Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:23, 16 December 2016

↑ To top of page

Shortcuts

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

Search the frequently asked questions

Search the help desk archives and other help pages

December 13

Adding to a Wikipedia entry

I just added another book to the list of books titled Boys will be Boys.

When I went to the Wikipedia entry, it was not there.

Is there a time delay or did I do something wrong?

Gary Ferdman

Garyferdman (talk) 01:35, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Garyferdman: There is no time delay. Click the "View history" tab to see [1] what happened. It was reverted with edit summary "Reverting article-less addition to dab page". Boys Will Be Boys is a disambiguation page to help readers find the right Wikipedia article. Per MOS:DABENTRY there should be a link to an article in each entry. There is no article about the book or its author so there is nothing to link. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Garyferdman: To be a bit more succinct, on disambiguation pages such as that one, there should be a relevant link on each line. In the case of the book you added, there should be a link to the Wikipedia article for either the book itself or to the author. Since neither of those have articles here, we don't include it in the list. †dismas†|^(talk) 02:21, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article was overwritten with text in another language

Hi, my organization prepared several translations of an article. Now the article that used to be in English got overwritten with text in Albanian. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpret_Europe I wanted to link this article to the others so that system would show we have an Albanian translation now, but don't know how to. I went to Languages -> edit connections and delete the English (because it is not in English anymore), but I can not do it. I tried to add Albanian, but can not, because the system doesn't find the article. What do you suggest? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dijana PC (talk • contribs) 10:42, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the mistaken over-writing of the English version. I noticed also that you had in October mistakenly moved User:Dijana PC/sandbox to Wikipedia:Interpret Europe, which was wrong on two grounds, firstly that the text was not in English and secondly that the Wikipedia namespace is not for article text but for administration of the project. I have therefore moved the text back to your sandbox. If you want to know more about translating an English Wikipedia article into an article in one of the foreign language Wikipedias, see WP:Translate us. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:02, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dijana PC. Judging from your mention of "my organization", I am concerned that you may have a conflict of interest in working on Interpret Europe at all. Looking at that article, I see no independent sources cited about the organization - without these, the article does not establish that it is notable in Wikipedia's special sense. Please understand that English Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything that an organisation says about itself, or that its employees or members say about it: Wikipedia is only interested in what sources independent of the organisation have published about it. (Other language Wikipedias have different policies, and it may be that some of them would take a different view of this article: I don't know). If you want to create and link articles about IE in different languages, please see Translation; but (if I am right in my understanding that you are part of the organisation) you will still have a COI in doing so. --ColinFine (talk) 12:33, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Simi Valley Adult School

Simi Valley Adult School and Career Institute has changed the school name to Simi Institute for Careers and Education. The Principal is Michele Arso. Simi Unified School District. Address: 1880 Blackstock Avenue, Simi Valley, CA 93065, 805.579.6200, Website: SimiInstitute.com. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.157.143.202 (talk) 16:48, December 13, 2016‎ (UTC)

Apparently yes. Will try and move the article to the new name. Thanks for the information. Lourdes 17:26, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User MYRIADGT

Hello, it appears that I cannot submit my entry from User:MYRIADGT/sandbox for review and publication. I am told that the MYRIADGT user page does not exist. Please advise as to what I should do. Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MYRIADGT (talk • contribs) 19:50, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, are you looking for User:MYRIADGT/sandbox? It is tagged for deletion because it is promotional. Your username also violates Wikipedia policies. Fuortu (talk) 20:00, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As well as being promotional it was a copyright violation from various pages on the https://www.myriadgt.com/ website (hence not surprising that the language was promotional). --David Biddulph (talk) 20:05, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a grid to a sandbox test.

I would like to make a drawing, sort of an illustration, very simple, a few parallel vertical and horizontal lines like in a grid. I also want to number some of the intersections and place small circles on them. I wonder if there is a page somewhere in Wikipedia that assists with this type of work? Thanks, --AboutFace 22 (talk) 21:16, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you looking for how to create that image on a wikipedia page, or just in general? Please seek general computing support from the Reference Desk. Tiggerjay (talk) 21:23, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If it's for Wikipedia then you can try Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:38, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is for a Wikipedia sandbox. Thank you, @PrimeHunter, you've helped me before. --AboutFace 22 (talk) 21:55, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tiggerjay: if what you want is anything like the three diagrams here, tell me the spec on my talk page, and I'll make the image for you. Maproom (talk) 22:11, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Maproom, the request was acutally from AboutFace 22 not me. Tiggerjay (talk) 22:21, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 14

Special:Uploads

A real-life acquaintance just discovered Special:Uploads/Nyttend, which surprises me: she already knew my onwiki identity, so that's fine, but I've never heard of this special page before (I'm not even finding it on Special:Specialpages), and as I can't find a description, I'm really confused how it works. It's not linked anywhere that I'd think to link — and what's more, it's significantly different from Special:Listfiles or https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Nyttend&namespace=6&tagfilter=&year=2016&month=-1 because it includes Commons uploads as well as uploads here at en:wp. Can anyone tell me anything about this page, e.g. how to reach it and whether it includes all my uploads or just a subset of them? Nyttend (talk) 02:10, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's listed at Help:Special page (as Special:MyUploads, but the generalization is obvious). Special:Specialpages is mostly global system-wide special pages. It doesn't list Special:Diff, Special:Contributions, or lots of other parameterized pages. (Also see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/upload?user=Nyttend, a different presentation.)

Sorry I can't answer your more detailed questions. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 02:49, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

MyUploads is local only. Uploads shows global uploads which is curious. It must do it through CentralAuth but I'm not finding any documentation on mediawiki. Still searching though. --Majora (talk) 02:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyttend: Alright, so the Uploads special page definitely has something to do with mobile viewing of Wikipedia. If you look at the page with the parts enabled, it traces to mw:Extension:MobileFrontend. There is a phab task that has something to do with it here: phab:T50732 but there isn't any answers there. I'm not sure why it also pulls Commons data and there isn't much information on that on the documentation. Perhaps someone else can shed some light on it? --Majora (talk) 03:28, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's linked on "Uploads" at top of mobile user pages: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Nyttend. It only shows Commons uploads as mentioned at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2016 December 9#Uploads in mobile version. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:28, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Overlinking geographical features

According to WP:OVERLINKING, we shouldn't be linking to major geographical features. Is there a generally accepted line at which a feature becomes major? Hack (talk) 03:00, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can't supply that, but please remember not to link major geographical features if they're not hugely relevant to the context. For example, in an article about atomic theory, you need not link anything in a sentence "The next stage of research occurred in the United Kingdom when Doe published his eighty-third book." However, in articles about places, the major geographical feature is definitely part of the context; a city in the United States needs to have a link to United States in the intro. Nyttend (talk) 03:35, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kiss

I just read your article on Kiss and it stated that they performed on Dec 13, 2016 with the winner of The Voice, Sundance. How is that possible when the show is live? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1005:B055:58:ADBA:A56B:7058:9480 (talk) 03:38, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Voice aired at 8 EST. It is almost 11 in that time zone. Whatever you are watching isn't live. It may say it is live, but just going off the clock it isn't. That information was added about 30 minutes ago and has already been reported by numerous reliable sources. --Majora (talk) 03:43, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. It is still on apparently. But that information was added 30 minutes ago. Wikipedia editors like to keep the articles as up to date as possible. --Majora (talk) 03:46, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is this the right place?

I want to know if the website I linked is the right place to request an article to be made when you don't know what category it belongs in? Ramister (talk) 03:47, 14 December 2016 (UTC) Maybe I should have posted this instead. Ramister (talk) 03:51, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ramister, yes. It is for other or unknown categories. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 04:29, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

University Repository

Hello, I need to create a page about University Repository.

But I did not see any information about other University Repositories, maybe it is not permitted to publish?

So, please help me.

Thank you, Tolkyn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jangulova (talk • contribs) 04:02, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

University Repository of what exactly? If it is part of the university it would probably go within the article about the university if there is enough to go on at all. Probably not enough to have a standalone article. --Majora (talk) 04:04, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Tolkyn. Wikipedia does not have articles on everything that exists in the world, just things that are notable in Wikipedia's special sense: people with no connection to the subject have thought them worth publishing significant material on. If you are thinking of creating an article, please start by reading Your first article. When you say you "need" to create a page, I wonder if that means that you are connected with the University Repository in question and have been directed to "create a page" as part of your job? If that is the case, please be aware that Wikipedia may not be used for promotion of any kind (and that includes non-commercial organisations) and that editing articles where you may have a conflict of interest is discouraged. --ColinFine (talk) 10:38, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As all institutions have repositories and most containing unique collections of one sort or other, there is to my mind, little encyclopedic value to creating such an article focusing on just one university. Also guess, several editors here (self included) would immediately put it up for AfD and commit it to cyber-heven without so much as a tombstone to morn its passing. However, having said that, if this university repository provides free and open access to all, then that might be worth adding to the WP University's article as a short sub heading, as I think that effort makes such a repository notable. Example:the University of Pennsylvania is making efforts in this direction. If enough universities open up their archives in such a way, then maybe, one-day, we should create a list of open access university repositories. All of Wikipedia is work in progress and no doubt such an article will come about eventually. So, think and encourage, the OP to explore this.--Aspro (talk) 16:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New page creation

i want to make a new page for our movie. please give them link — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sabidecembermist (talk • contribs) 10:54, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To create an article, follow these steps:

Read Your first article carefully.
If you don't have an account, consider creating one (it's not essential, but it makes some things easier, especially communicating with other editors) and logging in.
Learn the basics of editing with the Wikipedia:Tutorial
Make sure the subject is notable enough to warrant a stand-alone article
Gather reliable sources to cite in the article
Make sure no article on the subject exists under a different title by typing the subject into the search box and clicking 'Search'
Use the Article Wizard to create a draft.
Create the article, including all your references, making sure you adhere to the Manual of Style and our article layout guidelines. Base the article on what the references say, rather than on what you know.
Once you believe that your draft meets Wikipedia's requirements, submit it for review by picking the "Submit your draft for review" button in the draft.
Be aware that many drafts are not accepted the first time, or even the second time they are submitted for review, for failing to adhere to our policies and guidelines. New articles by new users are particularly likely not to be accepted, due to new users' unfamiliarity with our rules. Consider gaining experience by editing existing articles before attempting to create new ones. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 13:25, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hello, Sabidecembermist. I'm afraid you have some fundamental misunderstandings about Wikipedia. If people who have no connection with your movie have published significant material about it in reliable places, then Wikipedia may have an article about it; otherwise, no such article will be accepted, however it is written. An article should summarise what these independent sources have said about the movie: Wikipedia has no interest in what you or anybody else connected with the movie say or want to say about it. As you have a conflict of interest, you are strongly discouraged from creating or editing such an article. And finally, creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks on Wikipedia, and there really is no shortcut. --ColinFine (talk) 13:29, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template usage statistics

Is there a way to tell what pages a template is used on? I found this, which tells the total number of pages, but provides no information on which pages those are. TimothyJosephWood 15:59, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Go to the template page and click the "what links here" tool over in the left bar. RJFJR (talk) 16:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

...ever had a problem where the solution was so easy you looked right over it? TimothyJosephWood 16:31, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

...All the time... RJFJR (talk) 17:15, 14 December 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Where can I request visibility of edits to be removed?

Hi there!

I have noticed an edit made to a talk page - this one - which appears to publicly reveal personal information including phone number and email address. Is there a page to request that the visibility of this edit be hidden?

Thanks for your help, <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 16:44, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some Gadget Geek, I don't know if there is an official page, but I've done it anyway Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:51, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for oversight. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:56, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Why isn't WP:RFO designed to be used like WP:RFPP? <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 17:47, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Some Gadget Geek: If you want something hidden then discussing it in public is often bad. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copy/Pasted Material

I work for a library and have been assigned to create a Wikipedia page for our library. I've already stated the COI line at the beginning so everyone knows this. I've been given permission to list anything on our actual website on the Wikipedia. Yesterday the "history" portion on my draft Wikipedia pages was removed for copyright issues. I have direct permission from the person who wrote it up to use it on the page. Is there any way around this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AZimmermanDunedin (talk • contribs) 16:59, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AZimmermanDunedin. The way round it is not to use copyright material. While it is possible for the holder of the copyright (the library) to release it under a suitable licence (which will allow anybody to reuse it for any purpose, including commercial - see WP:donating copyright materials) material from an organisation's own website is almost never suitable for a Wikipedia article; because Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything that a subject says about themselves. If you want to write an article about your library, start by finding reliable independent sources which discuss your library at some length, and base your draft entirely on what they say (though in your own words, of course). If you can write a substantial article that way, then you can add some uncontroversial factual data (such as places and dates) from the library's own website. --ColinFine (talk) 17:31, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As your draft currently sits, I don't see why most of the material would stay. For instance, hours of operation is not generally in any of our articles. Nor are mission statements. I notice that you mentioned your COI, but I thought I'd point out both WP:COI as well as WP:OWN. That last one points out that the library will have no control over the content of the article about it. I don't mean to come off as harsh but I think that you and the rest of the staff should know what they're getting into. †dismas†|^(talk) 18:21, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great question -- but as others have said there are several issues with what you're trying to do, and here are some of my additions:

Wikipedia is not simply a collection of everything, even non-profits like Libraries. They must be able to establish their own notability to be included through reliable third-party sources. Right now, while it appears that Dunedin Public Library is a fine and respectable library, there is nothing which established is to be included in wikipedia. I suggest you take a look at WP:CORP which spends more time on this topic.
The information you're copying is written in a promotional tone (See WP:SPAM), which is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. And correcting it isn't simply swapping out taboo words. Rather a complete rewrite of what is trying to be stated. And if I was to go through to remove the promotional and non-encyclopedic content there would be virtually nothing left of the article.

While this comparison might be extreme, take a look at Library of Congress or perhaps on a less grand scale, look at Geisel Library. Those contain examples of the type of encyclopedic information we're looking for in order to be included here. Tiggerjay (talk) 20:52, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are watermarked images allowed on the WikiMedia Commons, if they've been released through the proper licensing?

If I find a photographer on say, Flickr, who has watermarks on all of their photos, but is willing to release one under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 2.0 Generic License, would I be allowed to upload the photo to the WikiMedia Commons? Or would I have to request that the photographer upload a non-watermarked version? Removing the watermark seems like it would be too much to ask, but I'm not clear on how to understand WP:Watermark. Would I be allowed to upload the original, watermarked version of a photo to the Commons, if I also uploaded a second version with the watermark cropped out? --Jpcase (talk) 19:46, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Watermarks are discouraged and image without such mark should be uploaded instead. Also, images which are published under CCA licenses are rarely watermarked in the first place, causing some concerns over the actual license status. Tiggerjay (talk) 20:36, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Tiggerjay: I haven't actually found any watermarked images that have been published under Creative Commons, which as you say, would be strange. But I occasionally contact photographers on Flickr, asking them if they'd be willing to release a photo of their's for use on Wikipedia. So it would be good to know whether asking about watermarked photos is worthwhile or not. When you say "discouraged", how strict is that? Would it still be allowed, so long as the photo was properly licensed? Or could I simply download the photo from Flickr onto my computer, crop out the watermark, and then upload the non-watermarked version to the Commons? --Jpcase (talk) 00:12, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jpcase: The policy on this can be found here: c:COM:Exif#Watermark. It is nor forbidden per say. But it is strongly discouraged. If you do upload an image with a watermark please ensure you tag it with the proper template. This can be found here: c:template:watermark. --Majora (talk) 00:21, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) In the strictest sense, as long as it is licensed properly, technically you can crop the image, and share it because that sort of transformation and reuse would be permitted under a CC BY-SA 2.0 license. And so the preference would likely go: a fully unwatermarked followed by a cropped image if necessary... This is presuming this image is watermarked on the lower corner, as is typical of branded images. Tiggerjay (talk) 00:23, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

HELP!

Nothing to see here. Ramister should email ArbCom at arbcom-l

lists.wikimedia.org to discuss the block. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 22:33, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I got blocked but I don't know why. Can you please tell me what I did wrong or get me unblocked? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:374A:8F70:450B:826:8EF5:F3A1 (talk) 21:14, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We could tell you, if you gave us your username. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:16, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ramister — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:374A:8F70:450B:826:8EF5:F3A1 (talk • contribs)

Ramister (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) was blocked by User:Opabinia regalis with the reason {{OversightBlock}}. It's unlikely that anyone but the few editors with WP:OVERSIGHT permission will be able to discuss this with you. Deli nk (talk) 21:25, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please email arbcom-l

lists.wikimedia.org. Thanks. Opabinia regalis (talk) 21:28, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You will also find some helpful information at WP:GAB regarding to appealing the block, but as for why, using the email method listed above is the best way to go. Tiggerjay (talk) 21:54, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I meant what did I do wrong on what page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:374A:8F70:450B:826:8EF5:F3A1 (talk • contribs)

Sorry but this isn't going to be discussed here on a public page. Please use the email as advised. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 22:26, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry, I didn't realize that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:374A:8F70:450B:826:8EF5:F3A1 (talk) 22:29, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Linking honorifics like "Sir"

A minor disagreement has appeared on the "Cottingley Fairies" article, wherein my edit to change the link "Sir Arthur Conan Doyle" to appear as "Sir Arthur Conan Doyle" was reverted (I was by also told by a frankly similarly-experienced editor that I must not have any "idea what (I'm) doing"). I've looked through WP:MOSLINK and WP:NAMES, but I can't seem to find anything about including honorifics in links. Anyone care to weigh in? –Matthew - (talk) 22:08, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well possibly the problem lies in that you edited to change the link. It was fine before, it was fine after, and I myself might well have rolled back it with an edit summary of "Reverted per WP:BRD, just roiling of the text to no gain, make your case on the talk page as to why your version is objectively better" which I think you would have been hard-pressed to do.

On the merits, I wouldn't consider an honorific to be an irreducable part of a name, no, such that it must always be included in all mentions of the person and be a necessary part of any link to the person. I doubt that there is a written rule about this (but there might be).

Don't worry about the nasty edit summary, it was from User:Eric Corbett who is generally acknowledged to have been weaned on a pickle. Being insulted by him is a badge of honor (which many carry). You didn't do anything wrong. You just made an edit which another editor disagreed with, and that editor reverted it, as as his right. That he was mean about it is too bad (and not his right) but don't overly worry about it. Herostratus (talk) 22:26, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But it's quite alright for you to make a personal attack? Dual standards apply obviously. J3Mrs (talk) 23:15, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 15

2017 NCAA Division I FBS Template

Can you please create the 2017 NCAA Division I FBS football season template please I'm asking for a request to create it. But I Don't know how to make a template.68.102.57.28 (talk) 00:08, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I told you this the last time you asked for a template. You do a search for "Template:whatever" and when it says that it doesn't exist, you create it. Same as an article. I also told you that you need an account. †dismas†|^(talk) 00:20, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's not even 2017 yet. Once again, please just wait and someone will do it. And posting here won't get it created any quicker, as I don't there's many American sports fans who watch the help desk. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:18, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Where to request image renaming

The image at File:Dixon_Street,_Wellington,_Australia.jpg has an incorrect title - Wellington is the capital of New Zealand and has not (nor will ever hopefully be :D) part of Australa.

Where is the correct place to request that an image be renamed? Apologies if I've missed this somewhere in the FAQ or somewhere else, I did do a quick search for this question but was unable to find the answer!

Thanks Albeetle (talk) 01:30, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Asking for help here is as good a place as any. I've renamed it to File:Dixon Street, Wellington, New Zealand.jpg; links to the old name will still work as redirects. Bencherlite ^Talk 01:39, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cool; thanks! Albeetle (talk) 01:46, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Beit She'an

This is in regard to the beginnings of Beth Shean after the War of Israel's Independence. The city was inhabited by about 50 Holocaust survivors and it was not settled by North Africans from Morocco until much later. Noah Merdinger was the founder of the Beth Shean Museum and the Mayor of Beth Shean. WE had waves of immigrants from Turkey, Yemen, Morocco, Iraq and Iran and then again with an influx of Moroccans. But, it was Europeans who were the first settlers in Beth Shean and Noah Merdinger cleaned up the city and used law and order. He was the one responsible for the first archeological digs which no one seems to mention. He dug up the Roman Road using unemployment laborers and founded the Museum and was responsible for having bus loads of tourists from every where. There was no money in the fifties to unearth the Roman Theater which Noah Merdinger attempted to do with very little sometimes with just a hunting knife. Someone from the nearby Kibutz then decided that he could do better. Money talks. and you know the rest, but, the city was first and foremost settled by Holocaust survivors. Sincerely Suzanne Merdinger Chemtob --2601:581:8401:27A0:48A8:1193:1A3D:5991 (talk) 04:05, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ms Merdinger: Thank you for your interest in the article on Beit She'an. You may edit the article or post your comments on that article's talk page. If you do either of these, however, please ensure that you quote reliable published sources in support of any information you would like to have added or modified, as we require article content to be verifiable and thus we do not accept personal knowledge as a sufficient basis for what goes into articles: Noyster (talk), 12:11, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

INDEXING ARTICLES TO SEARCH ENGINES

Could you please tell me how to have a wikipedia article that I authored about COMEDS appear when searching for the topic on typical search engines like Google? A search currently lists all references to COMEDS (including the wiki2 and wikivisual entries) with the unique exception of the wikipedia article. Even searching for "COMEDS wikipedia" does not result in display of the wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adalbertus1 (talk • contribs) 05:28, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is useful if a question includes a wikilink to the relevant article. I guess that you might be referring to Committee of Chiefs of Military Medical Services in NATO? The problem is that a change was introduced in October which NOINDEXes each new page until it has been patrolled through the New page patrol process, see WP:NOINDEX. There are currently some 14000 pages awaiting patrol. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:20, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article Not Indexed

Hi,

There is a Wikipedia article that was created about three weeks ago but does not appear to have been indexed by Google and does not show up in SERP.

Also, site:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Beckman returns no results.

The page shows that Spiders have crawled the page many multiple times.

Any thoughts, tips or changes to make the article Richard_Beckman show up in Google searches?

Thanks for your thoughts! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alicetomccinci (talk • contribs) 14:58, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think your answer may lie in the above query. - X201 (talk) 15:03, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just a hunch and nothing to do with your problem, but having a read of WP:PLAINSIMPLECOI may help pass the time while you're waiting for it to appear on Google. - X201 (talk) 15:19, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Alicetomccinci subsequently added {{INDEX|visible = yes}} to the page. I have deleted it as Template:INDEX clearly states this template "should only be used on User and User talk pages", whereas this is an article. We seem to have a COI editor desperate to get "their" article listed on Google.
I'm not saying that I agree, or disagree, with the change regarding No-indexing of unreviewed articles, but if getting round the change is that easy, it needs to be reconsidered. - Arjayay (talk) 19:04, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My reading of Wikipedia talk:Controlling search engine indexing#Possible updates needed is that the magic word is ignored, so User:Alicetomccinci was wasting his/her time. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:09, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

HELP: Safety concern

This is a plea for assistance made by a newly created anonymous account. My real identity appears in a wikipedia article that contains numerous factual errors and semi-slanderous things. A few years ago, I complained to the wiki foundation abt this and was told to create an account and correct it. Done. Anyway, one of the wikipedia editors has some sort of vendetta against me and is, I believe, mentally unstable. Having forced me to connect my wiki account to my real world identity, they have continued to attack me. Within the past 48 hours, that editor (who has been cyberstalking me) has posted on their non-wiki blog attacks on my person along with graphic Notsafeonwikipedia (talk) 15:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)and explicit calls for violence against my person. I would like to know how to go about having this person banned from wikipedia but I would also like to learn that without revealing myself as I am concerned for my safety.[reply]

If a Wikipedia editor is harassing you either on or off Wikipedia, you can contact the Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee privately at arbcom-l@lists.wikimedia.org and they can investigate the matter while keeping your identity confidential. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:21, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also emergency@wikimedia.org, and see Wikipedia:Responding to threats of harm. TimothyJosephWood 15:26, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can one editor edited another editor like this?

Reference: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Brandon_Iron_(2nd_nomination)&diff=prev&oldid=754109258 One editor (86.17.222.157) that voted "Delete" on an AfD removed bold text from another editor's reason for voting "Keep." I am the editor that voted "Keep." Is that type of editing allowed? My first inclination is just to do an undo, but being a newbie I thought I should check first and see what the guideline might be. I used the bold text for a reason, to emphasis that the original AfD resulted in a "Keep" resolution. The whole AfD is mighty suspicious as I explained in my reason for a "Keep" vote. Zootsuit1941 (talk) 17:57, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zootsuit1941, bolding in AfD is usually used as a way to identify individual !votes. Removing the bold makes it clear that you are referring to someone else's contribution, and that these are not all individual !votes cast by individuals in that particular ongoing discussion. Also, as I understand it, it might screw up software that keeps track of AfD participation. TimothyJosephWood 18:10, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The edit summary for the edit in question made the reason clear. There is no need to emphasise that the original AfD resulted in a "Keep" resolution, as the closing admin will look at that before closing. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

TimothyJosephWood, David Biddulph Thanks for the feedback, I'll leave the "unbolding" as is. But in my defense, there was no "obviously a delibarate action because the equivalent "delete"s were not bolded" on my part, as there were no "equivalent Delete" votes in the original AfD to bold for emphasis. Zootsuit1941 (talk) 18:35, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Zootsuit1941: in the paragraph you wrote, you use the word "keep" four times, all bolded, and "delete" three times, none of them bolded. I am not surprised that another editor assumed this was deliberate. Maproom (talk) 20:24, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maproom Yes, it was deliberate, but not as in deliberate to deceive any other editor, the closing administrator or software that keeps track of AfD participation; I'm not that smart. I was merely trying to make the point that ALL the votes in the original AfD were "Keep" votes, and those votes were in bold. And there were NO (as in zero, none) "Delete" votes in the original AfD, so no bolding required on "Delete.". Absolutely NO subterfuge on my part. But I agree with TimothyJosephWood and David Biddulph that it wasn't a good use of bolding text. I do think it's a stretch to think that it might deceive other editors, the closing administrator; although I have no idea about the software that keeps track of AfD participation. Zootsuit1941 (talk) 21:26, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The !votes aren't counted by software, they are assessed by the closing administrator, who is generally smart and experienced. I have seen various attempts at misleading an administrator, but I've never seen one succeed. I understand that you weren't trying to mislead, but I don't blame someone for the mistaken idea that you were. Maproom (talk) 21:35, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. Probably could have been a bit more WP:AGF there. TimothyJosephWood 18:38, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My own take on this is that I hardly ever (never) edit another editor's comments on Talk pages etc unless it is an obvious case of vandalism. I think the IP was wrong to have unbolded your comments in the first place, but instead, should have entered into discussion with you about this and asked you to change your own edit. This is especially the case because you are a newcomer to WP. Happy editing. DrChrissy ^(talk) 18:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree DrChrissy. Furthermore, it is unsettling that the edit summary accuses the editor of an "obvious delibarate (sic) action"; which could be seen by other editors that Zootsuit1941 was reverted for either vandalism or improper usage of WP. It could have been handled better. Maineartists (talk) 19:44, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DrChrissy], Maineartists Thanks for you comments. Based on Maineartist's comment, I went back and did an "undo" on 86.17.222.157's unbolding edit, and redid my paragraph using italics on the word "Keep" rather than bold. I hope that is satisfactory to everyone, including TimothyJosephWood, David Biddulph and Maproom. Zootsuit1941 (talk) 21:46, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. You have not made an earth-shattering mistake here, but the usual way of dealing with your own edits that are problematic is to use ~~strike through~~ the existing text and then adding what you want to change. This is so other editors can follow what is happening. My own view, which is not a strong one, is simply not to emphasise the words in any way. DrChrissy ^(talk) 22:24, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DrChrissy At this point, should I go back and change it to use the strikethroughs, or just let it go? I can also delete the italics emphasis. Zootsuit1941 (talk) 22:35, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(after edit conflict) It would have been nice to know that I was being discussed here, but I acknowledge that I should also have put a message on Zootsuit1941's talk page about what I was doing - I didn't go to check that that person was a new editor so might need more gentle handling than someone more experienced. And I apologise profusely to the English language for misspelling "deliberate". Unlike other edits it's not possible to go back and fix such things in edit summaries. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 22:40, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To zoot:I wouldn't stress too much about it. If someone takes issue with it, just assume good faith and do your best to get along. That's how all this works after all. Also, resisting the urge to hit the undo button is an essential skill here.

To the IP: Well...this is one of the advantages of registering an account. We would have certainly pinged you to the conversation, but you can't notify IPs. Welcome to the party. TimothyJosephWood 22:43, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To Zoot: As Timothy says above, perhaps best just left alone now. In the scheme of things on here, these have been minor matters. Please feel free to contact me if you have any other concerns about what you should/not do. DrChrissy ^(talk) 22:54, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What links here

What determines the order of the pages in the "what links here" page? There doesn't seem to be an obvious pattern. As a follow up, if this may be too technical, where the hell should I ask this question at? TimothyJosephWood 22:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A good place to ask technical questions is here:Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Best to wait a few minutes to see if it is answered here first. --S Philbrick (Talk) 23:02, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I always understood that it was ordered by date of creation of the pages, so that the newest pages will be at the end of the "what links here" list. Bencherlite ^Talk 23:09, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's doesn't seem to be date. In case it helps, I'm looking at this which is used in about 3k pages. TimothyJosephWood 23:34, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The first page on that list is Talk:Exponential function, created 18 August 2001. The second page is Talk:1st century, created 10 August 2002. The third page on that list is Talk:Northern and Southern dynasties, created 20 August 2002. The final page on that list is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive940 created 8 December 2016. As I said, it's ordered by date of creation of the pages, so the oldest pages are listed first (no matter when the link was added to that particular page) and the newest pages are listed last. Is that clearer now? Bencherlite ^Talk 23:42, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And now the final page on the list is User:Bencherlite/sandbox9, created 1 minute after my previous comment here. Bencherlite ^Talk 23:45, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen other things have an effect; I can't remember what they are. I thought deletion and undeletion would interrupt the flow, so I created User:Nyttend/sandbox test with the same content as Belcherlite's sandbox (so mine was last, and his next-to-last), I then deleted his sandbox, and finally I restored it. Once again, mine is last and Bencherlite's next-to-last, so clearly undeletion doesn't restart the clock. Nyttend (talk) 05:05, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the ordering is by Page ID, which you can see as part of the page information. For many years the Page ID has been assigned sequentially, so the order matches the order of page creation. But for the very oldest pages it can be different. For this help desk page, the first two entries listed are Talk:Afghanistan/Archive 6 (ID = 823, created in 2002) and then Talk:Abraham Lincoln (ID=2301, created in 2001). -- John of Reading (talk) 11:40, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What's going on here?

I added a CN tag to this article, which automatically added this category to the bottom: 'Articles with unsourced statements from 15 December 2016'. First of all, I've never seen this happen before; secondly, the category is a redlink, and I can't imagine that I'm the only person who's added a CN tag today. What's going on here -- and can somebody fix it? --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:C878:CDFF:2DE:659D (talk) 22:58, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it. The date should just be December 2016, not 15 December 2016. It's not broken down that much! ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 23:06, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. (Interesting how that category mysteriously appeared, and just as mysteriously disappeared) --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:C878:CDFF:2DE:659D (talk) 00:14, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:HIDDENCAT. Maintenance categories such as Category:Articles with unsourced statements from December 2016 are always created with code that hides them, so the only way you can see them on an article is if you've checked "Show hidden categories" in your preferences, and people editing with no username don't have the ability to change preferences. However, nonexistent categories can't be hidden (if you add the code to a nonexistent category page, it creates the category), so that's why you could see it. Nyttend (talk) 13:21, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thx; that makes sense. --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:0:0:0:1 (talk) 17:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help with page move

Hello. Could someone move some pages please? As follows: CMA1 → CMA1 (gene). Note that the target page exists as a redirect. The move has been proposed on the Talk:CMA1#Page move to 'CMA1 (gene)' talk page with no response after 38 days. That will then free up CMA1 to be a disaggregation page as follows:

'''CMA1''' or '''CMA 1''' can refer to: 

* [[CMA1 (gene)|CMA1]], a gene that encodes for the chymase enzyme in humans
* [[United Nations Climate Change conference#2016: COP 22/CMP 12/CMA 1, Marrakech, Morocco|CMA 1]], the first meeting of Parties to the Paris Agreement, held in Marrakech on 7–18{{nbsp}}November 2016

Articles should really not be titled with acronyms in the first place. Many thanks in advance. RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 23:10, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:TWODABS says that there shouldn't be a disambiguation page with just two entries, so I'm not going to do that for you. In any event, it's hardly surprising that nobody's commented on your move proposal on such an obscure page. Try listing it at WP:RM and await further input. Bencherlite ^Talk 23:16, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Even if a DAB with two entries was warranted, CMA is really an obscure term, so I would argue the gene is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for CMA1 anyways. I could not even find what it is an acronym for (if anything). At least this told me it means a meeting of the parties to the Paris agreement. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 10:12, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

December 16

Using Talk pages as a link dump

Is there any project page regarding the use of article Talk pages as a link dump, e.g. for potential sources? I recently came across a mess of some 50 completely disorganized URLs scattered through a Talk page, with no context or discussion or even user signatures. I formatted them all into a *list, but that’s still a list of over 50 URLs. What’s the best practice for this, if there is one? —67.14.236.50 (talk) 03:53, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That sort of research stuff should be in a user sandbox, not on talk Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:08, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know; I use talk pages for that quite often, especially if I'm collaborating with another user, or the page is at risk of deletion and I don't have time to actually work the sources in. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:43, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ONUnicorn: Pages full of nothing but URLs? A few or a dozen, I could understand. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 20:32, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite nothing but URLs. Talk:Hammerton Killick is one where I plunked down a bunch of sources while I was working on the article; mostly ones I didn't have access to when I discovered them, but wanted to save for a trip to a library. There are about 26, along with notes about what I thought they could contribute. Talk:Browning Hill also has a list of potential sources for expanding the article, put there in a different situation. Talk:Legal history also has a (very short) list, from a time when I was considering substantially revising it but real life kept me occupied. Talk:Charles Augustus Rosenheimer Campbell also has a list from a time when I came across it working on a different article and thought it could be expanded. Even Talk:Paleolithic diet has a source that I came across and thought would be useful to people working on that article, but didn't want to work in myself. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:57, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the examples! Here’s the one I found: [2]. Since organized into a single list and collapsed: [3]. Still seems an unreasonable amount to me, especially if they aren’t removed or marked after use, and I find myself agreeing with User:Jimfbleak; but no one’s suggesting total removal, so I’ll leave that list be. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 21:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Change photo image

How can I change and update photo of Maria Elena Gonzalez Calderon. I have permission to change and have copyright — Preceding unsigned comment added by Megc70 (talk • contribs) 04:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Megc70. It depends what you mean by "I have copyright". If you own the copyright of the picture you want to use (which probably means that you took the picture yourself, but there may be other cases) then you can explicitly licence it as you upload it. In any other case, you can upload it only if the copyright holder (not you) explicitly releases it under a licence such as CC-BY-SA (which will allow anybody to reuse the picture for any purpose, even commercially) - permission to use it on Wikipedia is not sufficient. If the copyright owner is willing to licence it, see Donating copyright materials for what they (not you) must do. If they are not, then you cannot use the picture on Wikipedia. To do the upload, if it is a new version of the same picture, go to commons:File:María Elena González Calderón 2014-04-27 17-46.jpg and pick "upload a new version of this file"; but if it is a different picture, use the upload wizard to upload it to commons. --ColinFine (talk) 17:51, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing errors on List of museums in Devon

Reference help requested. Could you please assist, as new to Wikipedia Thanks, Torrington Lad (talk) 07:31, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The error message said "Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).", with the words "help page" in blue to indicate that it was a wikilink, in this case to Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input which gives a clear explanation of the problem. A bot has subsequently corrected the problem with this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:34, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance to do edits in Wikipedia

HI, I want to create a page in Wikipedia, for that I need to be Auto confirmed which would require me to do some edits, I am a new user but a regular Wiki follower,can you please assist me as how can I make edits here in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SriB (talk • contribs) 12:46, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SriB: if your objective is to improve Wikipedia, it is a mistake for you already to think of creating a new article. Article creation is one of the most difficult tasks in Wikipedia. Instead it would be much more fruitful to do some of the many easier things, such as correcting typos, improving grammar, and adding references. If however your objective is to publicise something, you should instead use some other site, such as Facebook. Wikipedia should not be used for publicity. Maproom (talk) 13:18, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you don't need to be autoconfirmed to create a Wikipedia article, unless the article has been create protected that way. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:16, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @SriB: and welcome to the Help Desk. In addition to Maproom's always excellent advice, if you check your Talk page (User talk:SriB), I have left a selection of links that should contain what you need to get started. Start with "Introduction" and "Getting started". I trust they will be helpful, and when you have specific questions please come back and ask. --Gronk Oz (talk) 17:23, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing errors on Paper tiger

Reference help requested. What are the specific "errors" and suggested fix? A ri gi bod (talk) 16:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC) Thanks, A ri gi bod (talk) 16:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@A ri gi bod: It says: "More than one of |author1= and |last1= specified." Remove the "author1" parameter to fix the referencing. —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 16:30, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear A ri gi bod, you cannot have both "Last1=" and "Author1=". You have to remove one of the two. Taketa (talk) 17:07, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@A ri gi bod: When specifying the author in a cite, you have two options: either put their full name in "author", or split their "first" and "last" names. But you can't specifry both. --Gronk Oz (talk) 17:26, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The contrarian in me suggests that the correct 'fix' for this particular error is to delete both author parameters. The document itself does not identify an author so making the assumption that it is Henry Kissinger and the United States Government is, in my mind, inappropriate.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:33, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lady-Gaga-Perfect-Illusion-sample.ogg

Hi all I just uploaded a file linked above in the Ogg format adhering to WP:SAMPLE, and somehow it is showing a big screen image in the file, which is being transcluded in the linked article also. Please help as usually that big image does not come in articles ala File:Madonna - Living for Love.ogg. Please help. —IB ^{[ Poke ]} 17:15, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no expert on this, but it is to do with how the OGG file has been produced. Your file is an "Ogg multiplexed audio/video file", and it's that (blank) video component that is trying to display. Compare it to File:Accordion chords-01.ogg, which is an "Ogg Vorbis sound file" and does not have the problem. Sorry this isn't the solution, but hopefully it might be a step towards it... --Gronk Oz (talk) 17:45, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do I have to have consensus to remove a screenshot?

On the page Murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward, there is a screenshot or image I wanted to remove. I started a section on the talk page of Murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward titled "Would anyone object to me removing the screenshot?". I have wrote my opinion several times about wanting to remove the screenshot, but an editor named George Ho is just adamant that it stay. I don't know much about copyright, but I don't know if the screenshot is copyrighted or not since it was caputered from liveleak, which liveleak could have gotten the video from news station, which would own the footage, or who knows where. I personally just think the screenshot looks like it's there for shock value and makes Wikipedia look like a tabloid. The editor, George Ho wanted to know why I'm so interested in the image, and if I'm interested in the front page of Wikipedia? He then looked up my IP and wrote on the talk page that I'm from Tennessee. I don't understand what my being from Tennessee has to do with anything? If I remove the screenshot/image, the worse that will happen is that someone would revert me, correct? Can someone just read the talk page for Murders of Alison Parker and Adam West and tell me if I need consensus to remove the screenshot? Thank you. 2601:483:100:CB54:2921:709C:47A2:195E (talk) 23:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 23:22, 16 December 2016 edit 2601:483:100:cb54:2921:709c:47a2:195e (talk) →‎Do I have to have consensus to remove a screenshot?: new section ← Previous edit		Revision as of 23:23, 16 December 2016 edit undo 2601:483:100:cb54:2921:709c:47a2:195e (talk) →‎Do I have to have consensus to remove a screenshot? Next edit →
Line 377:		Line 377:
	== Do I have to have consensus to remove a screenshot? ==		== Do I have to have consensus to remove a screenshot? ==

	On the page Murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward, there is a screenshot or image I wanted to remove. I started a section on the talk page of Murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward titled "Would anyone object to me removing the screenshot?". I have wrote my opinion several times about wanting to remove the screenshot, but an editor named George Ho is just adamant that it stay. I don't know much about copyright, but I don't know if the screenshot is copyrighted or not since it was caputered from liveleak, which liveleak could have gotten the video from news station, which would own the footage, or who knows where. I personally just think the screenshot looks like it's there for shock value and makes Wikipedia look like a tabloid. The editor, George Ho wanted to know why I'm so interested in the image, if I'm interested in the front page of Wikipedia? He then looked up my IP and wrote on the talk page that I'm from Tennessee. I don't understand what my being from Tennessee has to do with anything? If I remove the screenshot/image, the worse that will happen is that someone would revert me, correct? Can someone just read the talk page for Murders of Alison Parker and Adam West and tell me if I need consensus to remove the screenshot? Thank you. [[Special:Contributions/2601:483:100:CB54:2921:709C:47A2:195E\|2601:483:100:CB54:2921:709C:47A2:195E]] ([[User talk:2601:483:100:CB54:2921:709C:47A2:195E\|talk]]) 23:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)		On the page Murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward, there is a screenshot or image I wanted to remove. I started a section on the talk page of Murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward titled "Would anyone object to me removing the screenshot?". I have wrote my opinion several times about wanting to remove the screenshot, but an editor named George Ho is just adamant that it stay. I don't know much about copyright, but I don't know if the screenshot is copyrighted or not since it was caputered from liveleak, which liveleak could have gotten the video from news station, which would own the footage, or who knows where. I personally just think the screenshot looks like it's there for shock value and makes Wikipedia look like a tabloid. The editor, George Ho wanted to know why I'm so interested in the image, and if I'm interested in the front page of Wikipedia? He then looked up my IP and wrote on the talk page that I'm from Tennessee. I don't understand what my being from Tennessee has to do with anything? If I remove the screenshot/image, the worse that will happen is that someone would revert me, correct? Can someone just read the talk page for Murders of Alison Parker and Adam West and tell me if I need consensus to remove the screenshot? Thank you. [[Special:Contributions/2601:483:100:CB54:2921:709C:47A2:195E\|2601:483:100:CB54:2921:709C:47A2:195E]] ([[User talk:2601:483:100:CB54:2921:709C:47A2:195E\|talk]]) 23:22, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

v t e Wikipedia help pages
*Visit the Teahouse* or the Help desk for an interactive Q & A forum. FAQs (?) Reference desks (?) Noticeboards (?) Cheatsheet (?) Directories (?)**
About Wikipedia (?)	Administration Purpose Principles Policies and guidelines What Wikipedia is not Disclaimer (parental advice) Making requests Who writes Wikipedia?
Help for readers (?)	FAQ Books Copyright Glossary Mobile access Navigation Other languages Searching Students Viewing media
Contributing to Wikipedia (?)	Advice for young editors Avoiding common mistakes Etiquette Simplified Manual of Style Simplified rule-set "Ignore all rules" "The rules are principles" Style-tips Tip of the day Your first article (article wizard)
Getting started (?)	Why create an account? Introductions by topic Graphics tutorials Picture tutorial IRC (live chat) tutorial VisualEditor user guide
Dos and don'ts (?)	Accessibility Biographies Biographies (living) Categorization Consensus Discussions Disambiguation Images Leads Links Lists References Tables Titles (of articles)
How-to pages and information pages (?)	Appealing blocks Article deletion Categories Citations/references Referencing for beginners Citation Style 1 Cite errors References and page numbers Convert Diff Editing Minor edit toolbar edit conflict Find sources Files Footnotes Image deletion Infoboxes Linking (link color) Logging in Merging Page name Renaming pages Redirect Passwords Email confirmation Reverting Simple vandalism cleanup Talk pages (archiving simple archiving) User contributions WP search protocol
Coding (?)	Wiki markup Barcharts Calculations Characters Columns Elevation Hidden text HTML Lists Magic words Music symbols Sections Sounds Tables Templates Transclusion URL Visual files
Directories (?)	Abbreviations Contents (Encyclopedia proper) Departments Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Guidelines Manual of Style Policies Tasks Tips Tools
Missing Manual Ask for help on your talk page (?)