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.
• 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.

Ask a question

April 23

Help

I just wanna ask that is it right to make a social media site of Wikipedia with @list.Wikimedia.org email address or is there another email address used for it. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 06:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia is most definitely not a social media site. See WP:NOTSOCIAL. While you can link your account with an email address (and I see that you have done), we don't give out Wikimedia addresses for people to use. Rojomoke (talk) 11:39, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

False/wrong information to the page, also take action those users who input false information

I am from The Daily Star Bangladesh, largest leading newspaper of Bangladesh. I need an help regarding The_Daily_Star_(Bangladesh) wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Star_(Bangladesh) Officially I am complaining that some people edit/update with false, wrong, untrusted information to the wikipedia page of The Daily Star Bangladesh. May be they are doing intentional by using bdnews source link. But bdnews is not a newspaper and its not a trusted news source. Although I remove the false information but again and again they update the page, You can get the information of The Daily Star from its website, http://www.thedailystar.net/about-us

They uses the following heading with the paragraphs, "Controversy", Backing of the 2007, etc (see the page history)

Here are the false Information: Section Controversy as on 22 April 2017 revision:

---

Backing of the 2007

In 2016, speaking at a panel discussion on ATN News, editor Mahfuz Anam admitted to long-running allegations that he collaborated with the military-led caretaker government of 2007 and ran false stories fed by the military intelligence outfit DGFI, aimed at maligning a former prime minister of Bangladesh. The Daily Star is widely criticized for 'backing' the army-installed government, led by former bureaucrat Fakhruddin Ahmad and armed with sweeping emergency powers to curb media and civil rights.[citation needed]

It is claimed that at the initiative of the Centre for Policy Dialogue, The Daily Star and its sister concern Bangla language daily Prothom Alo made the ground welcoming an unconstitutional government with a campaign for 'depoliticisation' through citizens' dialogue across the country, critics say. Previously he had denied those allegations. But on this occasion he finally admitted it saying it was his biggest mistake. He however tried to defend himself by saying that "everyone did it".[2]

This led to demands in parliament by several lawmakers calling for the arrest and trial of Mahfuz Anam and the owner, Latifur Rahman. Lawmaker Fazle Noor Taposh, standing up on the point of order:

Recently, Mafuz Anam admitted in a Television Talkshow aired through the ATN News that the Daily Star published some fabricated and untrue news during the 1/11 political turmoil . . . It 's definitely the violation of Constitution and a sedition case can be lodged in this connection.

[10] The lawmakers claimed that Mahfuz Anam involved himself in a conspiracy in implementing a blueprint during the1/11 changeover and demanded disclosing the "misdeeds" of Mahfuz Anam to the people.

---

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kolotan (talk • contribs) 12:02, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

You said in your title you wanted "action to be taken" against the users who added that information. Could you clarify what you mean by that? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 12:12, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

There are a couple of references in that section to rival publications. Wikipedia just reports what is written in WP:Reliable sources. It does not get involved in disputes between newspapers. I have no idea whether http://bdnews24.com/ or the other newspaper are more or less reliable than the Daily Star, but if you want balance, then find some references that support whatever you think the article should say. Have you declared your WP:Conflict of interest in this matter? Dbfirs 15:26, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Barons in Scotland

Resolved

 – Skamecrazy123 (talk) 12:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Just to let you know that almost every second reference is poorly done on this page. the citations look to me to be verifiable - but are done poorly (and not by me!). Cheerio101.182.219.133 (talk) 12:32, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

"Done poorly" meaning... what? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 12:37, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

OP is probably referring to the many "access date" errors. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:44, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Ah, I got it. I'll go fix them. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 12:46, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Bot Generated Issue-- Please help

Hello there,

Someone created a wikipedia page for me and it was deleted. It's fine; I respect the Wikipedia community.

However, now when people search for my name, it shows this link: http://deletedwiki.com/index.php?title=Wassim_Rasamny

How can I take off this link from deletedwiki.com. It is hurting my reputation in different ways as someone whose reputation is everything.

Is there a way to challenge this? Is there a way to remove it? Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheRoughEditor (talk • contribs) 12:36, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

The only way I can think of is to contact the admin on his talk page and ask if he can delete the page. Here's his talk page - [1]. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 12:40, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

deletedwiki.com has nothing to do with wikipedia.org (other than that they make a point of archiving articles that we delete) so there is nothing we can do about it. RJFJR (talk) 14:30, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

The question was "what can I do"? Not "what can you do". It was a simple question for advice. Maineartists (talk) 14:45, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Which was given. There is nothing he can do other than contact the admin of that Wiki and ask for them to take it down. --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 14:47, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Jodie Kenny

Hi, I've just merged Jodie Schulz into Jodie Kenny (as they're the same person). Would someone mind checking that I've done everything right? Red Fiona (talk) 12:50, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi Redfiona99, the merge seems alright on the face of it, as far as the content being merged is concerned. However, the lead section in Jodie Kenny is not well balanced with the rest of the article – as it contains material that probably should be shifted below in the sections of personal life and field hockey career. MOS:LEAD would give you good pointers on how you could format the lead section. Thanks. Lourdes 14:49, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

A couple of the later steps had been missed (per WP:FMERGE). I have fixed. Eagleash (talk) 15:41, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I didn't know how to find the talk page for Jode Schulz after I'd merged it. (And I will now get on with the tidying of the article, as I can now rest easy that I've not screwed the merge up completely :) ) Red Fiona (talk) 16:32, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

If you search for Jodie Schulz (or click that link) it will take you to 'Kenny'. At the top of the page just under the heading you will find a tiny blue link to the redirect. Or the redirect page should show up in your contributions. If you follow the steps at WP:FMERGE, merging is not as awkward as it might appear at first sight. Eagleash (talk) 16:54, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

/* Cover versions */ Denied

I contributed to Pop Musik song page under "Cover Versions" about the cover by Fuzzbox. It was removed and I received a message saying it was not conducive to the encyclopedia format ...something. WHY are the other cover versions relevant, but not Fuzzbox's??! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C4AC:EBF0:5D78:3477:8628:EB93 (talk) 14:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello, unfortunately your additions (or at least one of them did) linked to commercial sites and a reliable source was not provided. Eagleash (talk) 15:44, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Editors don't like linking to the Amazon product description, because the item is also for sale there, and so people put in Amazon links to help sell their song, and we are wary of that. Also your adding "is available on iTunes and Amazon" probably triggered somebody's tilt-o-meter -- we don't include material on where to buy stuff in our articles.

Discogs is an alternative site I use. It has lots of music data, is considered reasonably reliable I think, and since they don't sell anything you don't have that problem. The link for that song is https://www.discogs.com/Fuzzbox-PopMuzik/release/5315033. Herostratus (talk) 16:06, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Uploading a KML File / Uploading A Google Map

I'm confused. I've created a Google Map (a path of an old canal) and am able to download that file to a KML. What I can't figure out is how to upload that KML to Wikipedia so that people who look at the page for that canal can see the map I have made.

I can tell from this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_U.S._Roads/Maps_task_force/Tutorial#Creating_a_KML_file) that I have to create a template which might be described here (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Attached_KML)

But I can't figure it out.

If you show me and I do it I'll document what I did. Tell me where to put that documentation too and others who come after me can follow the instructions we create.

Thanks.

This is of course not urgent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HighAtop94 (talk • contribs) 16:13, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

You don't need to upload the KML file. Re-read step 8. Open the file on your PC and copy the text in the file. - X201 (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

X201 Thanks for answering. But what file do I paste it into? Again, sorry for being dense, but if I edit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaware_and_Hudson_Canal where would I paste all of that KML text (I'm fine on downloading it and opening it in Notepad, and copying it). Sorry to not be getting this? -- Matt — Preceding unsigned comment added by HighAtop94 (talk • contribs) 00:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

No problem. You need to do step 10, create a sub-page. In your case you need to create Template:Attached KML/Delaware and Hudson Canal, click that red link and paste the text in there and save it. Important! read what step 11 says about formatting the KML text, i.e. don't. - X201 (talk) 07:55, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

April 23, 2017 "today's featured article": the "Shakespeare authorship question"

Today, April 23, 2017, is William Shakespeare's 453d birthday. I am sure I speak for many, many Shakespeare aficionados, scholars and performers in deploring some Wikipedia editor's idiotic, offensive and disrespectful choice of making the so-called "Shakespeare authorship question" today's featured article -- on his birthday of all days. William Shakespeare of Stratford and London, the greatest literary genius in the history of the English language, wrote Shakespeare's works, period. Of course Shakespeare has to be featured in Wikipedia when we come to this date, but what have you done? Instead of hosannas and praise and paeans to his genius, for his gifts to us, you have chosen to feature the delusional sneers and jibes of his utterly undeserved and unworthy enemies. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever to think Shakespeare did not write his works. Only some built-in evolutionary failures, to wit: human snobbery, contrariness and a dogged devotion to stupidity and unreason can account for anyone believing otherwise. There is no genuine authorship question of the kind those idiots imagine. Yes, Shakespeare had collaborators for a few works, but the Shakespeare-written parts of those works were written by William Shakespeare. The so-called authorship question is as much a real question as the flat earth question or how much astrology should guide your life choices question or just how does Elvis spend his days these days question. Since November, we Americans have been living in a tragicomedy, at the mercy of what the Hamburg Morgenpost called the "Horror-Clown", so institutional reassurances that our civilization is not totally collapsing are especially important. Wikipedia is itself a work of genius and a marvel of the modern world, a living, working monument to some of humankind's best attributes, so this insensitive failure is especially disturbing. I hope you will be much nicer to him next year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.115.108.11 (talk) 20:25, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

You think we're showing insensitivity to the feelings of someone who's been dead for 400 years? Covering the fact that there are some people who believe in something (indeed, with the prominent disclaimer that All but a few Shakespeare scholars and literary historians consider it a fringe belief) doesn't mean that Wikipedia is endorsing that belief. ‑ Iridescent 20:33, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

This is not relevant to the purpose of the Help Desk. We are here to answer questions about how to edit Wikipedia. Do you wish to edit Wikipedia? Are you encountering difficulty doing so?

(Addressing the complaint, the Shakespeare authorship question article had been worked on until it was judged worthy of WP:Featured article status. That made it eligible for the front page; the only question was the date. Wikipedia is featuring the article; it does not indicate endorsement of the subject of the article any more than Wikipedia was endorsing the Rock Springs massacre on 2 September 2009.) 71.41.210.146 (talk) 20:46, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Atlantis Location Hypothesis

Please look carefully at what is going on here. RAYLEIGH22 (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

I feel that my work on Plato's Atlantis from a scientific perspective is NOT being well received. Please, somebody, prove me wrong.

RAYLEIGH22 (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Please specify what you wish to be informed about or what you advocate for change in an (elaborate X because of Y) and (change X to Y) format, respectively so that your concerns can be better addressed. Thanks for understanding! Geo ^talk 21:26, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

For over a year, this editor has being trying to insert his original research into the article Location hypotheses of Atlantis. He has been warned over and over, but persists in arguing that since his changes are based on published articles, his original research is not original research. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:32, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Over a year? try since 2009. This is when I formulated my Atlantis Location Hypothesis. Google "Atlantis Location Hypothesis". when I try to edit Wikipedia with recent science, I am met with archives from 1917 that are 100 years old this year. It is hard to believe that with climate change science and all of the progress that has been made, recent scientific research is not allowed...

I guess I should appreciate this more...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Doug_Weller/Archive_8#/media/File:Admin_T-shirt.PNG

You all work pretty hard here.

A story is in order.

As a radiologic technologist, there is a train of thought that holds that to protect a patient from excess radiation, the acronym, ALARA should be followed. (As Low As is Reasonably Achievable).

So, in addition to using a collimnator, a device that only allow radiation to reach an area illuminated by a light beam, that areas should be covered by lead. (a rubberized lead apron or a flat lead shield). The claim is that x-radiation produced during the exposure is also accompanied by "off focus radiation from the x-ray tube", "leakage of radiation from the collimnator" or "Xray tube housing leakage" all 3 of which are limited to leakage equivalent to average readings of background radiation from the environment by federal regulation.

So, the lead covering is commonly placed between the patient's body and the xray source or xray tube outside of the useful xray beam as indicated by the light from the collimnator when the exposure is made to obtain the image. The belief is that the lead shield protects the patient from the three sources that cannot possibly reaching the patient. Furthermore, the standard measured radiation is in the microGray range when significant scatter is in the milliGray range. (A microGray is 1/1000 of a milliGray)

The problem with all of this is that whenever xradiation is used in a diagnostic room setting, there can be only 2 kinds of radiation present. The first is the beam from the tube. The second is the scatter radiation produced by the Compton effect inside the atomic structure of that which is being radiated. (Patient, wall, equipment, etc) Furthermore, we can measure this with radiation detectors.

So. the question remains, what happens when you cover the patient's body outside the primary beam with lead. Experiments show that less radiation is present under the lead apron next to the patient's body. More is detected next to the patient's body if lead is not used outside of the primary beam.

What is happening is not what it seems. During the short exposure the patient's body becomes a source emitting scattered radiation. If you cover it with lead, you create a third interaction that prevents the scatter from leaving the patient's body. Therefore, the patient is absorbing more radiation. However. We are only talking about microGrays. You would get a thousand more time radiation in a commercial aircraft flying at 35,000 feet going from Los Angles To New York. But still, that radiation is only the equivalent of a diagnostic radiograph of your chest at high kvp technique.

Well, what you believe will work can be justified by somebody's research. I cannot pick the geology apart. I can only say that there is controversy.

My Atlantis Location hypothesis is only a hypothesis. It is not a theory. It is an idea that is supported by reasonable existing scientific data. I am not an ancient history expert. I am not an expert in the study of known ancient antiquities. I am a scientist with an interest in imaging using tomography, in this case "P" wave tomography. I have used CAT scanners in practice. I know what they can do. I am not "believing" in anything. I am presenting existing research and an explanation regarding a possible scenario of how it can be put together with science to solve an ancient mystery.

Like mathematics, my hypothesis could represent something that exists, and it may not represent something that exists. Make no mistake, that are super volcanoes like the undisputed one at Yellowstone Park, Wyoming. Keep in mind 80% of volcanic eruptions occur underwater. Most go undetected. My Atlantis in the Azores is a product of something that could have happened.

We know the last ice age ended abruptly. We know that oceans rose 10,000 years ago. I am presenting the hypothesis. If it can be elevted to a theory and then a scientifically proven occurrence, only time will tell. I do not apologize, and I do not back away from the science supporting the hypothesis. It is no more disruptive, it is no more obnoxious than any scientific hypothesis that remains as yet unproven.

As the example of lead shielding in my technological profession, this will continue until research accepts or rejects it. as we still do not know a lot of things about the dynamics of the planet Earth, we do not know if this hypothesis is correct. However, you cannot dispute the emerging science.

https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Atlantis/Location_Hypotheses

Look how they are hiding this in Google searches. Hiding it won't work, either.

Just google "Atlantis Location Hypothesis" and see what you find.

RAYLEIGH22 (talk) 01:29, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

My edit can be found in my sandbox... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:RAYLEIGH22/sandbox

Since it only describes the geologic activity of the Azores, is is constantly deleted. Statements that indicate the activity of Santorini are allowed. Plato stated earthquakes destroyed Atlantis. Earthquakes are still occurring.

Just look http://www.cvarg.azores.gov.pt/seismic/index.html

So why can't we place this here in Wikipedia. Original research it is not no more that what Dougweller posts is original research.

I claim that the deleting of my edits is disruptive. But that is only my opinion.

RAYLEIGH22 (talk) 01:50, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Media Viewer now turned off for everyone, by default?

Is there a systemic problem with media viewer? It now seems turned off for everyone, by default. I don't plan to register, and thus cannot enable/disable that function, so why is it now turned off? I can't even find a gear icon to enable media viewer. Is there someway to do that *without* registration? Maybe this is just a temporary glitch with Wikipedia? ---- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.223.29 (talk) 21:46, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Not very likely. Do you perhaps have a very old browser ? We recently turned off all JS enhancements for older browser generations, that we are no longer able to support. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 08:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

April 24

How do I resubmit my article?

I have made some revisions as requested and ready to resubmit my article but cannot find a way to resubmit it. I would appreciate any help. Thank you, Lisa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmroiter (talk • contribs) 01:38, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I see that you worked out how to resubmit, and have done so, but the reason that you couldn't immediately see how to do so was that in this edit you had deleted the previous feedback and comment, and by doing so you deleted the box with the "Resubmit" button. The way it works is that the previous feedback and comments stay on the draft (to help you and to help subsequent reviewers) until the draft is accepted for publication, at which stage the reviewer will remove the feedback and comments as part of the process of publishing the new article to mainspace. That's why the feedback includes the instruction <!-- Do not remove this line! -->. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:03, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

User contributions

Hello, why is there actually no link for a user's contributions with their signature? Wouldn't that make sense – analogously to the revisions in the page history, where you do already have this function apart from the talk link?--Hubon (talk) 02:49, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't know why there's no contributions link, by default, in signatures of registered users. (There is for IPs.) I could speculate, but maybe a developer could say for sure. If you want to link your contributions, you can create a custom signature. If you want to navigate to other users' contributions more easily, you can enable Popups. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 05:42, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I will second the recommendation regarding pop-ups. I use it so often, I sometimes forget that it is not a default and must be enabled. It does quite a few nice things but one of them is that when I hover over your name I get access to a dozen or so links one of which is contributions.--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:27, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you, Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER and S Philbrick! Would then one of you maybe like to forward this to Phabricator? Since I don't know how things work over there...--Hubon (talk) 00:15, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, what does Phabricator have to do with this? The point is that if you enable Popups, you'll have exactly what you want. And much more. --S Philbrick(Talk) 01:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Never heard of Phabricator before today. It doesn't seem to have anything to do with Wikipedia or any of the WMF projects. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 02:44, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Rivertorch: Phabricator is the tool used for reporting and tracking bugs in the Wikimedia software. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Signatures for IPs are determined by MediaWiki:Signature-anon. The MediaWiki default seen at MediaWiki:Signature-anon/qqx only links contributions. The English Wikipedia has chosen to also link the talk page. There is no reason to link the user page for IP's. Signatures for users without a custom signature are determined by MediaWiki:Signature. The MediaWiki default at MediaWiki:Signature/qqx is nearly identical (it's coded a little differently but the only practical difference is that we avoid a bold selflink on the user's own talk page). The English Wikipedia could add a third link or replace one of the two existing links. There is only reason for a Phabricator request if you want to the change the default for all MediaWiki wikis or all Wikimedia wikis. I don't expect that would be done and I also think consensus for changing the English Wikipedia is unlikely. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:23, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

URLs for references

Is there a policy/essay/whatever that says that references to sources that exist online should have URLs? Hack (talk) 03:05, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Hack, please see WP:REFB#Information_to_include. DES ^(talk) 04:11, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Incorrect info

Was reading about the 4 Corners area of Florida. I live in this area 24+yrs. U have the Counties correct. However, cities r wrong.Sanford should not be included. Its not near 4 Corners. Clermont (Lake County) is part of 4 Corners. Plz update this asap. This is a very heavy/busy Tourist Area. They are already confused, without Wiki Confusing them more due 2 wrong info! Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.100.100.10 (talk) 05:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello. It would be helpful if you'd specify what articles are involved. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 05:33, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Adding refs

I have already asked this question and had some replies, but because I'm not very competent, I'd appreciate a bit more help. I am editing this article: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_St._Quentin_Canal

In the notes section, I have added note 5. This refers to p.23 of the book in note 9. If someone could change this so that the book appears in the correct section, I think I'd be able to see what is going on and then be able to work out how to do add more page refs to this or some of the other reference works myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daveleicuk (talk • contribs) 08:55, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Already done, by User:Trappist the monk. Maproom (talk) 09:34, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Problem replacing the logo on the page LM Wind Power

Hello, I am having trouble replacing the logo on the page LM Wind Power. The company was acquired by GE Renewable Energy and now has a new official logo.

When I try to upload the new jpeg file, I am unable to update the Destination File Name. It shows text there in a png file format, that I cannot click on or edit. Then, when I click "Upload file" I receive the error message that I cannot upload a png file, even though my file is a jpeg. Thanks for your help with resolving this error. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Windcomms (talk • contribs) 09:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

User:Windcomms has been editing this article, and only this article, for two years now. I have blocked them as a spamusername, since it seems pretty evident that this particular duck is the "communications" (i.e., PR) office of LM Wind Power. --Orange Mike | Talk 22:18, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

need help

Hi Im new to Wikipedia An author asked me to upload a page about him I did it but the next day it was deleted the reason was: "23:05, 23 April 2017 Graeme Bartlett (talk | contribs) deleted page Alessandro Boccaletti (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement)"

Can some one explain to me the reason ? or how do I upload an author page with links to the books ? thanks Laorin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laorin (talk • contribs) 09:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Laorin, Graeme Bartlett, an administrator, apparently detected that the text of the article, or a significant part of it, was copied from or closely paraphrased from an outside source. Wikipedia has a very strong policy against accepting content that violates any copyright. Articles need to be written in original words, not copied from another web page, including the subjects own bio or resume. Graeme Bartlett did not include in the log entry the URL or other source that was infringed, so i can not quickly verify that his conclusion was accurate, but I have no serious doubt that it was. An article (not just a page) about an author can and should include links to his or her works, but must be an original text describing the author and the author's works.

Note that before being deleted as a copyright infringement, the article had been challenged as being overly promotional.

You may find it easier to work in the draft space, using the article wizard until you have the sources properly cited and the tone properly neutral, but even in draft space you may not simply paste in text from elsewhere. I hope this helps. DES ^(talk) 10:31, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I found that these url's contents were copied https://www.facebook.com/Big.Fat.American.Lion.Book/info?tab=page_info, https://www.kirkusreviews.com/author/alessandro-boccaletti/ and https://www.facebook.com/dr.alessandro.boccaletti/posts/1591945524441258. You should not just copy other people's writings about the topic. If you did write the content at these locations it may be possible to prove that you personally own the copyright and are able to release it under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license ———see WP:PERMIT. DESiegel's advice is good. I now see you were not notified about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alessandro Boccaletti by Burning Pillar either. I should have notified you on your talk page too about the speedy deletion for infringing copyright. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:16, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

First time posting

I posted a new article (First time poster) on Lorin O'Neil Caccamise. I got a message that it is being reviewed. Lorin actually uses his stage name "Lorin O'Neil" He is an absolute legen in the world of figure skating. I noticed in a posting on Eugene Turner he was cited but there was no page for him. The three links I provided should be enough to start the postings? Please advise. I'm new it Wikipedia postings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jneitlich (talk • contribs) 18:10, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

The message you got probably pointed you to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lorin O'Neil Caccamise, where an editor has nominated your article for deletion. An article about a living person has to follow our Biographies of Living Persons policy, or BLP for short. In order to have an article about this person, we need multiple sources that show why they are notable under our policies. Being involved at a high level in international figure skating might be a good claim of notability, but we have to have sources that document that involvement. Contemporary news articles, books, etc. - all would work. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 18:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I have a problem with editing

Hello, my name is Tauheed. I am a big fan of Five Nights at Freddy's: Its series and each of its individual games. What I would like to request you is to kindly let me edit the articles of Five Nights at Freddy's (Series) - Wikipedia; Five Nights at Freddy's 1 - Wikipedia; Five Nights at Freddy's 2 - Wikipedia; Five Nights at Freddy's 3 - Wikipedia; Five Nights at Freddy's 4 - Wikipedia and Five Nights at Freddy's: Sister Location - Wikipedia.
I would be very grateful if you can enable me to do this and it makes me helpful and confident towards the rest of the environment, eager to gain facts about these games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 16t.ahmad (talk • contribs) 19:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

@16t.ahmad: Please see WP:AUTOCONFIRM for the requirements for you to edit those pages. CTF83! 19:50, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Turn to libra

How to collect the wikipedia articles and turn to the libras?1.168.80.144 (talk) 22:48, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Can you explain what you are trying to do? RudolfRed (talk) 23:12, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi IP. I'm guessing here but maybe Help:Books is what you want? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

April 25

Editing uploaded media information

I'm curious about the process of editing the names of uploaded media. I realize that file names shouldn't often be changed, but i haven't been able to find an outlet to contest factually inaccurate file names. Specifically, this picture: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Mazda_rotary_engine_early.jpg&welcome=yes, which shows not only the stated Wankel engine, but also the transmission and alternator. A small distinction, I know, but important nonetheless. Any help would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omorosso (talk • contribs) 01:59, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello. Wikimedia Commons is a separate project from Wikipedia. They have a help desk over there, too, but you might want to read this on the FAQ page first. Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 02:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Elizabeth Gaskell

Ref number 7 is all wrong - I added in the URL later and got it wrong - sorry. Please alter if able 101.182.219.133 (talk) 04:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

The word "help" in the error message is in blue, indicating that it is a wikilink, in this case to Help:CS1 errors#bad_url, which includes the sentence "The URL field is checked to ensure that it contains only Latin characters and does not contain spaces". In your edit you included the text "cite web" (with the space) at the end of the url parameter. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:21, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

A big "Thanks" to David Biddulph - I fixed it up. 101.182.219.133 (talk) 04:43, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Interview with a person

There is a person who won at a particular competition. I would like to interview him about his biography and other stuffs, then I will post it onto Wikipedia. Is it okay? ▒hÅ╓Θ╚DΦ|≈ ▓ 04:53, 25 April 2017 (UTC)Haroldok▒hÅ╓Θ╚DΦ|≈ ▓ 04:53, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

No it is not OK. An interview which you carry out is original research, and not suitable for Wikipedia. Wikipedia is interested in what published reliable sources have said about the subject, not what the subject says about himself. --David Biddulph (talk) 05:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Change of page name due to re-brand

Hi, I'm looking to change the name of the page: MegaZip Adventure Park to our new brand name which is "Mega Adventure Park - Singapore

Please advise.

Thanks

Mega Adventure — Preceding unsigned comment added by MASGMKTG (talk • contribs) 08:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Verified at location's website and moved. Rojomoke (talk) 08:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

interlanguage link problem

hello, the page I have created, Marcial Solana González-Camino. contains a wrong interlanguage link (don't know how it got there); instead of pointing to the Spanish version of the article, Marcial Solana González-Camino, it points to Comunión Tradicionalista. I have tried to edit it in WikiData, but there everything seems OK. Have read Help on interlanguage links, but am no wiser. Please could you help. --Dd1495 (talk) 08:54, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Dd1495: Fixed: special:diff/777113948. --CiaPan (talk) 09:12, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@CiaPan: wow, that was fast. thank you very much. I am your debtor--Dd1495 (talk) 10:59, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Afd merger

I'm not sure if I'm supposed to retain the Afd-merge to template in Long Beach-class cruiser along with a redirect to USS Long Beach (CGN-9) (since there's a bot that's supposed to do something) or just the redirect. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Clarityfiend hello, since you've already merged the content, all that is required is to redirect plain and simple (no need to leave the merge template behind as you've already done the job). I've gone ahead and redirected the article. Hope it helps. Lourdes 16:20, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 18:17, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Bug

Hey, when copy pasting data from your pages into excel, the link back to your page directs me straight to the editing page where anyone can edit information. I mistakenly edited data on Russia (no harm intended) at the GDP page US$ for Europe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.57.21.134 (talk) 12:03, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Fixed the article: special:diff/777132159. --CiaPan (talk) 12:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Internal linking to a Difference between revisions page

In my recent edit of Talk:Haavara Agreement#Antisemitism Category, I wound up with a red link after several unsuccessful attempts at linking to a relevant page: Haavara Agreement: Difference between revisions Latest revision as of 11:55, 25 April 2017 - so please help me learn the correct syntax to fix this! -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:28, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Deborahjay: You can simply go to the page history, open a diff between appropriate revisions and copy the URL from the address bar of your browser:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haavara_Agreement&diff=777130738&oldid=776831207

You can also choose appropriate version from the history, say,

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haavara_Agreement&oldid=777130738

and select the link (diff) near the Previous revision link. That would be a difference link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Haavara_Agreement&diff=prev&oldid=777130738

Or, once you identified the revision you need, you can extract its ID from the URL (777130738 in the case above) and construct a shortened link to differences that revision brought into the article by

Special:Diff/777130738.

You can also use a {{oldid}} template or any of the {{diff}} templates family. --CiaPan (talk) 12:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Deborahjay: I have fixed the link for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Haavara_Agreement&diff=prev&oldid=777139451 --CiaPan (talk) 12:49, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, @CiaPan:, for this exhaustive explanation, which I'll keep with my toolkit. At the moment my personal preference is for the Special:Diff format, and I'm sure before long I'll have an opportunity similar to today's, to try it out. -- Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 13:26, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

University of Phoenix page

I can clearly see that the page regarding the University of Phoenix is slanted toward a negative bias against the organization.

One of the sentences regarding academic rigor noted, "The University of Phoenix has been criticized for lack of academic rigor. Henry M. Levin, a professor of higher education at Teachers College at Columbia University, called its business degree an "MBA Lite", saying "I've looked at [its] course materials. It's a very low level of instruction."[28]" Clearly, this quote was included to communicate a negative image about the university. The author of the cited reference has no ties to the University of Phoenix and clearly communicated his bias in the non-peer reviewed, popular press, article. It is not in the best interest of Wikipedia to include hearsay or conjecture in, what are supposed to be, academic resources. I recommend you remove this cited article.

Regards, Larry Austin, Ed.D. University of Phoenix Graduate — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.245.28.221 (talk) 14:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello. The place to comment on a specific article is on that article's talk page—in this case Talk:University of Phoenix. Start a new discussion there and sign your post by typing four tildes (~~~~). Rivertorch^FIRE_WATER 14:26, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

A question about suspected abuse of multiple accounts

Hello, I suspect an editor of using more than one account to further an argument during discussions and article edits in a particular topic area. I know the procedure is to file a sock puppet investigation, though I'm not particularly familiar with this process. Is there a quick way to compare edits from two different accounts? The subject concerned receives a large amound of editing traffic, and at least one of the accounts I suspect of abuse has made in excess of 50,000 edits. I have logged out from my own user account for the purpose of this discussion, in order not to alert the user concerned about this thread, since I have been foolish enough to already voice my suspicions. Any help would be much appreciated, and I am willing to confirm my identity by email if necessary. Thanks, 86.135.189.159 (talk) 14:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

• For the factual question, Wikipedia:Tools#User_interaction_analysis proposes two similar tools (though the first one is aimed at editor interaction and the second at sockpuppet investigations). Once the results are in, go to WP:SPI and follow the steps.

However... opening that SPI as an "anonymous" IP account is probably not something you want to do. Either you have credible reasons to believe the editor you are investigating will retaliate off-wiki on you, or you have not. If you have not, "hiding" yourself to open the SPI will be viewed poorly: you should rather open it under your real account, and face the possible consequences of a spurious report. If you have, first of all you should use the proper off-wiki channels, see WP:EMERGENCY; secondly, your IP address is actually a lot of information about you. If I am not mistaken, I know in which village you made the above post; it has a Wikipedia article indicating a population of a little less than 600 in 2011 in the infobox (considering the circumstances, I am not writing how I obtained that information, and I am not giving the exact population figure to prevent a search on the article space, but that should be enough details for the OP to verify I am not bluffing). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:32, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Of course, I will file the report under my username, so have no fear of that. I'm only logged out because the discussion got quite heated with the two accounts concerned, and I didn't want this discussion to further fan the flames. My suspicion about their activity is based on an incident that occurred earlier today, where two accounts made an edit using similar logic that appeared to misinterpret an aspect of Wikipedia's guidelines. It may just be coincidence, so first I would need to gather some evidence. But assuming I can then I'll open the report. By the way, you're not correct about my location, which is not a village, and has a population somewhat larger than 600. 86.135.189.159 (talk) 16:59, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

sbject information

Hello Recently there was personal information regarding Battalion Chief Jim McMains on the home page that we deleted. As a current administrator of the department we would like to stop that type of information on the page. Please help in assisting in stopping this in the future. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.35.60.234 (talk) 16:20, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

• Hello there. Apparently, you managed to remove the information yourself. I agree with the edit you made, not because you have any special control over the article content by the virtue of your position, but because it was a bit of trivia that should not be present in the encyclopedia.

The text is still accessible via the page history. It could be removed, but you need a strong reason for that and I do not think you have any; before heading here to require the text removed from public view, I strongly suggest reading about the Streisand effect. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 16:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Any table experts?

I'm trying to make this table compatible with mobile, but I can't manage to do it! Some of the items (at the bottom) look wrong, they should have full width. Any help would be highly appreciated! Karlpoppery (talk) 18:16, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately, in order to protect mobile views from tables that are too wide, that is not really possible. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 20:14, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks TheDJ, I see. To be clear, I'm only trying to make all the row of the table appear the same length. I don't understand why they're not, on mobile. Karlpoppery (talk) 20:23, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Because mobile views are different. You are making expectations about behavior that are not valid in our mobile view. Specifically you expect that a table cell will fill out to the width of the parent table. But that is not true on mobile (because tables on mobile don't use table layout rules, because it would cause wide tables to screw up the viewport of the render surface). —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 20:29, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. Karlpoppery (talk) 20:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

my own Fair Use

can my own work can be uploaded to wikipedia with "Fair uses" conditions?UY4Xe8VM5VYxaQQ (talk) 19:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

That depends. We need a lot more information about the type of image and what article it would be used in. For some general information on fair use in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Non-free content. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 19:44, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Are you asking because you want to upload your own work on a "fair use" basis, or because someone else has uploaded it on that basis? Maproom (talk) 19:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

tenho um roteiro ja pronto.que gostaria de mostra, a sinopse.

boa noite tenho um roteiro ja pronto que gostaria de mostra a produtoras como eu fasso obrigada — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janete dias (talk • contribs) 22:32, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

@Janete dias: I'm sorry but this is the English Wikipedia. All contributions here must be in English. Perhaps the Portuguese help desk would be able to help you further? --Majora (talk) 22:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Google translation: Desculpe, mas esta é a Wikipédia em inglês. Todas as contribuições aqui devem estar em inglês. Talvez o helpdesk português pudesse ajudá-lo ainda mais?

April 26

New Page

REVISED: I have made a new page or the ELECTRIC LIGHT ORCHESTRA's "The BBC Sessions." (The BBC Sessions (Electric Light Orchestra album)) I feel it is referenced correctly. (ELO>Discography>Live Albums>The BBC Sessions) URL=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_BBC_Sessions_(Electric_Light_Orchestra_album) Why doesn't it show up when searched or if the link is used? Thank you, JOHN McCARTHY "jhm795" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhm795 (talk • contribs) 00:24, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Read: Wikipedia:Tutorial/Citing sources. Have added the ref tag for you so you can see how it works. The article now shows the ref's. Aspro (talk) 00:36, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Hello Jhm795, if your question is about why your article is not being displayed when you search for the same on internet search engines, the answer is that newly created articles take some time to get indexed via search crawlers. So perhaps wait a month or so after the creation of the article before checking again. Having said that, I feel your current article The BBC Sessions (Electric Light Orchestra album) replicates an article existing since 2008: Live at the BBC (Electric Light Orchestra album). I would suggest you include your article's contents into the older article (including the references) and redirect your article to the older article. If you have any problems doing that, write back here and we'll assist. Thanks. Lourdes 00:52, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Ditto Aspro (talk) 01:25, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

M.C. Gainey: Filmography Addition. 2003; The Last Cowboy; with Jenny Garth, Lance Henriksen.

Resolved

 – Lourdes

M.C. Gainey: Filmography Addition. 2003; The Last Cowboy; with Jenny Garth, Lance Henriksen. 00:43, 26 April 2017 (UTC) Am watching it on the Hallmark channel Movies. Noticed it was not listed.

Looked him up to see if he was related to Gainey Arabian horses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.212.154 (talk) 00:43, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. The information has been added onto Gainey's biography. Lourdes 01:09, 26 April 2017 (UTC)