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Noah's ark zoo farm

I have tried on multiple occasions to add a factual list of awards to the Noah's ark zoo farm page but they keep getting stripped out leading me to believe that the editors of this page are biased. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.149.66.60 (talk) 11:56, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Your edits were reverted because the awards in question were of dubious notability and were very poorly sourced. If you believe that the information belongs in the article, the appropriate next step is to start a discussion on the article's talkpage, where you and other editors can debate the merits of including the awards section. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:14, 16 January 2013 (UTC) (Note: there's already a discussion from about a year ago concerning the awards section, which you may want to read first)

Category change request -- page on choreographer William Forsythe

I represent the choreographer William Forsythe as his dramaturg. Would you please change the heading at

William Forsythe (dancer)

from William Forsythe (dancer) to William Forsythe (choreographer)? I am unable to do so.

Please also reflect this category change in the Dutch language categorization.

Thank you,

Dr. Freya Vass-Rhee The Forsythe Company — Preceding unsigned comment added by Freyav (talk • contribs) 13:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

A quick scan of the article seems to show that Forsythe's main work has been as a choreographer, so I've moved the page as requested. Rojomoke (talk) 13:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

On the other hand, Freya has been polishing this article with a massive conflict of interest for almost four years now! I've reported this to the conflict of interest noticeboard, but would appreciate input from people more knowledgable in dance as the current version is so turgid with promotional and pretentious language as to be almost unreadable. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

It certainly is! I wonder if a Wikipedia article can qualify for Private Eye's Pseuds Corner? Maproom (talk) 15:23, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I tried to take a stab at it but my head hurt after 2 sections...--ukexpat (talk) 16:13, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

See the smarmy moderator comments above. If you want for Wikipedia to be supported, you really should add some sugar to your intellectual sour grapes , mods.

Matt_O'Connor

Added a title Rojomoke (talk) 13:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
Hello

I would really appreciate any advice and help anyone can give me to resolve flagged issues with this article:

Matt O'Connor

The issues raised are as below. I believe I have addressed the points, but I am not sure how long before the article will be reviewed again and resolved issues unflagged. If I have not successfully resolved the issues I would appreciate your insight and advice.

Thank you!

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page.

This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions. (January 2013)

This article appears to be written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by rewriting promotional content from a neutral point of view and removing any inappropriate external links. (January 2013)

This article contains too many pictures, charts or diagrams, and is in need of cleanup. Please help to improve this article in accordance with the Manual of Style on use of images. (January 2013)

Mcguirl1 (talk) 13:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I have reverted all your recent changes, as they appear to contain content taken from his LinkedIn profile, of which Wikipedia can't reuse, due to copyright problems. Mdann52 (talk) 13:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

... and I've changed the link in your question from an internet url to a wikilink to make it more readable. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:36, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Edited image does not appear to be changed

I edited the image at [2] to improve the contrast and colors. The new version looks identical to the previous version on Wikipedia and does not appear to have been updated, even though it does look quite different locally on my PC. The revision history show the old file size as 514 KB, and the new size as 434 KB, which agrees with my local copies, indicating that Wikipedia should have the new version. But the new version appears to be identical to the previous version on the file page and in the File history. I tried viewing this file in two different browsers and on two different PCs, after clearing temporary internet files, and get the same results. I downloaded the 'new' version from Wikipedia and it is actually the old version with size 514 KB. I thought there might be caching of the old image, but is still unchanged more than 18 hours later. CuriousEric 13:54, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

They look different to me - your edit has better colour depth. Try refreshing your cache again - instructions in WP:BYPASS. However, this might have something to do with the image being on Commons so maybe there is a different way of doing this for Commons images. Astronaut (talk) 14:30, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Sometimes the caching takes awhile to update. I suggest waiting a day, and if its not updated, raise the issue again. Monty₈₄₅ 18:13, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. I tried all the suggestions on WP:BYPASS and the new version still appears identical to the old version on Wikipedia and Wikimedia, using both IE8 and SeaMonkey. I had someone at a different location view the file's Wikipedia page, they also see the same lower contrast image for both new and old versions. But, on my Wikimedia Commons File list, the thumbnail shows the new version with improved contrast. When I pick the thumbnail, the Wikimedia file page shows the old image again. It has already been one day, and the cache has not updated. I'll wait a while longer and check the file again. But, this is very frustrating, initially making me believe I uploaded the incorrect file. And it may cause other editors to believe I had not made any actual changes, and they may upload a different improved image. Could Wikipedia/Wikimedia be fixed so this caching update happens immediately? Thanks. CuriousEric 18:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Major Issue - Page discrediting my place of business on your site

Hello -

I was very disturbed to see a page that was created on WIkipedia discrediting the Khabele School.

Khabele School

I want this deleted immediately AND would like to know the person who created it to be able to follow up with them.

Pleaser respond quickly.

Lisa Dubuque The Khabele School — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.173.215.82 (talk) 15:18, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The article has three times been edited by people whose usernames suggest that they have a conflict of interest. Their contributions have been removed. I see nothing in the article now that looks defamatory. Anyway - Wikipedia does not reveal the identities of its editors. But as the article cites no third-party sources, there is a strong case for its deletion. Maproom (talk) 15:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

FWIW I saw this and headed over there, but was beaten to the punch in removing the offending text by another editor. The article is now in my watchlist, and I'll keep an eye on it - but I also won't miss it should it be deleted. Chaheel Riens (talk) 15:49, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

PRODed Roger (talk) 15:54, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

And deprodded per the (ridiculous in my view) "inherent notability of secondary schools".--ukexpat (talk) 16:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I agree - "inherent notability" is a load of BS.

A presumption cannot be allowed to stand indefinitely - it's high time we discussed instituting a definite "Prove it or lose it" time limit on all these "presumptions of notability rules". IMHO the biggest effect they have on WP is to indefinitely protect trivial crap from getting deleted. They also allow sloppy editing because they create (unjustified IMHO) exceptions to the normal process of article creation for certain privileged categories of subjects, where step one is "get your sources lined up".

<rant>The presumption of notability for high schools is in any case based on the unique nature of high school - media relationships in the United States (and maybe Canada too). Most of the very few US high school articles that do by some miracle happen to have any independent sources they are mostly just the "Hicksville Gazette" (circulation 873) reporting on the successes/failures of the new principal or football/basketball coach at "Hicksville High".

In the rest of the world nobody outside of the specific school community give a rats ass about high school sports or pretty much anything else about the school. The vast majority of high schools globally, except for very high profile elite schools (Eton in the UK for example), never make the mainstream news. In most cases only "hard news" such as a teacher getting arrested for molesting fourth-graders or the school getting burnt down ever makes the mainstream media (outside the US). The idea of actually televising school sport (except for the aforementioned small number of elite schools) is simply ridiculous in most of the world. </rant> Roger (talk) 16:44, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

<agreement>I agree.</agreement>--ukexpat (talk) 16:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The general public doesn't know that, and they become perplexed when their articles get deleted and it discourages them from joining Wikipedia. The reason why "inherent notability" is important is because it tells other Wikipedians "don't waste time trying to get it deleted. The sources are out there. Just do the research and build it up." IMO deletion is best if it's a copyvio (of course) or if one has no clue if the sources exist. And what I am doing with this secondary school is getting the sources lined up, to prove the notability. These articles that prove notability often have nothing to do with school sports; they talk extensively about the school culture and other aspects about the school. Also look the Japanese, French, and Chinese Wikipedias, for secondary schools also have articles in those languages. Secondary schools have importance in other parts of the world too. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Ladies and gentlemen, and representatives of Khabele School, please take a look at the article in development at Khabele School. The Austin Business Journal and the Austin American-Statesman have been very helpful in sketching the school's history and objectives. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:35, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Also the author of the bad edit in question was an IP at the University of Southern California. I just marked it as such. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

LIN bus article has been updated.

Local Interconnect Network (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

There are several flags in the LIN bus article pointing to inadequate references. Those problems have largely been fixed.

All of the source protocol information is available from the LIN sponsoring body cited in reference 5 of the article [info@lin-subbus.org] The other references are useful.

Because LIN bus is an actively supported protocol in the automotive industry, most documentation is sourced either from the LIN specifying body (reference 5 again) or from the myriad electronics firms supporting the protocol in semiconductor products. Major among these companies are Texas Instruments, Robert Bosch, NXP (Philips), and ON Semiconductor.

I recommend that the flags be removed from the LIN Bus wiki entry so that readers are not warned away from the excellent article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.214.154.100 (talk) 16:50, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

What gives you the idea that it is an "excellent article"? It is in fact a fairly poor article, though not entirely bad. For a start none of the tagged issues have really been properly addressed yet. It needs a HUGE amount of work if it is to have any hope of ever becoming "an excellent article". You might want to read up on the standards we require of "Featured articles" which is the term we use for articles that really are "excellent". Roger (talk) 17:42, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

CHARLIE WILSON

ON BING WHEN YOU LOOK UP CHARLIE WILSON, THERE IS A PICTURE OF HIM ON THE LEFT WITH THE NAME CHERYL WILSON AS OPPOSED TO CHARLIE WILSON. CHARLIE IS AN R&B ICON AND TO HAVE HIS NAME INCORRECT NOT ONLY IS OFFENSIVE BUT IT DISCREDITS YOUR SITE EVEN MORE SO. PLEASE GET THAT CORRECTED SO IT REFLECTS THE CORRECT NAME AND REPUTATION OF YOUR SITE.

THANKS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.208.9.50 (talk) 17:32, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

If you look at the address bar of your browser you might notice that this is Wikipedia.org, not Bing.com, so we cannot help you, sorry. By the way, please don't SHOUT. Roger (talk) 17:47, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

That is bizarre, but I don't see anything on our end that would be causing it. Maybe there is some old vandalism in a cached version somewhere in the bing system. Monty₈₄₅ 18:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Charlie Wilson redirects to Charles Wilson: a disambiguation page, with no images. Wherever the problem is, it isn't on Wikipedia... AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:14, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

• This Bing search brings up the text "Cheryl Wilson is a session singer who has had multiple No. 1 dance songs on the UK Billboard chart and has p… en.wikipedia.org", but to the very left of that text shows a photo of Charlie Wilson credited to en.wikipedia.org and also shows the text Born: Jan 29, 1953 Tulsa Member of: The Gap Band" below the photo and the Cheryl Wilson text. The en.wikipedia.org link provided by Bing links to the Charlie Wilson article, so it's odd that the Bing search engine would bring up text from the Cheryl Wilson Wikipedia article. I did not see anything in the Cheryl Wilson history mentioning "Charlie." The bottom of the BING page has a Feedback option, so you might want to try that. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 15:47, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I noticed the search string Uzma used has "CHARLIE WILSON". Would this oddity the OP is complaining about be caused by their use of upper case in their search box? I can't check this myself because bing insists on geolocating me and providing different results in a language I don't read well and no photos either. Astronaut (talk) 17:30, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I searched on Bing for the name in the proper case and it produced the same oddity - clearly a Bing problem.--ukexpat (talk) 17:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Two Wikipedia questions

1. Why does the Account creation process exist? Why do humans have to create the accounts? Why doesn't Wikipedia automatically create them and send an e-mail, like Bugzilla does?
2. I'm confused about the user page protection policy. The policy text states that user pages may be (semi-)protected "at the user's request if there is evidence of vandalism/disruption or other good reason to do so". Whenever I have seen admins protect user pages, they indicate it was the user's request. However, I have seen admins (semi-)protect user pages with little or no disruption, and I have also seen admins deny (semi-)protection to user pages with no, little, or some disruption. Why does this happen? Is it a gray area?

These questions probably don't have concrete answers, but responses to one or both of the questions would be greatly appreciated. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 18:20, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

In response to your first question, there are certain technical limits on account creation designed to prevent disruption, such as a limit on the number of accounts created by an IP during a given time. The account creation process allows you to bypass those limitations. (say you needed accounts for 30 students in a class that will all be editing from the same IP) AFAIK, it can also be used to create an account where the editor would otherwise be subject to block on account creation due to an IP or IP range block. As for your second question, its a combination of factors. There isn't a clear definition of what constitutes sufficient disruption to justify protection, where an editor requests protection of their own userpage, which should have very little reason for IP or new editor edits, admins are often very deferential to the request. Some have semi-protected even without past disruption when requested, though that is not within the scope of policy. Its one of the areas where there isn't alot of policing. Monty₈₄₅ 18:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, that's just what I needed to know. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 18:34, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Daniel Niazi

user johnhartvig which helps to advertise the article on Daniel Nazi, claims in a discussion that he works for Wikimedia while he therefore has the power to delete other users if it tries to get his article deleted. Can it really be true? --80.161.143.239 (talk) 18:30, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm having a hard time finding either the article or the user you are talking about. Can you provide a link to where that was said? No one deletes users, but they can be blocked if consistent with the WP:Blocking Policy. Without additional information, its hard to say more then that. Monty₈₄₅ 18:39, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

• This appears to relate to Daniel Niazi, WP:Articles for deletion/Daniel Niazi, WT:Articles for creation/Daniel Niazi, and Johnhartvig (talk · contribs). Section header fixed. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:41, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't see where johnhartvig is making such a claim. In any event no one owns any Wikipedia article or draft and no one can dictate its content. We decide all such matters by reaching a consensus after discussion. Having said all that, and after looking at the draft, I think the notability of the subject is dubious at best so I doubt that it will make it into the mainspace or if it does, it will probably be deleted. --ukexpat (talk) 18:44, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

It appears the threat to "delete" other users was made on the Danish Wikpedia: here. To answer the question, no he can't do anything like that. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:45, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Adding a picture without meeting the criteria for picture upload

I added an account which will be old enough to edit but I do not have 10 edits.

It is not likely I will have 10 edits anytime soon.

I have the copyright on the photo I want to upload and do not care if it is redistributed.

The picture is for Anne W. Armstrong. I am one of her descendants and have a picture from her passport, dated 1924. There is no picture of her and I thought I would add one.

Thanks,

Ed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sideflakeopal (talk • contribs) 20:55, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello Sideflakeopal. It's simple: don't upload the photo here at all. Since as you indicate you are willing to release it under a free license, go to the Wikimedia Commons, sign up and upload the photo choosing the license "Multi-license with CC-BY-SA-3.0 and GFDL (recommended)". There is no autoconfirmation requirement there to upload and it's where freely-licensed images should be uploaded anyway. Once uploaded there, it can be immediately used here seamlessly using normal image markup, e.g., [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]]. By the way, if you want to make ten edits, just go fix some spelling errors using Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:28, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Request for semi-protection

Where does one request that an article be semi-protected? ~ Here? (good).   For The Scream article, at least 90% of the latest 100 or so edits have been reverted (either by bots or editors). - This used to be a "Good Article". It would save time, effort and server resources if the article were simply semi-protected.   ~Thanks, ~E: 74.60.29.141 (talk) 20:59, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

You can make the request at WP:RPP RudolfRed (talk) 21:05, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

... Or hope that a bored admin sees the request here. Semi-protected for a period of 3 months, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. Bencherlite^Talk 22:23, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Page that Blatently Misrepresents Facts and includes Content that May Violate Copyrights and May Libel

The Lords of the New Church (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

After numerous attempts to correct the deliberately false maliciously misleading content regarding historical activities of this band from 2000 to present - and craft a factual, fair and comprehensive description of events and the involved entities and individuals, only to have the correct and factual edits deleted and replaced continuously with the same maliciously false misleading content; the page must be considered for speedy deletion or the offending editors banned from editing, before any more real damages are incurred. Significant copyrights and factual narratives need your protection from willful mischief. Thank you for your assistance 66.177.78.24 (talk) 21:35, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for bringing up your concerns. Can you explain what information is incorrect, so we can fix the problem? Prodego ^talk 21:50, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

And please provide reliable sources for your requested changes.--ukexpat (talk) 21:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I have removed the whole of the 2001 section (except for the first sentence which has a reference) as completely unsourced.--ukexpat (talk) 22:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

stub article on Alford T Welch

Alford T. Welch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Please remove what is now only a stub for me, Alford T Welch. A fairly accurate, although short, article about my research and contributions to the field of Qur'anic Studies was in Wikipedia for a number of years. I did not place it there, but had no major complaints. Because of divisions within my academic field and the fact that some disagreed with my historical-critical approach the study of the Qur'an, I believe that, as a way of discrediting my research and publications, someone removed substantial, descriptive information, leaving only a misleading stub.

Explanation: In the period of over 40 years since I received an excellent education (in Hebrew, Greek, Jewish and Christian history, and, especially, methods of critical analysis of sacred texts) Southern Baptist Theological Seminary has been taken over by a group of the most conservative activists in the Convention and turned into a fundamentalist institution.

Whenever Fox News wants to air their far-right agenda through the mouth of a fundamentalist religious leader, they sometimes invite the current President of SBTS to their show, and he never fails to spew absurd, inflammable views that are an embarrassment to knowledgeable Christians, especially the dedicated faculty and students who made SBTS one of the most highly ranked graduate schools in theology until the 1970s.

Having my association with this institution prominently displayed on Widipedia as one of the few facts about me, without my other degrees, qualifications, publications, etc. is meant to discredit my research and publications on the Qur'an.

At some point, someone who knows my work well will contribute an informative article on me, my publications, and the major contribution I have made to Islamic Studies and our knowledge of the Qur'an. Until that time comes, I very much prefer that no article at all be included in Wikipedia about me.

Thank you,

Alford T Welch Professor Emeritus Michigan State University — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alford T Welch (talk • contribs) 23:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The article history shows that it has been in pretty much the same form since it was created in 2007 so I don't think there has been any attempt to discredit you.--ukexpat (talk) 00:48, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

January 17

Page creation

I just attempted to create a Wiki page (Photos to Space) and am probably missing something obvious, but how will I know once it's active? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steveshurtleff (talk • contribs) 00:07, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

You have created a draft at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Photos to Space. Please take a look at WP:CORP - if the company doesn't meet those guidelines, I am afraid it does not meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria.--ukexpat (talk) 00:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I have added a draft template with some information and a link to submit it for review, but it's currently unsuitable. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:59, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Looking for a block template

Do we have a block template for use on the talk pages of operators of misbehaving bots? Looking for something that would say "Sorry, but I've had to block your bot because it was misbehaving. Remember that this doesn't imply any wrongdoing on your part. When the bot's fixed, let me know and I'll unblock it." I've looked through Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace without finding what I want; the only bot-related templates I can see are {{Uw-botblock}} (for unapproved bots; I'm asking about approved bots that are messing up) and {{Uw-botublock}} (for non-bots whose usernames include "bot"), not anything that I want. Nyttend (talk) 04:25, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I am not aware of such a template. I could create one for you if you like. I don't have the time to do it right now, but if you want me to create it for you, simply drop me a line on my talkpage with a reminder of what you want to have (and maybe a link to this help desk section) and I will see what I can do as soon as I come home again (in case nobody else has taken care of it by then). -- Toshio Yamaguchi 09:44, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, I just created User:Toshio Yamaguchi/Template:Bot block message. Is that what you have in mind? If that's the case, then feel free to move the template out of my userspace and into template namespace (remember to move the doc subpage as well, if you want to retain it, although I think as an admin you have some button somewhere allowing you to move a page including its subpages in one sweep. Also, you need to adjust the template name in the documentation to the actual template name (without User:Toshio Yamaguchi/)). -- Toshio Yamaguchi 12:39, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! After some tweaks, I moved it to {{Bot block message}} and have announced its creation at WP:AN. Nyttend (talk) 14:04, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

How to block an editor

What single page does one go to for advice on beginning an action to block an editor? I went to WP:Requests for mediation/Guide, but was confronted with a notice stating "This Wikepedia page is outdated." Is there now a page that replaces this one? GeorgeLouis (talk) 04:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

If you are asking how to block an editor when you are an administrator, you can see Wikipedia:New admin school/Blocking. TBrandley ^{(what's up)} 04:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

[edit conflict] Is it a simple case, like vandalism, egregious personal attacks, or copyright violations? If so, go to WP:AIV. If it's something that will need explaining, consider whether you've done your best to resolve the issue in other ways, such as explaining to the other editor that his actions are problematic. If you've not done that, go do it. If so, and if the other editor simply keeps going, you'll need either to ask an admin privately (best on the admin's talk page, although doing it by email is reasonable if you need to keep it private) or to go to WP:ANI. Either way, lay out with links (diffs are best) the behavior that's led you to believe a block to be necessary, and be careful to say as little as possible that's not related to the dispute in question. Finally, be careful not to overwhelm the page; WP:TLDR is good advice. Nyttend (talk) 04:44, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you both. Can one of you handle the problem of the page above which bears the legend "This Wikepedia page is outdated" and refers the reader to the Talk Page, and yet there is nothing on the Talk Page to explain why the Project Page is outdated and where the searcher should go for information? GeorgeLouis (talk) 04:48, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I can't find any way to do this, short of modifying {{Update}}, and that would remove the notice from lots of pages where the talk page is helpful. In this case, note that the talk page is redirected somewhere else. Nyttend (talk) 05:09, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

User:AGK is listed as chair of the Mediation Committee, so he's probably the person you want to talk to, GeorgeLouis. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 09:08, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

What is good practice to ask a question if there seemed to be no answer?

Should I ask the question again and again or ask in different pages where someone might be interested?--Inspector (talk) 05:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

What question do you need answered? --Jayron32 05:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if Inspector is referring to this question? Maproom (talk) 09:41, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

It has been answered. Forum shopping when you don't like the answers that have been given, is frowned upon here on WP. Roger (talk) 16:07, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I mean the Tokugawa Ieyasu one: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Palmistry of Tokugawa Ieyasu: can it be verified? I had asked a wider question about Tokugawa Ieyasu once before in the Humanities desk and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan, also. --Inspector (talk) 00:05, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Link on page

I had my acct blocked for adding the link to our group Demo the waldo to this page in addition to Save the Waldo. Waldo Hotel#References

Both links were removed and I was told that links were not allowed as it was advertising.

Now someone else evidently has logged in and edited the page adding savethewaldos link back.

I edited the content using a link to a recent artical in our newspaper that is a reference to recent information on the buildings condition. However I did not add a link to our activist group Demo The Waldo because I didnt want my acct blocked again.

Im asking if they are allowed to link to the group that is for reviving the building a link to the group that wishes to have it razed also should be allowed, or neither should be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.76.38.179 (talk) 05:50, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I have removed the duplicate and unsourced material.--ukexpat (talk) 14:18, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

20 millions miles to earth

Venus not Uranus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.101.183 (talk) 11:40, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I guess you refer to 20 Million Miles to Earth. Somebody has rewritten the plot section and changed Uranus to Venus.[3] Thanks for telling us. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:06, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

WIKIPEDIA PAGE OF RAFAEL SERRANO

Page I want help with:

Rafael Serrano

Rafael Serrano’s Wikipedia page is currently displaying the message: “This article appears to be written like an advertisement. Please help improve it by rewriting promotional content from a neutral point of view and removing any inappropriate external links. (November 2012)”

All of the information provided in the article is true and accurate. In order to remove this banner I have found some very useful articles to be used as citations.

1. Rafael purchased the 125 year lease of Admiralty Arch, the Grade I listed entrance to the Mall, from the UK Government in October 2012. Admiralty Arch is the first major building to be sold by the Government, part of austerity measures to rationalise their property portfolio and raise funds for the Exchequer.[citation needed] http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9a01ff80-1df1-11e2-8e1d-00144feabdc0.html http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/news/government-leases-historic-admiralty-arch

2. Rafael Serrano started his career in 1991 at JP Morgan as an Investment Banker in Capital Markets and International Fund Management, Rafael spent three years in London before moving to the offices on Wall Street, New York. On his return to the UK in 2002, he became the Managing Director of Focus Investment Group, Europe, an investment management company.[citation needed] http://www.thecorner.eu/2012/07/londons-admiralty-arch-spanish-owned-hotel-buckingham-palace/

It is in our interest to remove this banner as soon as possible. Please advise me on how I can assist in presenting the article from a neutral point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prime Investors (talk • contribs) 12:03, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I fixed the advertising problems. If Serrano acquired only the lease to the building, the UK did not actually sell the building as the article states. Also, are you sure that, since its formation in 1707, the U.K. has never leased/sold a major government building until Serrano came along in 2012? That would be a very impressive accomplishment! -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 15:20, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Nice work as always. I am wondering about the page title - not sure whether it should be Rafael Serrano, Rafael Serrano Quevedo or Rafael Quevedo (entrepreneur) . Thoughts?--ukexpat (talk) 17:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Code for a character in math formula using TeX

Resolved

What is the code to generate an exclamation mark (!) in a math formula using TeX markup? I checked Help:Displaying a formula but can't seem to find it there. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 12:04, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, I just looked at factorial and found that I just have to add ! inside the TeX markup. Sometimes things can be really easy.... -- Toshio Yamaguchi 12:12, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Article on: Pathological demand avoidance - Reference to Dr Judith Gould

Article on: Pathological demand avoidance - Reference to Dr Judith Gould

The blue link for Dr Judith Gould is incorrect. If Dr Gould's name is clicked on it goes to a totally different Judith Gould who appears to be a US novelist.

Pathological demand avoidance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.223.2.173 (talk) 12:59, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I've changed the link to point to Judith Gould (psychologist), although that article does not currently exist. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 13:08, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Reliable Source

From where & how I can get reliable sources? for an article, titled "Imaam Siddiqui" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sajidkhan4u (talk • contribs) 13:25, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Hello there! There's a help page at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources which goes into some detail as to the kinds of source Wikipedia holds to be reliable, and how to go about finding them. Please be aware, however, that reliable sources don't just appear like magic waiting for us to cite them. They need to have been written by real people who have real jobs as scholars, journalists, academics, etc. There's a rather significant possibility that no such sources exist about a particular subject. For example, my life has never been the subject of a well-researched and edited biography by a well respected scholar. So, insofar as source may exist, the page I linked above should help you know how to recognize them. However, you should be prepared for the possibility that the sources may not actually exist. --Jayron32 14:14, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

For Imaam Siddiqui, there does not appear to be much in English language reliable sources: Google archives However, "Imam Siddique" seems to bring up more information.[4] -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 14:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Just to clarify, however, there is no requirement that sources have to be in English. Sources from any language which meet the guidance at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources are just fine. If such sources do exist in English, it would be good to use them, but if such sources only exist in other languages, that's fine too. --Jayron32 14:34, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I originally meant to explain something along those lines, but forgot to include something about it by the time I finished writing the above. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 15:27, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Infobox templates

Template:Infobox artwork doesn't allow for a website if a piece of art has an official one. Template:Infobox ice hockey player doesn't allow for a signature/autograph. I added them to The Drop (sculpture) and Wayne Gretzky if someone wants two pages to test. They are both entered at the bottom of the two infoboxes.--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:12, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't think we should be adding signatures for any living or recently dead person, the risk of a signature being used fraudulently or for identity theft is too great.--ukexpat (talk) 17:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Most famous people have them in their articles. I just checked Bill Gates and he has one. The commons has a big warning template about illegal use.--Canoe1967 (talk) 22:35, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

That doesn't mean it's a good idea. I can see the encyclopedic value in having the signatures of, say, the founding fathers, but Bill Gates and Wayne Gretsky?--ukexpat (talk) 03:52, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Fine by me. The sculpture article actually has more info than its website and the link to Gretzky in commons images has his signature if anyone really wants to see it. Btw, if you every come to Edmonton bring an accurate map and GPS because 80% of the streets are named after him here. Gets really confusing.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:50, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

My comments above were directed solely to your signatures question. If a work of art has an external link that meets the guidelines at WP:ELYES, I don't see any reason why it should not be in the ibox, so you should probably make a request to that effect at Template talk:Infobox artwork.--ukexpat (talk) 21:50, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Electro Technical Officer

Electro Technical Officer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

please help me to keep this article(Electro Technical Officer)..i dont know how to correct this thing..i tried a lot but nothing working..so please help...

thanking you

G Navin Nair — Preceding unsigned comment added by Navingnair (talk • contribs) 17:55, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

It's a clear copyvio of http://www.marineinsight.com/careers-2/career-of-electro-technical-officer-on-ship/ so you will have to rewrite it in your own words.--ukexpat (talk) 18:00, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Chip Kelly

Chip Kelly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hello,

You are pretty up to date on your information on former Ducks coach/now Philly Eagles coach Chip Kelly but you keep leaving out that he was married from 1992-1999.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.165.17 (talk) 17:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

 Not done I'm unable to find any evidence of this. Please cite your source. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 20:04, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

ESPN says exactly the opposite. From http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/8734011/do-fbs-coaches-usc-lane-kiffin-need-perfect-home-lives-success-espn-magazine "Oregon's Chip Kelly, the only current FBS coach who has never married, continues to succeed, garnering interest from the NFL, where 30 of 32 coaches have wives."

Citing findarticles.com

I've noticed FindArticles no longer works and any citation to a weblink on it is now dead and bounces straight to search.com's search page. This affects a substantial amount of articles. What options do we have to resolve this? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

I checked Wayback Machine— FindArticles had robots.txt set to not allow archives. You will have to search and find the articles elsewhere. For example, Irish Rebellion of 1641 references Noonan, Kathleen M. "Martyrs in Flames: Sir John Temple and the conception of the Irish in English martyrologies*". Albion, June, 2004. A search of the title finds it at JSTOR 10.2307/4054214. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 22:12, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Is there anything else we can we do about the now-dead references in articles, other than hope that editors come across them? Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:17, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

You can use Special:LinkSearch to locate use in articles. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 22:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

A handy tool for identifying and repairing dead-links (from Wayback or WebCite) is Checklinks   ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 03:19, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

But both honor websites that don't allow archiving, so they are not useful here. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 13:18, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Adding a picture

I'm not sure how to add a photo to an article.

I put one on before with some help from a friend but can't remember how we did it. Besides that, you folks deleted it anyway because you didn't know who owned it.

The picture I want to post is from a baseball card...its public domain. Am I going to have problems?

Will — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wllmlos (talk • contribs) 23:32, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Unless your baseball card is very old, it is probably not in the public domain. I recommend you ask at WP:IMAGEHELP for advice on the copyright. RudolfRed (talk) 03:29, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

January 18

Martin Degville

martin degville date of birth not as published it is 27.01.1958 his facebook page evan says this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.171.123.233 (talk) 00:29, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

That date is referenced to what appears to be a reliable source, though I haven't got the book to check. Facebook is not a reliable source (to be frank, it is not unknown for people to "massage" their ages - though this would not appear to be the usual direction). If you can find a reliable source, independent of Degville or his publishers and agents, for the 1958 date, you could add it to the article with that reference; but you should probably not remove the 1961 date unless there is an overwhelming preponderance of sources that say 1958. In that case you should discuss it on the article's talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 09:30, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

The article says 28 November 1961. http://www.dellam.com/english/SP/SPUTNIKWORLD%20LIMITED.html says 27 January 1958. I also found sources saying 27 January 1961. I don't know what is right. Can you give a Facebook link with the date? PrimeHunter (talk) 20:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Pathetic that you guys are instrumental in....

It's pathetic that you're instrumental in the deletion of Sheikh Imran Nazar Hosein's wikipedia page. I'd like an explanation as to why that page was taken down. Was it an order from Tel-Aviv? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.8.70 (talk) 00:59, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

See WP:AGF. Come back when you can rephrase your question. --Jayron32 01:13, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

The most recent deletion was for being a copy of copyrighted material. It had previously been deleted for lacking references. RJFJR (talk) 03:29, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

User:RiseOfMann/Nick Savoy

I have created a draft for Nick Savoy, one of the leaders in the field of seduction. I am requesting guidance in properly citing references to this article since I am new to the editing scene. From my research there were prior articles written about Nick Savoy that were deleted for advertising and not having proper sources; thus I am trying to avoid this. I am in no way affiliated with Nick Savoy, just believe he is worthy of an article due to his popularity and relevance to modern culture.

Any help is greatly appreciated!

RiseOfMann (talk) 03:32, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Start at Referencing for Beginners RudolfRed (talk) 03:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Creating account

I noticed in the Swonder Ice Arena (Evansville,IN) page, it says the place is home to the Rollergirls of Southern Indiana. This league doesn't exist anymore. When I went to edit, it prompted me to sign in...I needed to create an account but the page to create an account only had the option of "log-in issues"...or something along those lines. I need to log-in to get rid of that dated information. Please and Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.76.194.165 (talk) 14:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Try: Special:UserLogin/signup.--ukexpat (talk) 15:39, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any reason why you cannot edit Swonder Ice Arena from an IP. In order to edit the first section, you need to pick the 'Edit' tab from the top of the page. Thank you for improving the article: if you wanted to do more to improve it, it is badly in need of some references: as it is, a reader has no way of knowing whether information in the article is reliable, or whether it is out of date, or mistaken, or the result of vandalism. --ColinFine (talk) 16:47, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

IP's see MediaWiki:Anoneditwarning which since November has been more aggressive in encouraging login. It includes "Please log in or sign up". Maybe the poster thought it was required. Use the "sign up" link to create an account. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:24, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Why was my page deleted.

My page, Matty Staudt, was deleted and it seems it was a speedy delete by the foundation. I work in media and it is importan that I have my page up. Can this be remedied? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.239.199.2 (talk) 20:19, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

It wasn't deleted by the Foundation, it was deleted by a volunteer editor, after another volunteer editor proposed it for deletion under the WP:PROD process. The reason for the proposal was that you do not appear to pass WP:GNG.

Just incidentally, it wasn't "your" page; it was a page about you. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 20:39, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It wasn't speedy and it wasn't by the foundation but by a volunteer editor with high user rights. Matty Staudt was nominated for deletion per Wikipedia:Proposed deletion with argument "Not notable." See Wikipedia:Notability (people). The article was unsourced, nobody objected to deletion and after a week it was deleted. Even though the page may have been about you, it is not your page. We are an encyclopedia and our articles have to satisfy our criteria. It is not a factor that the subject wants to have a biography (although it can be a factor if they want it to be deleted). However, anybody can go to Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion and request undeletion of an article deleted per Wikipedia:Proposed deletion. It may then be nominated for deletion under another process. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:43, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

What is important to you is not necessarily what is important to Wikipedia. promotion of any kind is forbidden in Wikipedia. That is why the criterion of notability is applied: only topics which have already been written about in reliable organs may have articles in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 21:51, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

There are other places for you to create a bio such as WikiBios (unrelated to Wikipedia).--ukexpat (talk) 21:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Curious enigma

At the time of writing, the Wikitrends web site appeared to indicate that our article Curiously recurring template pattern was the most visited English Wikipedia page today, this week and this month. I am curious to understand why. Is there a way of determining where this traffic was coming from? --Senra (talk) 20:26, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

stats.grok.se shows similar.--ukexpat (talk) 20:41, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

It was also asked at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 107#Why this article is viewed so much? with the below reply. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:47, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Normally these peaks are the result of a mistake in some code someone's made that ends up requesting the page over and over again. Given the subject matter I think that's likely in this case. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 14:55, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you both. @PrimeHunter's link indicates a possible reason why this article has had so many page views. Is there any feasible way of determining where the traffic was coming from? --Senra (talk) 20:54, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Violation sovereign rights of a nation

Not only I'm going to rate your app as not useful and very bad, I'm also going to spread the word that you are politically inclined and are doing someone's (in my case putins) dirty job of convincing or confusing world to believe in his geopolitical ambitions. There is no "republic of abkhazia" on planet earth! There is region called Abkhazeti in Georgia and there is region Samachablo in Georgia. Just because they are occupied by putinist Russia it does not change what is recognized by civilized world to be reality! Regretfully Alla Wagner — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.144.196.245 (talk) 21:12, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

If you refer to our article Abkhazia then it says "The Georgian government and the majority of the world's governments consider Abkhazia a part of Georgia's territory." But it also mentions a few countries which recognize it as the Republic of Abkhazia. Whether you agree with the recognition or not, Wikipedia shouldn't hide the fact that some countries recognise it. See also International recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia which says "Georgia and the vast majority of other countries of the world do not recognise their independence and officially consider them as sovereign territory of the Georgian state". PrimeHunter (talk) 21:22, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

We don't actually care what you think. As far as WP is concerned the only opinions that matter are those that have been published by Reliable Sources. Roger (talk) 21:34, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

See also: Principality of Sealand which has an article here.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:36, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

@Roger: I beg to differ. We do care what our potential new editors think; we do not bite the newcomers. However, it is of course true that one of our guidelines requires editors to use reliable sources to back up claims such as Abkhazia is not a republic --Senra (talk) 22:22, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Neutral point of view is the more relevant policy here. We mention both sides in the dispute over Abkhazia but don't take sides. The poster didn't refer to a specific article but if there is an article stating there is a "republic of abkhazia" without mentioning that its status is disputed then please tell us. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:55, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I concede that "we don't care" was probably not the most diplomatic way to put it, but it is in fact true per WP:OR, WP:NPOV, WP:V and WP:RS. Roger (talk) 07:15, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

January 19

To use this ID in another wikipedia

Hello, I wonder how this id can be used in another wikipedia. What should I do to use my account and where? please give me a tip. Thanks --Mar del Este (talk) 01:55, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

See the links at WP:SUL for help on this RudolfRed (talk) 02:00, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Is ko:User:Mar del Este at the Korean Wikipedia your account? It has more than 5000 edits. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for both of you! Yes, it's my account, too! --Mar del Este (talk) 10:08, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Is this original research?

I am unsure whether a decision that I made while working on the article Mike Disa would be considered original research or not. In one reference, Disa mentions that he had developed a film called Wings at Warner Bros. years earlier, but that the film was never produced. He does not give a specific time period for this. Another reference mentions that he developed a film at Warner Bros, but does not specify the name of the project. It does give some frame of reference for when he developed the film though. Although Disa worked as an animator on Looney Tunes: Back in Action at Warner Bros, this is the only film in his resume that has any ties to the studio, and working as an animator is very different from actually developing a project. Thus, it seems clear to me that the unnamed film mentioned in the second source is almost definately Wings. I chose to incorporate the chronology from the second reference in the article and used both references. I feel that this should be okay, but am a little worried that it might be considered original research.

Here are the two references

http://www.integratedcatholiclife.org/2011/04/an-interview-with-catholic-hollywood-director-mike-disa/

http://www.ctnanimationexpo.com/mike-disa/

--Jpcase (talk) 06:25, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

To me that does sound like OR. However, I don't know if the following is considered a proper WP source, but...

According to Linkedin:[5]

Writer/Director Wings — Warner Feature

2004 – 2004 (less than a year) — Wrote script and Co-directed development for unproduced Warner Brothers feature film titled "Wings"

~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 07:25, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Browser emulator

Is there something like a browser emulator which can show what a WP page would look like on various browsers?   ~E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 07:29, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

It depends on which browser you are using. Some browsers allow you to change the user agent, which can give you a basic idea of what a page looks like. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 07:32, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Changing the User-Agent header will change the browser that the site thinks you are running, and therefore possibly the content it sends back to the browser, but it doesn't change how the browser interprets/renders it. Depending on the page, telling a site you are using IE when actually using Firefox could produce a page that looks nothing like it should in either. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 10:09, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

There are free and commercial browser compatibility test sites on the web. Smashing Magazine (not necessarily reliable) has a review of such products that may provide a guide. The Adobe Browser Lab (registration required) is one such free tool --Senra (talk) 11:47, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Policy/guideline for linking to off-wiki things that are copyright violations

Hi all,
Now, we all know how seriously Wikipedia takes copyright violations. Even to the point of discouraging links to external website that may contain copyright violations themselves, right? <blushes>I can't find the policy link for the latter.</blushes>
Help, please! --Shirt58 (talk) 08:30, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at WP:LINKVIO. Roger (talk) 08:37, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Exactly what I was looking for. Thanks mate!--Shirt58 (talk) 09:28, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Damon Dash

What's the status of the Damon Dash article? There is more than enough open source new articles than be used for this article. Remove block please.--Ron John (talk) 11:46, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

This is a Wikimedia Foundation issue, an office action. That is, us ordinary editors, and by that I mean, users, administrators, oversighters, bureaucrats, etc.—all of us who aren't among the Foundation's handful of employees—can do nothing (well, I have the technical ability to unlock the article, and if I did do I would [rightly so] be desysopped in about five minutes). There is a legal issue that is pending. We are not here to second guess the Foundation's counsel and don't know the pertinent facts or issues involved. I suggest you drop this. the fact that there are "more than enough open source new articles than be used for this article" is immaterial to the issue.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:22, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

It appears that someone was not happy with the way the Damon Dash article was progressing and the Wikimedia Foundation Office is looking into it. The article was temporarily courtesy blanked by order of the Wikimedia Foundation legal department. See Currently under scrutiny. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:48, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Why is this url on the blacklist?

I found a website I would like to use as a source in an article I am currently drafting in my userspace. I haven't tried to save the page with the link, but I remember that http://finance.mapsofworld.com/ is included in the spam blacklist. What is the problem with that site? Also it is not possible to get an exemption from the blacklist for my userspace (or my account in general), is that correct? -- Toshio Yamaguchi 11:48, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Do the replies at Url triggers spam filter in reponse to your 19 July 2012 finance.mapsofworld.com Help Desk request provide any assistance? -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 13:42, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Ah, yes that's why I recalled having had an issue with that url before, but I didn't remember exactly what it was :) Btw. I think the spam filter is worse than any NFCC enforcing bot could ever be, but the help desk is not the right place for this discussion.... -- Toshio Yamaguchi 13:57, 19 January 2013 (UTC)