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

March 1

Inaccurate information in article, can someone fix it?

Spartacus, the historical figure, of course has its own page, because Wikipedia is a hub for all knowledge for as far back as we have records and educated guesses.

So I can't even begin to imagine how many poorly written high-school essays have been plagued with the first line of that article. The first line indicates that it was not just completely factual and real Spartacus who began the slave rebellion, but his fictional super-friends, Crixus, Oenomaus, Castus and Gannicus.

Which does not make sense since Gannicus, a very official and Roman sounding name, does not actually exist. Why? Because the shows producers, knowing that Andy Whitfield was undergoing treatment for his cancer, needed a strong male character to take the mantle of champion until Crixus was a viable character. So they made a Latin sounding name, because anything with the prefix "-cus" sounds relatively Romany. Mark my words, though, it is a fake name.

As for the rest of them, Crixus, Oenomaus, and Castus (and Gannicus, but we already know why he's not real), there is no citation of their existence. The fact is, the writers needed good, strong, and memorable characters to throw in to support Spartacus and the rest of the cast to make the show really come alive for us viewers, but they would also have to be characters who never existed.

So, I will say this again, Crixus, Oenomaus, Castus, and Gannicus never ever existed. Could someone please edit the Wikipedia article to properly show this? And these characters have even been given their own freaking pages. They're not even REAL! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.69.2.18 (talk) 03:43, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

As you say, they have their own pages, linked in Spartacus which lists "Crixus, Oenomaus, Castus and Gannicus". I examined the first article Crixus. The page history [1] shows it was created in 2005, while Spartacus (TV series) premiered in 2010. Crixus#References lists several ancient Roman sources which mention Crixus, for example "Appian, Civil Wars 1.116" from 73 B.C. which says: "There many fugitive slaves and even some freemen from the fields joined Spartacus, and he plundered the neighboring country, having for subordinate officers two gladiators named Œnomaus and Crixus". All four articles have references so no, I will not remove the people or claim they never existed. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:14, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Just to clarify, (in this case) Appian was writing about the events of ~73 B.C., but he was writing in the mid second century A.D. Still, if Crixus, Oenomaus, etc. are fabrications, they are very old ones. Rwessel (talk) 08:12, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Lead images in biographical articles

I've noticed many biographical articles show a recent photo of the subject in the lead, often in preference to a more "iconic" image that would better represent why the person is known or notable. For example, in the article on Art Garfunkel, the lead photo is a 2013 photo of the subject, even though the lead states that he is best known for his performing career as part of the Simon & Garfunkel duo. Is there a specific guideline about this, or is this just something that has emerged in practice? 67.188.230.128 (talk) 05:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

See WP:LEADIMAGE. Dismas|^(talk) 05:39, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

The section you linked covers lead images in general but does not address my specific question, which is about how to choose from among several possible images of a person for the lead image of a biographical article. 67.188.230.128 (talk) 08:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

An important point is that an image of the subject of an article (and not just the lead image) should be a freely licensed image, rather than a copyrighted image used under fair use, unless no free image can possibly be obtained—for instance, if the subject is dead and no freely licensed images taken during his or her lifetime can be found. (See WP:NFCCP.) That's why so many biographical articles feature photos recently taken (usually by Wikipedians) during public appearances and uploaded with Wikipedia-compatible free licenses; as long as such a photo is available—or can be taken—the use of any older, copyrighted photo is prohibited. Deor (talk) 11:46, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

That's a good point. And to address the concerns over the link I provided, point 1 at that link is often considered to mean that the image should be able to be used to identify the subject, if living, as they are now. Dismas|^(talk) 11:51, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Help:Cite errors/Cite error references no text

I am Paul Wheeler the origonal time line is wrong , I have corrected and now I apparently have to jump through some sort of hoop — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skwawks (talk • contribs) 06:09, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Your contribution record shows no edits other than this question. Could you please give us a wikilink to the article about which you are concerned? --David Biddulph (talk) 06:17, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

There is a Paul Wheeler mentioned in the article for Cartridge World which has a time line. Perhaps the OP is referring to that article (which needs a good deal of help). There have been a number of edits made to it of late. Dismas|^(talk) 06:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Citation date for a 10-years later paperback edition

Regarding this: I have the page numbers, but not for the edition that was published the year the book itself was first published. Normally I'm not a stickler for ref template formatting, but this needs to be perfect before it's added to the article for ... reasons ... Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 06:22, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

In my opinion, you should cite all the information for the edition of the book that you are holding in your hands. It is not at all uncommon for later paperback editons to be expanded, modified, and have errors corrected. So cite the edition you actually read. You can note "first published 19XX" as long as it is crystal clear which edition you have read. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:49, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

question about a crime in 1966 spanish harlerm ny

ok now what — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:AE9D:2420:55BB:7CB9:61DD:E037 (talk) 08:21, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

If your question is about editing a Wikipedia article, please give details right here. If it's a question about the crime itself, you could try contacting our Reference Desk and give the details of your question. : Noyster (talk), 10:57, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia plagiarism site

This site, which calls itself the Marine biology resource network and masquerades as a copyrighted "database of marine species", appears to contain extensive plagiarism of Wikipedia. Where should the matter be referred? --Epipelagic (talk) 09:01, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Nowhere, really. I can copy what you just said and use it however I want. Same with everything on Wikipedia. Part of the contract mentioned above the "Save page" button. The writer at this crab article remembered the attribution part.

When someone doesn't, you can refer them to the same contract. If they choose to break the terms, there's probably not a lot to do, as far as legal remedies go. And what there is is probably too expensive.

Half the Internet (or close) copies Wikipedia. It's sort of what we're here for. No real harm done, since this site doesn't carry advertising or use paywalls. No incentive for hoarding knowledge. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:33, March 1, 2015 (UTC)

What a defeatist and destructive attitude, Hulk. This is an extreme example of a mirror site abusing the work of Wikipedia editors. The site is in fact fully monetised through advertising revenues and does not generally acknowledge its input from Wikipedia. I personally do not choose to spend my time building Wikipedia articles so creeps like these can rake off criminal profits. Is there anywhere else can I ask for sensible input? --Epipelagic (talk) 11:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Not that site, this site. Wikipedia's a free encyclopedia. Knowledge is power, and if we're helping someone make money and spread knowledge, that seems constructive to me. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:18, March 1, 2015 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks for how these are handled, particularly Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks#Non-compliance process. Remember that only a copyright holder who's copyright is being violated (i.e. a contributor of some of the content which is alledgedly being misused who hasn't release it under an additional licence they may be using or in to the public domain) can take action. And it would probably be best if copyright is clear, i.e. someone who contributed substanial content rather than simply spelling or grammar corrections or whatever. Also remember that neither the CC BY-SA 3.0 or GFDL licences (they can use either presuming no content was copied from a CC only source) prevent commercial use. They do however require attribution, although AFAIK there would be no need to attribute wikipedia, they could nominally just attribute the copyright holders properly (e.g. with a copy of the edit history and log), albeit since contributors often use pseudonyms they may have to link to the wikipedia user names. Both are also copyleft so copied content (whether a pure copy or modified) would need to be released under at least one of the licences, or some other compatible licence and they would need to make this clear. Nil Einne (talk) 14:13, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I left a similar message here.  DiscantX 14:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I had a look at the site, and presuming it's true they copied content from here without special additional permission from the original authors, it does look non compliant. From one of the examples given at ANI, it's possible User:Cwmhiraeth is the copyright holder for a bunch of the copied works. You could ask them if they are intested in pursuing this, but remember it's their choice. Nil Einne (talk) 14:26, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Epipelagic refers to not wanting to spend time building articles so that others can rake off criminal profits. What is the crime? In the particular example given, Wikipedia's copyleft was attributed. If the copyleft was not attributed, it still isn't clear that the plagiarism rises to the status of criminal plagiarism. I see three possible cases. First, the copyleft is attributed; there is no violation. Second, the copyleft is not attributed, but the copying web site does not claim copyright. I am not a lawyer and do not know whether there is a tort, let alone a crime. Third, the copyleft is not attributed and the copying web site does claim copyright. There is a violation of Wikipedia's copyleft. Since Wikipedia is not trying to make a profit, is Wikipedia being ripped off? Maybe the enforcement of Wikipedia's copyleft is a question for the WMF. However, what exactly is User:Epipelagic saying is "defeatist and destructive" about permitting a mirror or fork? The loss of Wikipedia's share of the profits? I haven't seen the analysis as to how much profit is involved anyway. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:20, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I did read the analysis. There is no loss by Wikipedia, only by its contributors, who were probably not trying to make a profit anyway. Once again, what is "defeatist and destructive" about Wikipedia not taking aggressive action? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:22, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't know if it's helpful to single out one example where licence terms may have been followed (although even there, it's still confusing since the bottom of the site claims copyright to the site and that all rights are reserved). Definitely other examples at ANI, e.g. [2] seem worse. Now, I haven't checked myself, but the comment at ANI would seem to suggest their content was probably copied from us. Yet they don't seem to give any attribution to contributors (e.g. via a hyperlink to wikipedia), nor any indication the content is under a copyleft licence. Considering as with all pages on that site, it includes the standard copyright statement, the lack of such an indication is even more troubling since it would likely lead many to believe the content is copyrighted by the site with all rights reserved rather than being copyleft.

BTW, I'm not sure whether it's helpful to get into a "loss"/"profit" argument. At least on the software & GPL side, it's been established in a few court cases, and to some extent via settlements, that there copyright holders of such content still have the right for their copyright to be enforced, such as requiring reusers to comply with the licence terms, regardless of their lack of intention to profit. If you don't personally care, that's obviously up to you, on the other hand, others surely are also entitled to be concerned with non-compliance on a site which chose copyleft licences with attribution requirements.

However as I said earlier, ultimately only copyright holders can demand enforcement. While I guess the WMF could get involved by supporting contributors/copyright holders, I'm not sure it's ever happened.

Nil Einne (talk) 23:37, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Some pages acknowledge Wikipedia.[3] --  Gadget850 ^talk 23:50, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

As noted above, if the page acknowledges Wikipedia, there is no violation and no other issue. I still don't understand what Epipelagic is saying, but maybe that doesn't matter. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:56, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Name of the school has changed - please help!

Hi,

I wonder if someone could please give me an advice as the school I work for has become an academy as from today, 1st March 2015. The name of the school has changed slightly and although I have changed the text successfully, the title is still there on Wikipedia showing the old school name 'Saint Cecilia's, Wandsworth Church of England School'. Could you please let me know how I change the title to the new school name which is Saint Cecilia's Church of England School? Thank you in advance - any help would be greatly appreciated. Saint Cecilia's, Wandsworth Church of England School — Preceding unsigned comment added by SAIN2015 (talk • contribs) 09:30, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I moved the page per your request and the school's actual website. A redirect with the "old" name will be kept, so the article can be found searching with either name. (I have changed your "external" link to an easier "internal" Wiki-link to the same target). GermanJoe (talk) 09:45, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

"How to" information about page moving can be found at Wikipedia:Moving a page. GermanJoe (talk) 09:53, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Mild parkinsons

I have mild parkinsons disorder. What is wikipedia doing to help people like myself navigate this site more effectively? 89.242.90.7 (talk) 10:41, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

As part of the Manual of Style, we have Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility and we have a group of people working on that issue Wikipedia:WikiProject Accessibility. If you have ideas of how the guidelines can be improved, please provide your comments on their talk pages. However, the biggest impacts to accessibility are likely to be made via the non Wikipedia avenues of the global HTML standards, how the various web browsers implement those standards and how the hardware on your computer is designed to facilitate your use of the Web. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Correction and addition to existing information.

Hello there, I am wanting to add some factual information in the information provided for 2 Pakistani cricketers. Mr.Fazal Mahmood Mr.Duncan Sharpe. There are some useful things which I have as am grandchild to Mr.Sharpe and I feel Wikipedia hasn't got enough about him. Kindly get back as I also have emailed you on the address provided on the contact page. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.186.117.243 (talk) 12:52, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Information for Wikipedia articles must be verifiable as having been published in a reliable source. If you have such sources, you can leave messages on the articles' talk pages directing other editors to those sources. We cannot however, use your personal knowledge. Because you have a conflict of interest, you generally should not be editing the article directly, because it is hard for people with such connections to edit from an appropriately neutral point of view. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Double Redirect? Broken Link? Link returns me to same page.

Re: Aeria Games ―Mandruss ☎ 21:49, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I have a question about a Wikipedia link within an article I see. I click on the link, and the link returns me back to the same article/page that I was just on (the article where I first found the link). Is this a double redirect? Can you please tell me how I can stop this from happening? I think I might also want to create a page for the linked item or update it, but I can't see how to get into the non-existent? 'page' to edit it. I'd really like to at least not have it take me right back to the other page I don't want to keep seeing there when I click on the link.

It's found on this page: 'Aeria Games' The link is: 'Grand Fantasia'. (When I click on Grand Fantasia, I am returned to 'Aeria Games' page - but I want to see the Grand Fantasia page, how other links work, instead.)

Thanks for having this help page available and any help is much appreciated! I'm really enjoying adding things to games pages I see and editing for practice, and this will help with updating Grand Fantasia (if it's still allowed, I suppose). Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by VonFeist (talk • contribs) 21:39, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

There is no article on English Wikipedia for Grand Fantasia, and it redirects to Aeria Games. Therefore the thing to do is de-link Grand Fantasia in that article, and I have done so. If and when a Grand Fantasia article is created, the redirect can be deleted and the link re-added. ―Mandruss ☎ 21:49, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Women's History Month

President Jimmy Carter did not issue a Presidential Proclamation regarding Women's History Week or Month. The Presidential Proclamations were issued by President Ronald Reagan (Presidential Proclamation 4903 and 5619).

Here is the Library of Congress website with the correct information. http://www.loc.gov/law/help/commemorative-observations/women_history.php

I hope that you will make every effort to correct the record. President Jimmy Carter may have gotten the ball rolling, but there is no record of an official Presidential Proclamation by him regarding Women's History Week or Month.

Thank you for working to document history accurately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.18.67.138 (talk)

Please note the information from the Law Library of Congress website (http://www.loc.gov/law/help/commemorative-observations/women_history.php)

"Women’s History Month had its origins in 1981 when Congress passed Pub. L. 97-28 which authorized and requested the President to proclaim the week beginning March 7, 1982 as “Women’s History Week". As requested by Congress, President Reagan issued Presidential Proclamation 4903 proclaiming the week beginning on March 7, 1982 as the first "Women’s History Week" and recognizing the vital role of women in American history: •American women of every race, creed and ethnic background helped found and build our Nation in countless recorded and unrecorded ways ... As leaders in public affairs, American women not only worked to secure their own rights of suffrage and equal opportunity but also were principal advocates in the abolitionist, temperance, mental health reform, industrial labor and social reform movements, as well as the modern civil rights movement.

Throughout the next five years, Congress continued to pass joint resolutions designating a week in March as "Women’s History Week" and authorizing the President to issue a proclamation to inform the country of this recognition and urge the people to study the contributions of women to U.S. history. In 1987 after being petitioned by the National Women’s History Project, Congress passed Pub. L. 100-9 which designated the month of March 1987 as “Women’s History Month.” This law requested the President to issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe this month with appropriate activities and ceremonies. President Reagan then issued Presidential Proclamation 5619 proclaiming March 1987 as "Women’s History Month" and calling upon all Americans to mark the month with observances to honor the achievements of American women. Between 1988 and 1994, Congress passed additional resolutions requesting and authorizing the President to proclaim March of each year as Women’s History Month."

Please correct the inaccurate information on your page titled "Women's History Month." Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.18.67.138 (talk) 22:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Carter's 1980 statement: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=32996. Reagan's 1982 proclamation: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=42216. Only the second is called a proclamation. I don't know the significance of that in this case but it seems very hard to ignore Carter just because it wasn't called a proclamation. The Law Library of Congress website starts when congress got involved in 1981 and authorized the President to issue a proclamation in 1982. Presidential proclamation says: "In the United States, the President's proclamation does not have the force of law, unless authorized by Congress." Wikipedia is a general encyclopedia and not here to only report what the U.S. congress does. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:49, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

To the original poster... This belongs on Talk:Women's History Month and put a note on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women's History. I'll copied them...Naraht (talk) 02:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Started a new wiki account and cannot gain access.

Dear Wiki Reference Desk,

I have access to this account, but on my mobile device I have access to my new account. I tried retain the password through the setup protocols, but the server is sending a message that the email is not correct. I created this account along time ago while using a substance. I did not know I had to accounts on the wiki servers. I apologize to everyone for taking up server space, and once I regain access to my other account this account should be erased. I have a set routine of passwords but all have seemed to fail. By the way, the captcha encryption is VERY hard to read as you attempt to retain passwords. I know that's probably a fail safe, and thank you for placing it there, but some eyes are not good as others. I recommend a new form of captcha encryption if possible. In my eyes, even allow verifying through SMS message through other forms of telecommunications. Any assistance would be appreciated. I love every member on here for there hard work on this collective server site. Keep up the hard work, but dont work too hard. ONE LOVE, bless you, Have a wonderful day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sctinker37 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Sctinker37, I recommend WP:VPT.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 23:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2

Adding Executive Producer Credit to Film Wikis

cheryl shark — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.158.88 (talk) 01:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I have edited the proper coding to add an Executive Producer title (of Aaron Meyerson) to two film pages (Dumb and Dumber and Inspector Gadget (film)), but they are not showing up after saving. Is there something wrong with my coding or are there certain protections that are preventing these updates from going live? — Preceding unsigned comment added by EagleEye73 (talk • contribs) 01:16, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Template:Infobox film doesn't have an "executive producer" field.

In other words, film articles use this template to put certain things in the infobox. But the fields have to be in the template first before you can put values into them.

If you'd like the field added, it's best to take it up on the talk page of the template at Template talk:Infobox film. If you edit the template itself, it will have an effect on all of the articles that use that template. That is likely a couple hundred thousand articles at least. Dismas|^(talk) 01:56, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Less than 100,000: 96935 (as of this moment)  :)Naraht (talk) 02:03, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Huh! Between Hollywood and Bollywood, I thought we'd have surpassed the 100k mark long ago. Dismas|^(talk) 02:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Click "What links here" and "Transclusion count" to quickly get the count. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Entries in an infobox, such as Template:Infobox Film come from a specific list of what can go on the left hand side of the equal signs. The infobox doesn't understand "Executive Producer" any more than it does "blah-blah". If you look at the Template:Infobox Film , it shows what the values are that go on the left. Also, the infobox information indicates that only Producer Credits should be included, not Executive Producer.Naraht (talk) 02:01, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Inline external link

This edit was immediately reverted by a pc reviewer. I concur with the revert, but I can't put my finger on the guideline that discourages that usage. I try to link to the guideline in the editsum when I can, so I'd like to know where it is in advance. Does anyone know? ―Mandruss ☎ 09:15, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi Mandruss, see WP:ELPOINTS (point 2). Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 09:30, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you ―Mandruss ☎ 09:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Links with other Wikipedia articles

In the Draft "Nikolaos G Papadopoulos" there are words in the text that can lead to other Wikipedia articles. I have placed these links using the "REDIRECT" module. As a final result i do not see these words in blue colour just like the ones that typically have an integrated link when you click on them. Have i done it the correct way? Thank you in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by EAACI (talk • contribs) 09:44, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi EAACI, I fixed two links so they become blue. Click this button to see how it is done. I suggest you go to a Wikipedia article, click on the "Edit button" a the top, and just have a look around how they do it. All the best, Taketa (talk) 09:57, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

... and also worth looking at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

While you are at it, you ought to cure the bare urls in your references. See WP:Referencing for beginners, and Wikipedia:Template messages/Sources of articles/Citation quick reference. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Concerning: Wikipedia Law Encyclopdia Articles

Concerning: Creation of Articles that use Raw Legal Citation and Codification.

Hello. I am working on a legal article topic (False Production) that is being prepared for the United States Federal Register and Library of Congress and needed to know if there was an etiquette reference and any project pages for the different types of raw citation, including the main topics being referenced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Habatchii (talk • contribs) 10:12, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Habatchii. Would you explain more clearly what you are trying to do? I am not even clear whether you are writing an article in Wikipedia or somewhere else (your clause "that is being prepared for the United States Federal Register and Library of Congress" doesn't make any sense in the context of Wikipedia, because Wikipedia articles are for Wikipedia only, and should make no concession to what some other person or organisation wants). If you are talking about a Wikipedia article, the general guidance for citing sources is referencing for beginners, and there is a family of templates for citing statutes - see Category:Law citation templates. If you're talking about an article outside Wikipedia, then I think you'll have to make you question clearer. --ColinFine (talk) 19:44, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Taking a disclaimer off a page at ADAMA Agricultural Solutions

Dear friends at Wikipedia,

I amended and updated ADAMA Agricultural Solutions' article on Wikipedia (Link: ADAMA Agricultural Solutions). This company used to be called "Makhteshim Agan Industries" and about a year ago re-branded itself to become it's recent brand- ADAMA. There is only one issue pending- there is disclaimer at the top of the page which reads: "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". The disclaimer was posted on December 2011 and has now become obsolete due to the recent changes to the article. I would like to find out who of the community can proofread the page to be able to take the disclaimer off.

For reference please see Adama's competitor's pages e.g., Dow Chemical Company, Bayer CropScience, BASF and DuPont, all of which have similar types of articles and do not have the disclaimer mentioned in Adama's.

Your advice will be highly appreciated.

With kind regards, Moran Amitai Moranamitai (talk) 10:46, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Those articles which you list about other companies use the words "product" and "chemical" for what the companies make. The ADAMA article uses the word "solution", twice, in its opening paragraph. The use of that word tends to indicate material written by a PR person who doesn't know what the company actually does. Apart from that, the article seems to me acceptable, and not unduly promotional. Maproom (talk) 11:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

@Moranamitai: Any Wikipedia editor, including you, may remove such a message when it no longer applies, by removing the corresponding template from the top of the article (in this case, {{advert}}). I removed it before Maproom's comment, with which I don't disagree. ―Mandruss ☎ 11:44, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree with both of the above editors. See WP:BUZZWORD for more on these actionable points of contention. Dismas|^(talk) 12:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Inserting an image

Hi,

I am brand new to creating a wiki page. I have written a company page (User:Feargroupcomms/Fear Group) but cant add the logo as I think I am too new a user. Please can someone assist? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Feargroupcomms (talk • contribs) 12:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

User blocked. --  Gadget850 ^talk 14:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Official Status of www.wikipedia.<XX> (XX in de, fr, nl etc.)

I've noticed that www.wikipedia.de , www.wikipedia.fr and www.wikipedia.nl exist, but are sort of gateways. For example www.wikipedia.de includes a search on de.wikipedia.org and apparently the picture of the day and the www.wikipedia.fr gives even more choices, but are they actually run by wikipedia itself? I noticed for example, the "W" used as the image up on my tab bar is slightly larger for www.wikipedia.de than it is for the wikipedia.org pages. Also, if it is official, is there any way of getting a list?Naraht (talk) 13:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

There are multiple versions of Wikipedia in many different languages - each is effectively its own project, although all fall under the auspices of the Wikimedia Foundation. Here's a full list of the different language versions available. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:09, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Yunshui, the question is about www.wikipedia.de and its ilk, not de.wikipedia.org. Rojomoke (talk) 13:35, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Oh, good spot - shame on me for not recognising the different URLs. On the surface, these look like local Wikimedia chapter projects. However, I've never seen them before, and wouldn't like to comment on their veracity or official status. Might be worth pinging someone from the Foundation to see if they know anything. Yunshui ^雲_水 13:43, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Checking WHOIS, none are registered to the WMF. --  Gadget850 ^talk 14:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not an organization by itself and does not run any websites. Wikipedia is one of several websites run by the Wikimedia Foundation. Several wikipedia.xx domains are run by Wikimedia chapters legally independent of the Wikimedia Foundationion. See List of Wikimedia chapters. The listed domain is with wikimedia and not wikipedia in the name but in many cases they also own a corresponding wikipedia domain. I don't know a list of which wikipedia.xx country domains exist or who owns them. I don't know whether the Wikimedia Foundation itself owns any of them. At a Whois service like http://whois.domaintools.com/ you can often see who has registered a domain. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

On www.wikipedia.de's imprint (https://www.wikipedia.de/imprint) there's a link to this Meta page. The beginning of the text on that Meta page reads: On this page, feedback for the domain wikipedia.de is gathered: error report, suggestions, offers for collaboration (whatever that means), criticism, compliments, ... In the imprint they say that wikipedia.de belongs to Wikimedia Deutschland/Germany
Also, wikipedia.fr, wikipedia.ch and wikipedia.at say they belong to Wikimedia France, CH and Österreich, respectivly-- Metrophil44 (talk) 15:15, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

OK, I'll take a look at the others. Most of them seem pretty useful, with links to the multiple language wikipedias if the country has multiple languages or just pure redirect (www.wikipedia.jp redirects to jp.wikipedia.org). OTOH. w ww.wik ipedia.co (and yes, I'm deliberately breaking it up) redirects to one of the most annoying web pages I've *ever* seen. timed popup blockers designed to keep you from getting out of the page, claiming that you have viruses, and an annoying chirping sound. I wonder if WMF can do anything about that one. (co = Colombia).Naraht (talk) 17:33, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

an internal wikipedia link

Hello:

I found a medical article on Wikipedia last week that I am trying to return to. It is important for medical research I am doing. I clicked on a link in this article regarding "word loss" and that took me to the "anomic aphasia" page. The original page that had that link I believe was on the topic of thyroid or adrenal glands or some type of medical condition related to these organs. I've tried in vain for a week to find this page but I can't. I hope you have some resource their to find internal links to the "anomic aphasia" page on the topic of word loss that will locate the referring page. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Chris Kaufmann — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cnkaufmann (talk • contribs) 16:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

The page Word loss exists as a redirect to Anomic aphasia, but "What links here" shows no links to that redirect Word loss. A search for "word loss" within Wikipedia shows no relevant results. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:53, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

As Cnkaufmann only has one edit, I will explain the "what links here" feature.
If you go to the Anomic aphasia page, in the left hand column, under Tools is "What links here" - if you click on that, it lists all the pages that link to Anomic aphasia.
So, if you got to that page by clicking a link, you will have been on one of the pages in that list. - Arjayay (talk) 17:15, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Do any of the pages linked from Lists of language disorders ring a bell? --Guy Macon (talk) 17:18, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Getting help for other languages and projects

I have been going through the list of Wikimedia projects at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:SiteMatrix looking for misconfigurations and software bugs. So far I have found several problems, including;

• mr.wikipedia.org: rejected all submissions written in non-Marathi languages, including anything posted to their Wikipedia Embassy page -- the page dedicated to asking questions in other languages. A very helpful mr.wikipedia.org admin fixed it.

• ak.wikipedia.org - the edit filters thought that secure.wikimedia.org is a harmful site. No admins on ak.wikipedia.org, so I asked a steward, who fixed it.

My latest two are:

• yi.wikipedia.org (Yiddish) has a problem with LTR text. It puts the icon on the wrong end of https links but gets http links right. (See https://yi.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%91%D7%90%D6%B7%D7%A0%D7%99%D7%A6%D7%A2%D7%A8:Guy_Macon for an example.) he.wikipedia.org (Hebrew) has no such problem.

• When I tried to post the following to my talk page on fr.wikiversity.org...

I prefer that messages be posted to [ https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/User_talk:Guy_Macon ] instead of here, but if you post here I will get a weekly email notice and will eventually get back here to respond. This may take a week or two, so please be patient.

...I got an error that says...

This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed. If you believe your action was constructive, please inform an administrator of what you were trying to do. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: Publicité fréquente (Google translates to "Advertising frequent")

...so possibly this is another wiki that thinks that secure.wikimedia.org is a harmful site.

My question is, where is the best place to find someone who speaks English and can address these problems? --Guy Macon (talk) 16:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

secure.wikimedia.org is Wikipedia:Secure server#The old server which has just redirected since 2012. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/User_talk:Guy_Macon redirects to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Guy_Macon. That page can be reached from other wikis with a wikilink without needing a url: w:en:User talk:Guy Macon (some users may reach http instead of https on that link). I don't speak French and have never visited French Wikiversity before but I can navigate public filter logs. [4] shows your attempted edits triggered the filter with description "Publicité fréquente", as you also say yourself. wikiversity:fr:Special:Abusefilter shows that is wikiversity:fr:Spécial:Filtre antiabus/14. That filter disallows saving a url if you have less than 10 edits and haven't been granted one of certain user rights. It sounds a bit harsh but wikis decide their own rules and the French notes indicates they made the filter for a reason. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

That's actually a quite reasonable restriction, not at all as bad as deciding that secure.wikimedia.org is a harmful site. I already knew about non-url wikilinks. My goal here is to test things like URLs and edit windows and report any bugs, not to find a workaround. I am marking this one "doesn't need to be fixed" and moving on. Thanks!

Does anyone know have a suggestion as to where to address the issue of yi.wikipedia.org not handling left-to-right https URLs properly? --Guy Macon (talk) 02:14, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

What precisely do you see at yi and he? You speak of "wrong" and not "properly" but never specify left or right. At yi I see https with the icon on top of the right end of a bare url or link text. That's annoying. I see http and pdf with the icon to the left of a bare url or link text. If a bare url uses left-to-right English characters then an icon to the left may seem like wrong placement, but for right-to-left link text it is right to place the icon to the left. If a bare left-to-right url is part of right-to-left text then I'm not sure an icon to the left should be called wrong, and it would be difficult and confusing to move the icon between the right and left depending on the surronding text. At he I see no icons at all on http and https. On pdf I see the icon to the left for both bare urls' and link text, just like pdf and http on yi. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:06, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

This is interesting.

• Using Firefox, on yi[5] http has the icon on the right, not overlapping the rightmost letter.
• Using Firefox, on yi https has the icon on the left, overlapping the leftmost letter.

• Using Firefox, on he[6] http has the icon on the right, not overlapping the rightmost letter.
• Using Firefox, on he https has the icon on the right, not overlapping the rightmost letter.

• Using Opera, on yi, http has the icon on the left, not overlapping the leftmost letter.
• Using Opera, on yi, https has the icon on the right, overlapping the rightmost letter.

• Using Opera, on he, http has no icon.
• Using Opera, on he, https has no icon.

• Using Chrome, on yi, http has the icon on the left, not overlapping the leftmost letter.
• Using Chrome, on yi, https has the icon on the right, overlapping the rightmost letter.

• Using Chrome, on he, http has no icon.
• Using Chrome, on he, https has no icon.

• Using IE, on yi, http has the icon on the left, not overlapping the leftmost letter.
• Using IE, on yi, https has the icon on the right, overlapping the rightmost letter.

• Using IE, on he, http has no icon.
• Using IE, on he, https has no icon.

Also, IE throws a javascript error on yi but not he

Versions tested:

• Firefox 36.0
• Opera 22.0.1471.50
• Chrome 40.0.2214.115 m
• IE 8.0.6001.18702

Icon on the left is fine, icon on the right is fine, no icon is fine.

Icon overlapping the leftmost or rightmost letter is a bug.

Icon not being consistant between http and https is a bug.

Basicly, he.wikipedia.org needs no fixes, and yi.wikipedia.org needs to start doing with https whatever it is already doing with http. Either that or start doing whatever he.wikipedia.org is doing. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:54, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Renaming Sound File

I'm not sure how to go about doing this, but I found a sound file on the site needs to be renamed. I don't see how a user can manually do that, so I'm wondering how to go about requesting that move. --Shadow (talk) 22:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi @ShadowRanger: Only admins and file movers can move files. If you'd like to rename a file on Wikipedia, you can request a rename using Template:Rename media - though you should typically only request renames that fall under one of the reasons given at WP:FMV/W.

If the file you'd like to rename is at the Commons, they have a similar process outlined at Commons:File_renaming. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 22:50, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you, this is exactly what I needed. --Shadow (talk) 23:09, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

March 3

Ungulate

Ungulate correction Latin plural hippopotami — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.255.102.238 (talk) 02:00, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps you didn't read Hippopotamus#Etymology? --David Biddulph (talk) 02:08, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Help reviewing my page

Hi

I would like to get some help with my new Wikipedia page. I have a few alerts attached to my page and, as I am a new editor, I am not sure what I need to do to get them removed. I have tried to address the issues but I would like some help to make sure before I remove the tags. Another editor has kindly pointed me to your site. Please cam someone take a look and let me know if I am going to be able to get this page free of concerns for the editors of Wikipedia?

The Grove Community History Library

History6011 (talk) 03:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I have improved some of the formatting of the article. But its main problem is the lack of inline citations from reliable independent sources that establish that the library is notable. As you have access to Australian newspapers, you are better placed to do that than I am. Maproom (talk) 08:45, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of changing the external url in your question to an internal wikilink. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Can't delete an article

See these contributions. I have tried to delete the articles created by the editor but it won't let me. It appears to be a problem with the ampersand in the titles, but I'm fairly certain I've seen ampersands in other article titles (can't come up with one right now), and, in any event, why would the author be able to create it if the ampersand were prohibited? So, for example, the title is "Director at Aristotle English langauge & Competitions Classes"; yet, when I click on Delete page, the error message I get says "Cannot delete page "Director at Aristotle English langauge"". Is there some other way to delete it?--Bbb23 (talk) 09:03, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Worked fine for me. I suspect you're having the same problem as User:CambridgeBayWeather did at WP:VPT#Cremation or burial?. —Cryptic 09:08, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hehe, now I'm having an even more fun delete problem. When I try to delete "Lets Get High", it takes me to the main page. The quotes? I don't recall having these problems before. I didn't read the discussion about CambridgeBayWeather's problem carefully. Was it determined to be a bug, or did he just start using MusikAnimal's gadget to get around the problem?--Bbb23 (talk) 09:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Both, I think; I didn't follow it closely either.

If you can edit the article, you can delete it. Just change the action=edit at the end of the url to action=delete, i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%22Lets_Get_High%22&action=delete. What's the url that your delete button links to? —Cryptic 09:17, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

That worked, thanks. I reread the discussion at the Pump, and I believe there's a gadget that I have checked in Preferences that gives me a Page tab, which then gives me a drop-down, one of the options of which is Delete. My guess is that MusikAnimal fixed the gadget for question marks, but it's apparently still having problems with ampersands and quotation marks. Based on those assumptions, I posted something over there so that hopefully MA can fix it. Meanwhile, I really need to go to bed (the only reason I'm up at all is I couldn't sleep). Thanks for your help.--Bbb23 (talk) 09:26, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

(EC)It appears that MusikAnimal did for the "?" just applies to that particular character. I didn't install any extra gadget. Trying to delete "Lets Get High" sent me to the main page as well. Also trying to delete Above&Beyond (magazine) gave me the opportunity to delete About. It was due to having "Add Page and User dropdown menus to the toolbar" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets that was the problem. It's still enabled in mine and turning it off will allow the page deletion. One other way is to move the problem page to Lets Get High without leaving a redirect and then delete the thing. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 09:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

@CambridgeBayWeather: Right, but if I understand it properly, that preference, which I have turned on as well, invokes the thingamajigger (script?) that MusikAnimal fixed so you could delete articles without unchecking it if the title had a question mark. I'm just asking MA to do the same for other special characters. You know, I thought of moving the page without a redirect, but I assumed, silly me, that the delete part of that wouldn't work.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:37, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I was surprised that moving without a redirect worked. I tried in on some pages in my user space. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 15:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

@Cryptic: Is it OK to publish a clickable 'delete' hyperlink? The article may get re-created some day and then any careless user may accidentaly delete it just by clicking the link. --CiaPan (talk) 10:21, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

It's fine because to actually delete it you need to be an admin. So you just get a permission error. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 11:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry about that, fixed one thing and broke a bunch others. Because of a WMF bug I can't use mw.util.getUrl for pages ending in a ? so I switched it to the /w/index.php URL syntax, but now the page names aren't being properly escaped. To further complicate things, WP doesn't escape them like you would think, there's a wiki-specific way, which is why you're supposed to use mw.util.getUrl, but again there's a bug with that function... Catch-22 if you will. Let me brainstorm a solution. I've reverted back to mw.util.getUrl for now, as you'll run into pages ending in a ? a lot less often than pages containing any other non-alphanumeric characters. — MusikAnimal ^talk 16:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

I dunno, I think we should rename all of Wikiedia's policies to have a question mark at the end of their titles. After all, editors question the policies all the time. That way, we'd have things like WP:VERIFIABILITY? and WP:BAN? I'm glad you understand what the problem is and are working on it. Maybe you should bug the WMF more to fix the bug????--Bbb23 (talk) 16:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hahaha, you always manage to crack me up Bbb23! I think they opened a phab report for the bug but I'll have to double-check. It'll be a long wait before it's fixed I'm sure. In the meantime if you do run into a ? page that you want to delete try a URL like /w/index.php?title=PAGENAME?&action=delete. Cheers — MusikAnimal ^talk 17:06, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Berlin Art Link Magazine

Dear Wikipedia,

I published an article about Berlin Art Link Magazine and a few moments later it was reviewed but 90 % of what I wrote was deleted. Please let me know how come this happened.

13:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)13:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mannyhow (talk • contribs)

The problem is that what you included in Berlin Art Link Magazine was entirely deviod of references to published reliable sources independent of the subject to verify its notability. I have added some links to your user talk page; start with WP:Your first article, & you'll find other useful links from there. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:57, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello

I am writing to complain about the structure of wikipedia, I find it very difficult understanding your categorising system. If I look up a subject, I sometimes want to know the parent category and its parent category. At the moment I have to scroll to the bottom of an article and look through an extremely confusing system. For example today I was curious to know more about Chesapeake Bay, so I went to the page and it says its an Estuary. So I click on the estuary link as I am unsure of its meaning. So I am looking at the Estuary description and it says it is "A partly enclosed coastal body of brackish water". So i think what the hell is a body of brackish water??? but i don't want to know that because I'm trying to find out what an Estuary is... So I look at the older historical pages to find years and years of changes, vandalism and more confusion. So i look at the very first entry from around 2002 which says "An estuary is the stretch of a river mouth directly affected by sea tides". Maybe somewhat imprecise but its fairly accurate and in no way confusing. So my next question would be what category does an estuary fall in to? Now from what i gather you have it under "Marine habitats".. Ok fair enough but wikimedia commons has it categorised as coastal landforms. My problem is I want accurate easy to understand information. I won't even attempt to edit one of your subjects simply because it is too confusing, frustrating and bland. I should be able to search for a word and have a small brief description (No more than 2 lines!!), THE CATEGORY AT THE TOP, instead of making me scroll to the end of a document. A discussion section that isn't actually hard to use, for instance "WTF is this?? -> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Estuary". Where do i talk, vent my complaints because it is a terrible article. If someone had actually went to the effort of writing an accurate description of Chesapeake Bay, including location (Is it in the USA, what part, what is it famous for). Now i know i couldn't care less because it must just be a nowhere that no-one should give a toss about. I'm done ranting. Take from this what you will but wikipedia NEEDS a desparate overhall. If you want contributions i'd suggest the KISS principle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.239.160.20 (talk) 13:50, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

It isn't entirely clear what your complaint is. You may be confusing the Wikipedia concept of categories, which are a technique, sometimes hierarchical and sometimes non-hierarchical, of grouping articles, with the concept of links. Editors are encouraged to put links around any name that is the name of an article so that both readers and editors can navigate to it, as you did from Chesapeake Bay to estuary. Categories are a technical concept that are sometimes controversial, as you mention at the bottom of the page, but one that editors are not required to be familiar with, so that they can reasonably be ignored. Links are, in my opinion, much more important and useful than categories, and easier to use. You did refer to the talk page tab, which is at the top of every article, and that is where you can make comments about how an article can be improved. You say that an article is terrible, but it isn't clear whether you are talking about Chesapeake Bay or estuary. Which are you complaining about? Robert McClenon (talk) 14:14, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Don't worry i cannot put in to words what I am annoyed about. Basically the category system is of the utmost importance to me, i am aware that there can be many categories for one subject. I am aware that many people can change an article and Wikipedia staff organise the structure of the pages. I just find the layout very ugly and antiquated, hard to find things. I don't find it to be a reliable source of information but its not like we have many other places to go in this censored world.

The talk page should appear like a conversation almost like i would see on an IPhone. Input, response, input, response. At the moment the talk page looks like another article at first glance. A simple comment box with a voting system, thumbs up for agree, down for disagree is what i'd prefer. Please feel free to delete this. I apologise for wasting your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.239.160.20 (talk) 14:47, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

There are no "Wikipedia staff" who "organise the structure of the pages" - that's all done by volunteers, as is the creation of articles. Yes, talk page functionality isn't the best, but a voting system isn't going to help. We decide things by discussion to reach a consensus, which really doesn't lend itself to a thumbs up or thumbs down process.--ukexpat (talk) 16:40, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Requesting An Article

HI There,

Ive been speaking to one of your colleagues Mark Squier about requesting an article - he told me the best place to come would be here.

I work with a singer/songwriter called Polina who's worked with the likes of Eminem & Steve Aoki in the past & I'd like to get a wikipedia page set up for her.

Ive been getting to this page >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requested_articles/music/Performers,_bands_and_songwriters

Then from there I am totally unclear of where I should goo to request an article?

Please could someone help me.

Thanks, Jasper — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.144.154.22 (talk) 15:54, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Click the edit link at the section heading Wikipedia:Requested articles/music/Performers, bands and songwriters#M-Z, write an entry similar to the others and placed alphabetically, click Show preview to check it looks right, and then Save page. There is already an article at Polina and we have articles about other musicians called Polina so you can write [[Polina Goudieva]] as the name, even if she usually only goes by "Polina". PrimeHunter (talk) 17:32, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia : The Movie

I am currently filming Wikipedia: The Movie and I need people for the following parts:

• User:Jimbo Wales
• User:Jayron32
• User:Technoquat
• User:Ceoil.

Auditions will be held at 1350 S Five Mile Rd, Boise, Idaho at 5:30pm on the 10th March 2015. --FilmioBiellio (talk) 16:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Based on looks, I should be played by George Clooney, but he should have the comedic sensibility of someone like Jim Parsons. I think Clooney could pull that off. --Jayron32 16:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

What a total sausage party. I'm not paying to see that. Drmies (talk) 17:46, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Auditions at a U.S. Post Office? ―Mandruss ☎ 17:48, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Can I get in on this? Every movie needs a furry anthropomorphic animal for comedy relief. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 17:53, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Just turn up at the said location with $10 and a script. Further roles avaliable:

• User:5 albert square
• User:DHeyward
• User:CorporateM

--FilmioBiellio (talk) 20:47, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

*UPDATE*

• Here is the plot: Jimbo Wales is trying to sell Wikipedia to Chinese businessmen and when Jayron32 and Ceoil realise this they ask Technoquat (troll villain) to troll Jimbo to get him to stop and it fails to then 5 albert square, DHeyward and CorporateM realise also what is happening so they start their own version of Wikipedia called 'NuWiKipedIA' and make millions which makes Jimbo very sad so Jimbo realises how horrible he was being and apoligises to everyone. --FilmioBiellio (talk) 20:53, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Based on looks, Holly Valance should portray me. However, like @Jayron32: I love the comic genuis of Jim Parsons so whoever portrays me would need to mix that in too. Yeah I think Holly would be up to the job :)--5 albert square (talk) 21:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Very weak plot. More interesting things have actually happened here. Suggest a documentary instead (less expensive too). ―Mandruss ☎ 21:13, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Support - Documentary instead. Mlpearc (open channel) 21:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Punctuation

On the drop-down menu of "common minor edit summaries", I would like "Punctuation -quotation marks -dashes" to be added as an option. Thank you. deisenbe (talk) 16:55, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi @Deisenbe: Any recommendations for changes to the gadget should be made at MediaWiki talk:Gadget-defaultsummaries.js - however, I don't think your recommendation would be a common-enough edit summary to be included.

That being said, you can implement your own custom version of the gadget. First, disable the gadget in your preferences (the one called "Add two new dropdown boxes below..."). Then, copy and paste the code from MediaWiki:Gadget-defaultsummaries.js to your custom JavaScript page, located at User:Deisenbe/common.js. You can then edit the code to add (or remove) your own custom edit summaries: look for the lines of code that contain the current edit summaries, then copy-and-paste those lines and add your own edit summaries as you see fit. If you need help with this, just let me know and I can guide you. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 17:05, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

mis-spelled name

Hello the article 40_Point_Plan is about a film I made in Los Angeles, CA

My name is mis-spelled. My name is Christianne Christensen not Christiensen There is an extra "i" that should not be there! I would like to start an article about myself but the information on there in not accurate. Thank you for your time, Christianne — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CE71:DB80:94D7:200:C4C:7E82 (talk) 17:10, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Done (and condensed above message). Drmies (talk) 17:13, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

As for starting an article about yourself, please see WP:AUTOBIO. Dismas|^(talk) 21:25, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Article review / uploading logos

I submitted an article contribution and was wondering how I know when it has been reviewed, accepted, rejected, etc?

ALSO, I have no idea how to upload a logo into the page. Since it is a logo I cannot upload into Commons, correct? So then how do I add it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SheriSmith (talk • contribs) 17:17, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi @SheriSmith: You should receive a message on your talk page when an editor reviews your draft.

Non-free images can be uploaded to Wikipedia as long as they meet our fair use requirements (which includes using the logo of an organization in its respective article). Non-free images should only be used in live articles, however, so I'd hold off on that until your article goes live. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 17:57, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

While you are waiting for it to be reviewed, you can still work on it. You could increase its chance of being accepted by adding some citations of reliable independent sources that establish that the subject is notable. As things are now, it cites three sources: the subject's press release, the subject's LinkedIn page, and the subject's founder's LinkedIn page. None of them qualifies as "reliable and independent". Maproom (talk) 00:00, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Adding pictures

how to add a picture — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.114.222.6 (talk) 17:22, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Short questions, short answers: Wikipedia:Uploading images. Scarce2 (talk) 17:35, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

March 4

Chronology

Is there a chronological list of Wikipedia articles by date of creation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohyeahstormtroopers6 (talk • contribs) 00:17, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Special:NewPages would seem to be what you're looking for, but it only goes back a little over a month. —Al E.^(talk) 02:15, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

How to add language link to a Wikipedia page

I'm trying to add an interlanguage link to a Wikipedia page. (Nineteenth-Century French Studies) I've read the instructions given in Wikipedia:Wikidata page, but couldn't get to add the language links.

Here is what I'm trying to do: When I click on the Add link button in the left side, it shows a you need to be logged in pop-up and redirects me to the central data repository (Wikidata) user login page. When I sign-in, it takes me to the Wikidata homepage which I've no clue on what to do. Then, I just tried to search the Wikidata for the page and found the item. At the bottom of the item I've added the french language Wikipedia entry.

But when I open the original Wikipedia page, there is no link to the french page in the languages column. And now, when I click on the Add links button, it again shows the login popup.

Is there any thing that I'm missing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.74.69 (talk) 01:23, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

• Yeah, you're missing -- insert witticism. Someone can explain this, but let me just declare my sympathy here: it can be awfully complicated. I just added the link; when I'm logged into the English wiki it's simple, with one little screen, but when I'm logged into the Dutch wiki, for instance, it's a mysterious and cumbersome process not unlike what you described. Drmies (talk) 01:26, 4 March 2015 (UTC)