Wikipedia:New contributors' help page

What would you like to do?

Ask a question	Do something
Ask a knowledge question that you cannot find the answer to in the encyclopedia. (e.g. Did Leonardo da Vinci build a working flying machine?)	Learn about how and where you can help Wikipedia (information and resources on the basics needed to comprehend, comment on, and contribute to Wikipedia)
Ask a question at the Teahouse about using or editing Wikipedia that you cannot find the answer to in the Frequently Asked Questions. (e.g. How can I fix this problem with this article?)	Create an article now (see Your first article before you start)
Ask a question about a practical problem you have that is not related to using or editing Wikipedia. (e.g. I was cheated by a builder. Please Help.)	Request that other editors review your new article

Ways to get help

If you place {{helpme}} on your talk page, a helper will visit you there as soon as possible!
Join the #wikipedia-en-help IRC channel for real-time chat. New to IRC? Click here to be connected instantly!
The template below outlines Wikipedia's help pages and can be viewed at the bottom of most related pages.

(Click "show" on the right to expand the template)

new entry

Hello, I have created a new entry which is currently in draft form at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Meechpod/new_article_name_here

I've tried to find the answers to the following questions but I'm afraid I got lost in the many different help sections. My main questions are:

How do I upload the two images? (public domain)

How do I add the subject category?

There are probably some other issues that need fixing, like the format of the links in References and External Links.

I think that once these issues are resolved, the article is ready for going live.

Thank you for your help. I look forward to hearing from you.

Meechpod (talk) 12:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You add categories by typing eg. [[Category:1950 births]] at the bottom of the page for each category that you want the article to appear in. It's best not to do this until the article is "live".

For help formating your references, see Wikipedia:Citing sources. You especially need to make sure that you reference his "claims to fame" so to speak - say who thinks he's an authority, where does it say his book is the top-selling one, the most popular etc.

By the way, to link to an article or page here, like you have done above, you just need to enclose the name in two square brackets, eg. [[User:Meechpod/new article name here]] gives User:Meechpod/new article name here.

I tried this - User:Meechpod/Marijan Dundek - but the link says 'this page does not exist'.

Hope this helps, --Beloved Freak 13:07, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(after edit conflict) I'll leave the upload question to somebody more familiar with that than I am; but are you sure the pictures are public domain? You'll need to demonstrate that. (If you're planning to use the photo of the Lesotho Promise from the Jewellery Outlook article, that appears to belong to Graff Diamonds).

You add an article to a category by inserting [[Category:<category name>]] anywhere in it - usually at the bottom.

There are indeed issues which need fixing, so that the article is not ready for going live. The minor point is that the language is not encyclopaedic: please read WP:PEACOCK. The more serious one is that there are no independent, substantial references to reliable sources. While the article does implicitly assert the subject's notability as the author of a significant book, you need to establish his notability, and meet the stringent requirements of WP:BLP or the article will certainly be nominated for deletion as non-notable. --ColinFine (talk) 13:09, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your prompt feedback. I have removed 'peacock' terms such as 'top-selling' and 'popular' ('top-selling' was included on the basis of the book having the top spot in the Amazon ranking of books of this subject matter -- does that qualify it for the term 'top-selling'?).

I read the section WP:BLP and it seems that the subject meets these criteria, as his book has been judged notable in its field by the organizations mentioned and peer reviews (such as the two cited in references). I'm not clear as to why these two sources do not qualify as independent, reliable references, as they come from independent published sources.

I don't believe I have other source material I can add, so please tell me if you feel the article does not merit inclusion on the basis of the references given so far. Thank you for your help.

Meechpod (talk) 19:52, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Meechpod (talk • contribs) 18:38, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're getting closer, and I appreciate that you are working hard to meet the requirements, but in my opinion you're not there yet.

The point about "top-selling" concerns both style and reference: A statement such as "Diamonds was ranked top in Amazon's list of books on this subject in (year)", (with a reference), would be fine, as it would be factual and referenced, not evaluative.

Unfortunately, I pointed you at the wrong place: while WP:BLP applies, it is really WP:BIO that I meant to cite. I am not impugning the reliability or independence of your sources, but they support hardly any of the information in the article. As I said, as the author of "a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." (from WP:AUTH) he is probably notable; but you have provided no sources for most of the information you give about him, and for that reason the article would probably not survive for long if you moved it to Article space at present. --ColinFine (talk) 21:35, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I will check the Amazon rating and include that info when confirmed. You say I provide no sources for most of the information I give, but I'm not clear about what kind of sources are needed for the biographical details (which are of course obtained directly from him).

Also I'm not clear what other things I say that require independent verification and sources. My statement that his book covers the subject of natural coloured diamonds is substantiated by the article on the book in the online magazine 'Jewellery Outlook' (the first reference given), which states that the book is one of the few on the market to provide information on this subject. That article also verifies that he is an authority with lengthy experience in the field. Why is this not considered an adequate source?

I did read WP:BIO. In my view Mr Dundek meets the criterion "The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field." The recognition comes from the gemmological institutions that have praised the book (as well as from two museums that have stocked his book in their bookshops, and also from readers’ praise on Amazon, but I imagine these don’t count).

I look forward to further clarification and hope I can improve the article to meet the requirements. Thank you very much for your help. Meechpod (talk) 16:21, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, Amazon user reviews don't count, mainly because they are inherently unreliable - I could write a positive review of his book and I know nothing about the subject matter. I think the issue here is that notability has to be supported by significant coverage in reliable sources. A couple of book reviews in trade journals may not be enough. – ukexpat (talk) 16:32, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is precisely the biographical details that I am talking about. You say that they are obtained directly from him: but if they are not obtainable from a published source, then they are original research, and not acceptable on WP. This may seem strange, but with respect you are a random person on the internet (as am I) and unless we have references that in principle anybody can follow up, we have no way of telling whether the information is reliable or not: see WP:Verifiability.

The further corollary, as I indicated above, is that if there are not such references then he is by definition not notable. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 23:56, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to add an existing image to an article, add [[Image:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information.
If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must find out what the proper license of the image is. If you know the image is licensed under a free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure what license the image takes, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy. I hope this helps. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:34, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Hamo

Material Handling Specialist with Crown Equipment Corporation —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bigpete187 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK....do you have a question that we can help with? – ukexpat (talk) 20:52, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

copyright

i own the copyright of the biography posted which has been rejected as sourced from http://www.jccglass.fsnet.co.uk/biog.html on my own web site jccglassJccglass (talk) 22:11, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:IOWN for advice on how to release copyright materials for use on Wikipedia. – ukexpat (talk) 22:16, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Content

Hello

I wish to add content to Wikipedia Bio of my brother and myself

ID skyblue38 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skyblue38 (talk • contribs) 04:51, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't. Even if you are notable per WP:BIO, there would still be conflict of interest and autobiography issues. There are other alternatives such as Wikipopuli and Wikibios. – ukexpat (talk) 04:57, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

biographicon :) -- œ ^™ 06:35, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I recently ran into this problem. I've read WP:BIO and it doesn't actually prohibit one writing about oneself or someone related. It discourages it but also asserts that if neutral point of view style writing is adhered to, and all entries are cited properly and meet notability guidelines, it is acceptable. Etrangere (talk) 21:16, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is true. It is not forbidden, but it is strongly discouraged, and certainly any attempt to do so would be likely to be reviewed very critically by other editors. --ColinFine (talk) 23:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The opening sentence of WP:AUTO is pretty succinct: Writing an autobiography on Wikipedia is strongly discouraged, unless your writing has been approved by other editors in the community. Editing a biography about yourself should only be done in clear-cut cases. – ukexpat (talk) 01:22, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citation format

I would like to request that someone knowledgeable on Wikipedia take a look at my sandbox entry (Ralph Izzard) and tell me whether or not I'm formatting my citations correctly. I've seen a few different variations on citation formats on the Wikipedia and I'm not sure which is best to use. I'm still working on the article but would like to make sure I'm citing properly before adding more content. Thanks in advance to anyone who takes a look.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Etrangere/Sandbox

Etrangere (talk) 21:20, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On a quick look, they appear fine to me. I always use citation templates, such as Template:cite web and Template:cite book, which then take care of the formatting as long as I provided the few arguments which are essential. --ColinFine (talk) 00:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aim to include the author, publisher, and dates of each source, and you'll be fine. However, as ColinFine says, it is much easier to use a citation template. All you have to do is copy and paste the code and fill in the parameters- the template formats it for you. Liquidluck✽talk 00:06, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you use Firefox, there is a cite web addon which is very useful: http://wpcite.mozdev.org/ – ukexpat (talk) 01:19, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

How can I make my article look like a neutral point of view Shammy maxtec (talk) 04:45, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please use a descriptive title in future questions.

Er, by making it actually have a neutral point of view? I'm sorry, but you've given us no information by which to help you, and you don't appear to have edited any articles. Try reading WP:NPOV, and come back here if you've any further questions. --ColinFine (talk) 08:31, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chendrimada

This is the name (Manepeda) of a family (Clan) from kodagu (Coorg), Karnataka, India. They belong to a community called the Kodavas. They originated in a place called Vypalli Keri in Nangala village of Virajpet Taluk in Kodagu District. The family members are descendants of one individual (details not known). They are ancestor worshippers (Guru Karana) like other kodavas. There are currently three groups in the family viz. Balyamane, Pudiyamane and Koppatmane. These group of family members are descendants of three brothers, who separated due to possible family fued. They all use chendrimada as their clan name (Manepeda), but do not participate in each others godly functions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Meradeshmahan (talk • contribs) 13:08, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this looks like a draft article. If so this is not the place to post it. Please see the article creation wizard. If it is not a draft article, do you have a question that we can help you with? – ukexpat (talk) 14:47, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Company documents

Are an organization's documents (press releases. newsletters, etc.) an acceptable source to cite when writing an article about that organization?130.219.235.254 (talk) 17:54, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They are OK for supporting basic facts such as who is the CEO and who is on the board, but for sources in support of notability per WP:CORP, they are self references and therefore not reliable sources. – ukexpat (talk) 18:06, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews as References?

Is it ok to cite online interviews (such as on youtube) as references? For example, on the article The Fray, the first line is cited to a youtube interview. Is that okay in Wikipedia? Prince Imrahil (talk) 05:38, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Video sources can be entirely acceptable - WP:RS says that "audio, video, and multimedia materials that have been recorded then broadcast, distributed, or archived by a reputable third-party may also meet the necessary criteria to be considered reliable source. Like text sources, media sources must be produced by a reliable third-party and be properly cited. Additionally, an archived copy of the media must exist." Notice that video sources may meet the reliable source criteria: I'm unfortunately currently unable to view video, so I can't comment on this case. You could take your question to the reliable sources noticeboard for the input of editors interested in sourcing issues; they will probably want to consider the following points:

The linked video is unlikely to have been created by Youtube itself - the authority of the creator of the video is what would be significant in determining whether the source is reliable.
Different kinds of sources are needed for different kinds of claims - self-published primary sources can suffice for particular kinds of information; controversial claims need heavyweight sources.
Youtube is sometimes used to host material in a way that violates copyright; we should avoid linking to cases like this. Gonzonoir (talk) 12:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When is a secondary source a tertiary source?

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 17:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In my example, a MetalfromFinland.com reference states: "Source:Blabbermouth.net" at the bottom of the article. It is verbatim to the Blabbermouth.net (which is Roadrunner Records.com) article. Am I wrong to consider it one step removed anyway? I replaced the reference with the more direct, original source. Again, both pages are verbatim, only differences are website layout, advertisements, etc. I usually make this change if I notice it anyway, but is it proper to cite WP:SECONDARY or WP:PRIMARY in the edit summary, or is there another shortcut I should be referencing? – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 06:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In theory, I have no idea for the answer to your question; but in practice, if I have two identical websites with one citing the other, I use the one cited - it's possible the other is a mirror. For the edit summary I'd just put something like "Changing source to original quoted source" or such like. Further questions? let me know! Fleetflame · whack! whack! · 15:51, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks! So really, I'm making a bigger deal out of it than I should. I just like throwing WP shortcuts around : ) – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 16:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:YOUCANNEVERUSETOOMANYWIKIPEDIASHORTCUTS! – ukexpat (talk) 17:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're onto something there! –Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 17:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, Keraunoscopia, both WP:PRIMARY and WP:SECONDARY point to the same place, so there's no point wondering which to use ;-] Fleetflame · whack! whack! · 18:18, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, that I realize, thanks : ) I use one or the other, depending which point I'm trying to emphasize. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 20:05, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Page

How do I add a new page? I want to add a brief history of Belmont Day School. 18:28, 2 February 2010 (UTC)~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecarere (talk • contribs)

A Wizard is available to walk you through these steps. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines with which all articles should comply. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Wikipedia:Your first article. You might also look at Wikipedia:How to write a great article for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation. An Article Wizard is also available to walk you through creating an article. – ukexpat (talk) 18:36, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PICTURE OF ONE ASTRONAUT IN THE OTHERS VISOR... APOLLO MOONSHOT TW FROM KS

IS THE MOON SO INCREDIBLY SMALL THAT YOU CAN SEE BOTH HORIZONS OVER EACH MANS SHOULDERS? OTHER PICTURES DO NOT SEEM TO SUGGEST THAT! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.102.73.89 (talk) 23:49, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. Liquidluck✽talk 23:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would think the curve of the glass in the visor has something to do with it. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 02:58, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting Vandals

Is it alright for any user to report vandalism here, or is it for admins only? RA0808 (talk) 05:16, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any user may. In fact, the page is used so that non-admins can bring vandals to the attention of admins who (if appropriate) can block the vandal. Liquidluck✽talk 05:27, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse an AfD?

Resolved

– Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 08:36, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I marked Gallow Hill (Abigail Williams EP) as an AfD due to several violations, including lack of verifiability, possible original research, etc. The sources I pulled up on Google were all blogs, forums, and webzines I'd never heard of before. When I started editing AbWilliams articles last year, I could have sworn I saw a little edit war going on regarding this EP because it was (from what I recall) a bootleg thrown together by fans and otherwise not notable enough for inclusion. Well, that article (and history) has since been deleted... so I've been using this "memory" as my driving force. But what if I'm wrong? So I started looking through the webzines and they all seem to corroborate the fact that the EP, though never officially released, was used as a demo to garner attention to the band. So I'm deeply questioning my AfD choice here. What if the EP is not a bootleg afterall? Should I wait for the judgment of the AfD discussion? Maybe I should give the article a chance? I would help clean it up. –Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 08:01, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, it is perfectly acceptable to withdraw an AfD if you think it is wrong (I've done so before). A look on Google Books revealed that New Wave of American Heavy Metal By Garry Sharpe-Young says "The three track demo 'Gallow HIll' arrived in 2005." (see here) and metal-archives.com also mentions the bootleg. If you want to close it, just edit the AfD and add a note saying "Withdrawing nomination following further search for sources". Someone will close it (I'll do it depending on if I am online when you do so!). Alternatively, leave it and see what happens. Personally, I would withdraw the nomination, though. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:24, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to see what would "happen"... curious as I am. : D But your suggestion is excellent and I will remove the nomination right now. Thank you so much! – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 08:36, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

creating page

I am trying to create a page for my amateur hockey team. We have local recongitiona nd our own website inwhich i want to reference. I would like to use an already established hockey teams page template and change the info where it needs to be altered. can someone help me with this issue? Creh (talk) 16:38, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does your team meet the criteria for inclusion (see Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) - I assume you mean an ice hockey team, in which case you might want to ask at Wikipedia Talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey.

Basically, If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article. (to quote from the notability guidelines). -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:06, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And to amplify what Steve has said: if it does not meet the criteria, then as soon as you release it into article space it will get deleted.

To answer your specific question - yes, assuming it does meet the notability criterion, so that it is worth your while creating it, copying the structure of an existing page might be a good way to proceed. You will also quite likely find some appropriate templates used on it. 'Edit' that page, and copy headings, templates etc from the edit box to the edit box in your own page. Then cancel the edit on the source page, and Save Changes on your own. --ColinFine (talk) 19:32, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help! My entry might be deleted!

Hello,

I recently created an entry for a page titled "earth, inc.". After my initial post, which I thought would have first gone into review, was actually posted without references or internal links. I have since added references and external links to support the material on this page, however, the page is still being considered for deletion.

I've never experienced this problem before and was hoping someone could offer some guidance on what other relevant details need to be included on this page to make the content verifiable and excempt from deletion.

Any information would be extremely helpful.

Thank you, Tara —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zwickertara (talk • contribs) 16:46, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article "Earth, Inc." is being considered for deletion as it may not meet the notability criteria for inclusion, as it is a book that has not even been published yet. If it had received significant coverage in the press/media then it might be counted as notable, but I can see no evidence of this. You might want to read Wikipedia:Notability (books) and especially the section "[Wikipedia:Notability_(books)#Not_yet_published_books|Not yet published books]". Incidently, should the article be kept, it will need to be moved to the title Earth, Inc. (without the quotes) - I will note this on the AfD page. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:09, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Thanks so much for your response. As this book receives more coverage we plan to add to this entry. However, until then I'm not sure this will meet your criteria. Is there a way to freeze the page until such coverage happens? For example, we are awaiting coverage in some very noteworthy print and online publications, although these are approximately three to four weeks away. Please let me know the best way to proceed.

Thanks again for your help, Tara —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zwickertara (talk • contribs) 17:19, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As you may have noticed, I have suggested the deletion of the article as well, as mentioned above. However, it is possible to have the article moved to your userspace (this is called userfying. It allows you to work on it without it being put up for deletion (unless it contains copyright violations, or personal attacks). If you want this to happen, I will move it for you, and close the AfD as "userfied". -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:29, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

If you could move the article to my userspace that would be great. How do I access this post in the userspace? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zwickertara (talk • contribs) 18:29, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have suggested it on the AfD page, and have asked that anyone with objections reply by 20:00UTC. If there are no objections, I will move it and then I will leave you a message on your talk page explaining where it is. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 18:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zwickertara (talk • contribs) 19:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the language you have used above about the book suggests that you may be connected with it. If this is the case, you are strongly discouraged from writing any article on it: please see conflict of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 19:35, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew jolly.

Andrew Robert Jolly (London/Essex) is an independent music producer and musician.Work credits to date include the following- Klein(bass),The Full Revolution(guitars,writing,vocals),Ectomorph(guitars,keyboards,writing,vocals,producer),The Happy Flowers(All arrangements with Martin Peter Lilley)....Lilley/Jolly.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Graysboy (talk • contribs) 00:10, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome. Thanks for telling us! --Jayron32 00:48, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

::LOL @ Jayron..i know i should not type this BUT i could not stop laughing... Buzzzsherman (talk) 01:10, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vehicle Insurance

What is First Party, Third Party, IMT 115.99.3.140 (talk) 00:26, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ok so we cant really help you with anything on the encyclopedia right??...look here --> Vicarious liability and contact your insurance company.. Buzzzsherman (talk) 00:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might find what you are looking for in the articles about Liability insurance or Vehicle insurance. If you cannot find the answer there, you can try asking your question at Wikipedia's Reference Desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except about how to use Wikipedia, which is what this help desk is for). I hope this helps. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be helpful: First party is the person who buys the insurance - the vehicle owner. Third party is anyone else who drives the vehicle. So if I buy insurance, I would normally purchase Full coverage for myself, and Third party, fire and theft for other people who drive my car. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Er ... no. 'Third party' is anybody other than the insurer and the insured, i.e. anybody who isn't one of the two parties to the contract. That may be somebody who drives the vehicle, but it is also the pedestrian who gets knocked down or an occupant of another car. That is why Third Party insurance is compulsory in many jurisdictions, as opposed to other risks such as theft which only concern the insured. --ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ColinFine is right. First party is you. Second party is the insurance company. Third party is everyone else. You buy liability coverage, because you might damage someone else or their property. If you hit their car, your insurance company pays them because you bought Property Damage Liability, which covers your legal responsibility to third parties. If you hit them and injure them, your insurance company pays them because you bought Bodily Injury Liability which covers your legal responsibility to third parties. If you damage your car in the accident, your insurance company pays them because you bought Collision Coverage, which is a first party coverage. (This is a quick synopsis, which ignores complications such as PIP, in no-fault states, and Medical payments and UM and UIM. Post a question at the relevant Reference desk or at my talk page if you want to know more.SPhilbrick T 18:55, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles that Need Editing for Grammar, etc?

I am not great at Wiki formatting, but I consider myself pretty good at editing, etc. Is there a way to find pages in need of grammatical editing, etc? I are great at English. (That's a joke, by the way) I'm behind you until you look (talk) 06:32, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If they have been tagged (and many have not been), then they should be listed at Category:Wikipedia articles needing copy edit. Alternatively, you might join The Guild of Copy Editors, or WikiProject Grammar - both of whom will have links to articles in need of work. The other option is to look at a random article by clicking on Random article in the navigation box below the Wikipedia logo on the top left of the screen - keep doing that until you find an article which needs working on! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 07:16, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Media Matters

Do you feel that Media Matters should be used as an impartial citation? I have seen it listed on several of the living people I have looked up. It appears to be blatanly left leaning in it's interpretation of news events.209.30.40.217 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:13, 5 February 2010 (UTC).[reply]

If you've got a concern about a source, you may want to look at the Reliable Sources noticeboard. Not sure if Media Matters has been discussed there or not. Tony Fox (arf!) 17:11, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find anywhere on WP:RS that says that sources have to be impartial. Most newspapers have an editorial stance: that does not necessarily make them unreliable. --ColinFine (talk) 17:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Media Matters (disambiguation page) says there are 3 organisations with this name, 2 of which could be the one you're talking about. Be sure to specify which one when asking at RS. --A Knight Who Says Ni (talk) 16:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abraham Maslow

please i need to know the understanding off Abraham maslows hierachy off needs and this understanding off needs and how successful communication with people off each levels? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.210.6.193 (talk) 19:29, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does Maslow's hierarchy of needs help? – ukexpat (talk) 19:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

nypd auxiliary...

i am very confused...under the training section for auxiliary it states that they ARE considered peace officers.... and then under the controversy section it states that UNDER CURRENT LAWS...THEY ARE NOT... what gives..whats the real answer...my understanding is that they are but ONLY while are duty... so are they not peace officers on duty or not....74.65.195.22 (talk) 23:46, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please ask on the article's talk page here: Talk:New York City Police Department Auxiliary Police. – ukexpat (talk) 02:01, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But that's a legal question; don't ask here. Wikipedia cannot offer medical, legal, or other professional advice, and makes no assertion that our content is correct. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:18, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not every question about the law is a a request for legal advice; otherwise we'd have to throw out about 5 to 10 percent of Wikipedia (e.g. what does the Civil Rights Act or the European Treaty say about something?) But, while I hate as much as any other Wikipedia editor to shuttle newcomers' questions around to other pages, this particular question about a particular article does belong on its talk page, as UKexpat (of which I'm another) says above. If that doesn't clarify things, you could ask about the general question (the law-enforcement authority of Auxiliary members and trainees) at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. This page is primarily to help new editors to create, improve or expand articles in Wikipedia, or to deal with various unfamiliar administrative policies at Wikipedia. ¶ If however, the original enquiry is based upon a particular incident, I'd join Orange Mike in advising the enquirer to seek advice from a qualified legal professional (i.e. a lawyer), not a semi-random group of anonymous Internet users from many states, countries, backgrounds and political views. —— Shakescene (talk) 02:41, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Wards in Wikipedia

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 19:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support,

I was searching Mike Ward to see who showed up and I didn't see myself on the list so I wrote an article about me. Is this OK to do or do I have to follow a certain format so that it will appear within Wikipedia when people do search for me under mike ward?

Thanks,

Mike Ward —Preceding unsigned comment added by Whoismikeward (talk • contribs) 05:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should not write an article about yourself: writing an article about yourself is necessarily a conflict of interest. Furthermore, only articles about people who meet Wikipedia's criteria of notability are acceptable (it may be you meet these criteria: I haven't searched).

However, what you have done is write your User page, and that is acceptable, provided you conform to the guidelines in WP:USER. However, those guidelines emphasise that your user page is about your contribution to Wikipedia, and may not be used for self-promotion. Therefore, as it stands, your User page is likely to be nominated for deletion at WP:MfD.

I suggest you read what Wikipedia is not: among the things it is not, are a directory and an advertising medium. --ColinFine (talk) 10:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated it for speedy deletion as blatant advertising. – ukexpat (talk) 16:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now deleted. – ukexpat (talk) 19:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Linking pages

Hi,

I'm failry sure that this is going to be quite straightforward but I'm having difficulty linking 2 pages. I guess once you've done it once it's pretty easy. I just need some help getting out of the blocks so to speak.

I need/want to link this page:

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

To the Alphabetical listings under "T" on this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Knights_Commander_of_the_Royal_Victorian_Order&from=Muhammad+of+Negeri+Sembilan

the link needs to sit alphabetically beneath 'Crispin Tickell'

with a reciprical link[?]

Can any fine person out there help me in this task. I'd love to have a hnadle on how to do it rather than someone just magic it for me.

Please don't hesitate to get in touch.

Thanks in advance,

Tobyt

<email redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobytids10 (talk • contribs) 07:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You add an article to a category by placing [[Category:Knights Commander of the Royal Victorian Order]] anywhere on the page - conventionally at the bottom. See WP:Categories.

That will however sort it by the article title, and hence put it under 'J'. You can get that entry (and indeed the existing categories) to sort properly by placing {{DEFAULTSORT:Tidmarsh}} anywhere on the page.

However, this category should NOT be added to the page unless the page contains sourced information about the honour.

There may be a further complication. I'm guessing from your Username that you may be related to Jay Tidmarsh: if you are, you are strongly discouraged from editing the article: see WP:COI.

Please do not include contact details in your questions. We are unable to provide answers by any off-wiki medium and this page is highly visible across the internet. The details have been removed, but if you want them to be permanently removed from the page history, please email oversight-l

lists.wikimedia.org. --ColinFine (talk) 08:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have added {{DEFAULTSORT:Tidmarsh, Jay}} to Jay Tidmarsh. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:09, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why you delete this

Why you delete this..

I was really upset.. could you say why you are deleting this.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ezhil 1986 (talk • contribs) 11:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you clarify what was deleted? I can't work it out from your contribution history or talk page. If you are asking about Ezhilarasan, it was not deleted but moved into userspace (you can now find it as your userpage, User:Ezhil 1986, presumably because it appeared to be autobiographical. The speedy deletion tag now at Ezhilarasan is seeking to get rid of the redirect from article space to your userspace. Gonzonoir (talk) 12:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you mean why the page you created at Ezhilarasan was moved to User:Ezhil 1986. It was unsuited as an article per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#A7 and Wikipedia:Notability (people) so it was moved to your user page. It could easily have been deleted instead. See also Wikipedia:Autobiography. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do I create a fact box?

How do I create a fact box? ( the info box on the left side right below the title on a wikipedia page) I am trying to create a new entry and I need help making the fact box. It is a business. I don't know how to edit the intro or the fact box.

Hbmedia (talk) 11:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox should be on the right side. See Help:Infobox. You may want Template:Infobox company. See Help:Section#Editing before the first section. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And for a company the correct template is {{Infobox company}}. The documentation on that page should tell you all you need to know to add it to the article. – ukexpat (talk) 15:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

military communication

which communication is used in military.

options: cdma,tdma,fdma or any other one —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajayyaja (talk • contribs) 12:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps. You may want to say which military it is. Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Transmit electric energy into radio waves

can we transmit electric energy into radio waves? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.248.21.66 (talk) 12:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried the Science section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Stub

I was looking at an article regarding Les, Incorporated and the Rogak P-18. Your article states it is 9 mm. I have one that is 30 cal. Luger. I was wondering how many of those were made, since it appears that there were only 2300 made total. I am having great difficulty understanding how to do things here since I am not real computer intelligent. I just survive. I can take pictures of my gun if needed but it looks exactly as the one you have pictured. It is just that the caliber is different. Thank you Tom Buie —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tommys67 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page is for help in using Wikipedia. You would be better asking this question at the Talk page for the article in question. (I would provide a link to it, but I'm not sure which article you mean). Go to the article, pick the tab at the top labelled 'talk', and edit that to post your question: there you will be addressing people who have a particular knowledge or interest in the subject of the article. --ColinFine (talk) 00:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think Talk:Steyr GB must be the place. --ColinFine (talk) 00:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Music Education

The article on American music education history appears to be based in large part on my book, "A History of American Music Education" (3rd ed, Rowman & Littlefield, 2007), but the book is not cited in the article. As virtually the only contemporary text used in American universities for music education history, it should appear somewhere in the Wikipedia article (an abbreviated version of the book, "A Concise History of American Music Education" is used in some undergraduate classes).

Michael Mark```` —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaellmark (talk • contribs) 16:09, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the moment I have added it to the further reading section. If you believe that the article is in violation of copyright, please let us know and we will take steps accordingly - Wikipedia takes copyright violation very seriously. – ukexpat (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

using native american languages

why doesn't wickpida come in some native american languages? like cherokee? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.171.168.28 (talk) 15:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a Cherokee language Wikipedia at http://chr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E1%8E%A4%E1%8E%B5%E1%8E%AE%E1%8E%B5%E1%8F%8D%E1%8F%97. The complete like of all language Wikipedias can be read at List of Wikipedias. --Mysdaao ^talk 15:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or in a prettier format: Cherokee Wikipedia Main Page. – ukexpat (talk) 16:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting a page

I've been going around Recent Changess, and ssometimess I'll notice a page devoted entirely to vandalissm. How do I get rid of them? Varicious (talk) 23:26, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can tag for speedy deletion - see WP:CSD Ronhjones ^(Talk) 23:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trouble editing and going live

In brief: I was blocked from editing because of an innappropriate choice of a user name; the second name I chose turned out to be a spammer, finally I was unblocked, but nearly a month passed before my username was changed. I reduced the contents of the article to a stub to avoid being tagged "promotional". Someone started cleaning up the wiki on my article after I had some difficulty (thanks!). I tagged it "new unreviewed article".User:AMWoodall/new article name here Today while logging in I found another article with the same name "Pomodoro Technique" that I did not write and has been tagged for non-notability (no refs). I don't understand if the article I submitted for review actually has the name "Pomodoro Technique" since it says "New article" and I can't change it. And I don't understand where to go from here. Help/advice appreciated! AMWoodall (talk) 07:33, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]