Wikipedia:Help desk

Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)

• For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• If your question is about a Wikipedia article, draft article, or other page on Wikipedia, tell us what it is!
• Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).

Ask a question

March 29

File:Second Revolution Flag 2x3.svg

I do not usually challenge images but I believe that this image should be deleted because it may not have either a copyright tag or an acceptable fair use rationale. Even if {{Symbol rationale}} was added, it still may be rendered in too high a resolution. Also, I do not believe the source as given is correct. Can an expert look at this and make a determination. --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 01:13, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I doubt they can copyright it. It is just a minor modification of the Betsy Ross flag which is probably PD.--Canoe1967 (talk) 01:45, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

List notability and styles

This [[1]] has raised a style question with respect to listing a notable person in a list.

One editor feels that if someone is no longer practicing something they were notable for, they should be listed as "former". Their comment was:

"This dispute is simply about the word "former". Once a person is no longer doing what made them notable in the first place, they should have the word "former" (or something similar) attached to their description."

In this case it is a radio personality who at the moment is not on the radio. I feel that then style should refereence what the subject is notable for, not for what they used to be. Unless they we actually notable for being a "former radio personality". I don't see how that coud happen, but anything is possible I guess.

A very cursory glance shows that most lists in Wikipedia tend to follow my prefered syntax. Is there a style guideline which might be of assistance? I'd like to try finding one before asking for an RfC on such a minor syntactical issue. Fasttimes68 (talk) 04:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't find any coverage in the Manual of Style pages, but radio personality seems like an individual could do it again on any given day for the rest of their lives, like 'author' or 'commentator'. He's a 'Former radio host', but 'Media personality', as he is actively podcasting. Lists in tables can be more clear, see the Prior Experience column of List of current United States Senators#Members by state, but unnecessary on location pages. Dru of Id (talk) 05:17, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Mistake at "Marble Falls, TX"

Hello,

I was editing the current population of Marble Falls, TX, and the format was disrupted somehow. I was not able to resolve the issue. Could someone help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.221.153.112 (talk) 05:54, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

 Fixed Replaced your )] with ]]. Dru of Id (talk) 06:05, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

How to make different versions in Wikipedia (Same Topic)

How do I create different version of the same topic in terms of language. For example I created a page in english version and I want to have it also available in german language for example without having to leave the english version page. I want it to be located on the left navigation of the page for the different languages. Do I have to create a page first for the german version and link it to the english version? how do I do that? Please advise. Visit this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGS_S.A. for the sample of what I want to attain. It has different languages to choose from without having to leave the main page.Sgssm (talk) 06:12, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you would have to create the German version first and then link the two with interlanguage links. Dismas|^(talk) 06:22, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

The necessary tools should all be available through Category:Wikipedia translation, its subcategories, and articles. Many interlanguage links are added by bots, with readers and editors as human quality control, reporting errors. Dru of Id (talk) 06:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I created the english version last week http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGS_Agricultural_Services and tried to create the german version http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGS_Agricultural_Services of it the other day but it was proposed for deletion. why is that so? Could someone tell what is the process for creating the different language with the same topic?Sgssm (talk) 06:40, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

My German isn't good enough to read their policies but it might have something to do with their standards for inclusion versus the English standards. Not all Wikipedias have the same rules as to what is allowed and what isn't. I'd ask at the German Wikipedia why the article is up for deletion. Dismas|^(talk) 06:44, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your fast feedback and help. I've read this under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Translation/German/Translation_advice: "Interwikis Remember to code the bottom interwiki line "[[de:xxx]]" for the deutsch link. German Wikipedia bots edit its articles to backlink interwiki "en:" (within 5 hours); once "[[de:xxx]]" is added to an English article, the German article "xxx" is later bot-edited to backlink (with "en:") by various bots such as Alexbot or Grouchobot." -What does this mean? Do I have to put "[[de:xxx]]" at the bottom of my article in the english version? and replace the XXX with the name of the article I made in german version? For example: [[de:SGS Agricultural Services]]?? Did I get it right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sgssm (talk • contribs) 07:08, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

That's right - add that to the English version, and the bots should notice this and fix up the German version. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:20, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for your help. I have already linked it to the english version. But I still have one problem. The page I created in german language has been proposed for deletion. What should I do? Sgssm (talk) 08:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

sorry to say the english version reads like a promotional page for the company and might well get nominated for deletion as well. MilborneOne (talk) 17:32, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with MilborneOne. Some examples are:

• It may be appropriate somewhere in the article to mention the number of staff and the number of offices, but doing so in the WP:LEDE looks like promotional language
• "a complete range of services" is peacock language. --ColinFine (talk) 09:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Blue background?

Starting today, Wikipedia appears to have a blue background that stretches across part of every page. I've attached a screenshot depicting what I see. It's quite annoying; does anyone know how to get rid of it or what it is caused by? Thanks. Screenshot: http://i.imgur.com/FBUPt.png 174.63.29.45 (talk) 07:51, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

It's almost certainly not a problem with Winkipedia. First thing to try is 'purge browser cache', second: reboot. ~Eric F184.76.225.106 (talk) 10:11, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Bypass your cache for how to completely clear the cache. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:53, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Cleared cache. Didn't change anything; this issue is specific to Chrome (tried Firefox and it was fine) it seems but I tried disabling all my extensions, full browsing history clear, etc. with no avail. Really odd. Anyone have any ideas? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 32.178.182.110 (talk) 15:45, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't have the problem in Chrome whether I'm logged in or out. If you completely cleared the cache under the Tools menu as described at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache#Google Chrome then I don't know what causes it. Does the blue disappear at any of these:

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk?useskin=vector
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk?useskin=monobook
3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk?useskin=vector
4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk?useskin=monobook

monobook has a different page layout. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Hm, I'm getting the same problem in Chrome (but Safari was fine). Clearing the cache did nothing, but the two "monobook" links above showed the normal white background. "Vector" links still had the blue bg. Is that enough information to know what's causing it and how to fix it permanently? It's quite hard to read at the moment! 98.218.23.245 (talk) 01:32, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't know the cause or a general fix. It works for me in the current Google Chrome 18.0.1025.142 on Windows Vista. It also worked in 17.0.963.83 before I updated during this discussion. And it works in Internet Explorer, Firefox and Opera. Which Chrome version and operating system do you have? You can change individual pages to monobook by adding ?useskin=monobook to the url, but it's not preserved when you change page. Registered users can change their skin permanently to MonoBook or other options at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. The default skin changed from MonoBook to Vector in 2010. Unregistered users always see the default skin unless they have ?useskin= in the url. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:32, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm using the most current Chrome (18.0.1025.142 as you have above) but on a Mac: OS X 10.6.8 to be specific. The blue background started just a couple days ago and wasn't associated with any software or other update on my end that I know of. Just now I did a complete software update to see if that changed anything but it's still the same, blue for no discernible reason. Googling the problem brought me to this webpage: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=113711 . I'm afraid I can't make heads or tails of the coding discussion there but perhaps it will be helpful to someone here? Thank you to everyone who is spending time on this! 98.218.23.245 (talk) 04:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. I can now reproduce the problem in Chrome by changing the Zoom level to below 100%. Zoom can be changed up and down with Ctrl++ and Ctrl+-. It's reset to 100% with Ctrl+0. Zoom can also be changed by scrolling the mouse wheel while Ctrl is pressed down. Some people do this accidentally. Do you have Zoom below 100%? If so, is it on purpose? PrimeHunter (talk) 14:08, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

OP here (174.63.29.45 and 32.178.182.110 although my IP changes a lot). Bypassing cache etc. also did not work, but the monobook skin did. I'm also on OSX with this problem starting a few days ago. I purposely have my zoom at 67% or 75% usually just because I have a small monitor, and a small zoom let's me see a lot more information on it at once. I'm guessing due to the recent nature of the problem and the fact that it only exists in Chrome/OSX at small zoom, that it was a recent change in how Chrome renders zoomed vectorized images causing this. For now I suppose I'll just use Wikipedia at 100% zoom, as the blue background is surprisingly very annoying. Thanks for your help with diagnosis! 18.202.1.190 (talk) 08:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks like the bug isn't OSX specific but just Chrome specific and caused by Wikipedia's attempt to be compatible with IE (sigh..). Detailed explanation for those curious can be seen in reply 21 here: http://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?can=2&start=0&num=100&q=&id=113711#makechanges 18.202.1.190 (talk) 08:08, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Under Windows XP, either Monobook or Vector, Chrome 17.0.963.83 was fine at all zoom levels. Chrome 18.0.1025.142 is fine at normal zoom Ctrl+0 or any level of Ctrl++, but shows the blue background fault at all levels of Ctrl+-. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:27, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

bugzilla:34551 has been closed with this post by User:Edokter:

"This is a Chrome bug introduced in Chrome 18. There is nothing wrong with the CSS, as any permutation of the CSS rule results in the bug being displayed. In essense, Chrome seems to ignore or mis-interpret the repeat-x/y attributes when the zoom level is below 100%. Short term fix: use 100% zoom level. There is nothing we can do about it, so I'm closing this as INVALID."

PrimeHunter (talk) 21:08, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Problem with images

When I click on an image, it actually opens in a new page. and when I again click on it to see its full view/resolution...it opens in a dark background. Because of this the black colour text is not visible... see this link.....

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Wikimedia-servers-2010-12-28.svg/2000px-Wikimedia-servers-2010-12-28.svg.png

Check the legends at the bottom of this page.. This not only happens for this image only, but for many images... Correct it soon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sriram.aeropsn (talk • contribs) 08:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't know the answer, but I do know the next question to ask: what is your browser name and version? -- John of Reading (talk) 09:25, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

That image has a "clear" background -- you must have your default background set to black, therefore the black text cannot be seen. (It looks fine with my default white background.

Depending on your browser, the background color setting might be in the browser's options, or it could be a Windows 'Appearance' setting, or it could be (most likely) a non-default browser 'skin'. ~Eric F184.76.225.106 (talk) 10:42, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm suddenly noticing this effect when viewing clear-background image pages as well. Either there's been a change in the default in Wikipedia's Vector skin in a recent update to Firefox (I'm using v11.0 on OS X). DMacks (talk) 15:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

How does original research apply to images? WP:OI

File:Alemannic-Dialects-Map-English.png is very interesting, but it is very vague about its sources and cites lots of examples. Is this synthesis of existing arguments/data, or Original Research? --Quentin Smith 09:44, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Good question. I don't have the answer, but I'd suggest the principle problem with the image is it says its sources were German Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia cannot be used a source, it should be referencing the original source(s). Whether it is synthesis rather depends on whether it's saying something the original sources (whatever they were) don't. You'd either need to read German or know the subject to determine that. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 14:08, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

doi pointing to jstor

In a specific reference there is a doi and a JSTOR link. The doi however points to the JSTOR page, thus both links point to the same page. Should I keep the doi or the JSTOR link? -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 10:46, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd think keep the doi. It's the intrinsic identifier of the article itself, not an identifier for the article in the collection of a certain provider. The doi is more useful for others to use when locating the article (bibliographic data other than just as a clickable link) and in the future the publisher could move it to some other provider. DMacks (talk) 18:40, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

The most recent Wikipedia Signpost issue is empty

Why is the latest issue of Wikipedia Signpost, http://www.wikipediasignpost.com/blog/?p=555 (or http://www.wikipediasignpost.com/blog/), empty?

(However, Wikipedia Signpost (showing the last issue?) seems to have the expected content).

--Mortense (talk) 10:48, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

The About page says it's maintained by HaeB so I would ask at User talk:HaeB. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:46, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

How do I enable automatic categorization of tagged pages?

I created Template:Stub redirect (see the section 'proposed redirect' above from March 27, where the template was requested). How can I achieve that tagged pages get automatically added to a category like Category:Articles to be redirected from March 2012 the same way as Template:Merge to adds tagged pages to something like Category:Articles to be merged from November 2011? -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 14:26, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

It seems to work now. If you test it then note that the template must be in mainspace. This is automatically tested before placing the page in "Category:Articles ...". PrimeHunter (talk) 15:49, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Okay thanks. I don't have a page to test this right now, so I'll have to wait until I come across one where this would be appropriate. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 17:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

You can just preview. Categories are shown on preview. You can also use Special:ExpandTemplates to see the generated code on a given page. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:53, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I fixed the template markup and now everything seems to work as intended. Special:ExpandTemplates is a really nice feature I was unaware of until now. Thank you. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 20:12, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

How much "notability" does a biography subject need?

I'd like to create an article about a cartoonist who has worked for several decades and whose work has been featured in local and national newspapers and magazines, such as the New Yorker, USA Today, Good Housekeeping, etc. He has won many awards for his cartoons over the years, especially from the Maryland Delaware DC Press Association.

He is in his early 60s and will be retiring soon, not from cartooning, but from a side job he has held for many years. I'm sure he will continue to create his wonderful cartoons for as long as he can and I believe he has earned a Wikipedia article that acknowledges his contribution to the cartooning industry.

Since he is not exactly a household name, I am concerned about notability issues. Will there be a problem with this article being accepted?

Thank you. Teresar WV (talk) 16:39, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Does WP:BIO help?--ukexpat (talk) 16:43, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

In addition to what ukexpat has said, I feel you can create an article on him (what is the name of the cartoonist)? After starting the article, you can send me the article URL in my talk page, I'll add the article in my watchlist and will try to contribute in that article too (if you need). --Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 16:46, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll chime in:

• The fact that he has worked for several decades doesn't imply notability.
• The fact that his work has appeared (note "appeared" has a different meaning than "featured", which would mean the publication has devoted special attention or prominence to his work) may imply some notability. On the other hand, if I got a letter-to-the-editor published in several newspapers and magazines, would that make me notable? Being published doesn't necessarily imply notability.
• Winning several awards of national or regional scope would work though.
• And of course, if you can find reliable independent sources profiling him, that would help the most.

I suggest you draft the article in your own user space first. Just create an article User:Teresar WV/Cartoonist (replace "Cartoonist" with the man's name) and go from there. That way you can work on it at your leisure without worrying about it getting deleted. ~Amatulić (talk) 16:48, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I'll go with the list Amatulic offered. The most important one, IMO, is getting reliable independent sources. Also, the section on Creative people in WP:BIO talks about how he has influenced others. If he has, and this can be documented, it certainly is a contributing factor toward notability. --Tim Sabin (talk) 17:00, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Here are a few you may was to browse for ideas: Category:Canadian cartoonists--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Note, however, that you cannot use other articles within Wikipedia to provide sufficient notability. You may, however, use the references found there for your own article. --Tim Sabin (talk) 17:34, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much, everyone, for your responses. I'm still in research mode about the person in question, so hopefully I'll have worthy material to post. Looking at many articles - especially about artists and cartoonists - confused me because there are biographies of people on Wikipedia that are only a small paragraph with no considerable accomplishments of any kind. I still believe this is worth continuing and will try to do my best to create an acceptable entry. Teresar WV (talk) 18:07, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Please be aware that some articles "slip through the cracks". If they don't have any significant contributions, it may simply be that no one has looked closely at it. When someone, sometime does look at little closer, it may either get improved, or proposed for deletion.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 20:49, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

New to Wikipedia

How can I get started. I have information I would like to add — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ladygolf (talk • contribs) 17:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I've put a few links onto your user talk page. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

What do you wish to add? If it's a biographic article, see the section above on notability. If it's anything else, you still need to establish notability. Read up on things like "weasel words" and avoid their use. Stay away from fringe theories. --Tim Sabin (talk) 17:38, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

You may also wish to take other editors' comments with a grain of salt. Your best advice is in the wikipedia guidelines on your talk page. Most editors will advise and link to the guideline or policy they are advising on.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:50, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

MediaWiki talk:Watchlist-details

Hi,

I have placed a request at MediaWiki talk:Watchlist-details. It has been there for over 24 hours without objection, but it has also not been responded to. Have I missed something? It is quite urgent that this is sorted out because the current wording is potentially misleading people about the nature of a community discussion, with consequent ill-informed opinions being expressed.

Yaris678 (talk) 17:37, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Done. For future reference, on a request like this you might add an {{Edit protected}} request to the talk page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks. Maybe the need for {{Edit protected}} should be mentioned at the top of the page and/or on Wikipedia:Watchlist notices. Yaris678 (talk) 14:08, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Old username on talk pages and changing username again

Hi, I have a few questions concerning my username:

1. I usurped my current username about five years ago. I changed my username for privacy reasons. However, my old username (as part of my signature) still shows on various talk pages. I know as a general rule, old discussions are not to be edited (so I've been putting off what I am thinking to do). I would like to edit those signature to change the username part (yeah, it will still be in the pages history, but at least it doesn't show up on the current pages). Would this be allowed?
2. I am thinking of changing my username again for SUL purposes. Am I allowed to change my username again?
3. Is it possible to request that my current username to be "returned" to the original user after my name change?

Thanks!--Joshua ^{Say "hi" to me!}_{What I've done?} 18:30, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

User name issues are handled by bureaucrats. Not sure how many regularly read this page. I'd suggest asking at the WP:BN or Wikipedia talk:Changing username--SPhilbrick(Talk) 20:43, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

names of fields of profession or study - capital letter(s) or not?

Hi, I wonder about the right spelling (starting capital letter or not) in cases like:

• He graduated in BIOPHYSICS from the Moscow Institute...
• He studied MOLECULAR BIOPHYSICS...
• He did research in MOLECULAR BIOPHYSICS under supervision of...

I did not find it in MoS. I suppose that if it is an official name of a study program at the particular university, then there is a capital letter. And in other cases? Galapah (talk) 18:45, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi, on Wikipedia we don't use all caps for emphasis; see WP:ALLCAPS. Bold and italics are used for emphasis. However, in your case here the fields of profession or study doesn't need any special treatment (normal small letters in sentence case will do); a link to the respective articles would suffice. --Joshua ^{Say "hi" to me!}_{What I've done?} 18:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I think if they are just fields of study it would be biophysics, if it were a named faculty it would be the Department of Biophysics at the Moscow Institute.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:02, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you. (I used allcaps in order to avoid one of the possibilities.) The article on which I am working now is Edward Trifonov but I meant it as a general question as I think it should be added to the MoS.Galapah (talk) 19:08, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Well I think it is in the MoS. Joshua above linked to MOS:ALLCAPS, which is a subsection of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters, and I think they together provide clarity on this issue.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:48, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Vincent Brian Wigglesworth page

Hello, I noticed there is no image for Vincent Wigglesworth on his page. Portraits by photographer Antony Barrington Brown are going on display at the National Portrait Gallery in London, and a portrait of Dr. Wigglesworth is included.

Here is a link to the version on the NPG's website: http://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw216089/Sir-Vincent-Brian-Wigglesworth?LinkID=mp80918&role=sit&rNo=

I'm willing to volunteer to contact the Museum and ask permission to use the image and perhaps any others they would be willing to allow. I've never done that before but am willing to learn.

Thank you.

Cheers, Josie Babin — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spingus (talk • contribs) 19:06, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Non-free_content#Images. It seems the copyright is that of the photographer's estate. You could upload a small version under fair use guidelines without permission. You may wish to look for free content images first though.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

(note)This image has a creative commons licence with atribution:http://jeb.biologists.org/content/207/1/1/F8.expansion.html--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:36, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

The JEB license for articles (I'm not sure that applies to this photo) is CC-BY-NC-SA, which is not free enough because of the NC. —teb728 t c 00:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

External Linking

Respected Sir/Ma'am

I have added few links of my website in the See also section on few wiki pages. These links are appropriate on the respective wiki pages.

I hope I'm not doing anything wrong.

Thanks

Dr Jaskeerat Singh. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.199.103.39 (talk) 19:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure an Admin will tell you that links in the 'See also' section need to have established some degree of 'notability'. You should at least make a case in the 'Talk' page for the articles as to why you think your links belong there. ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 20:00, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not an admin but I will tell you that you should usually avoid indiscriminately adding links to articles, even if you think they are useful, unless they are serving to reference the text. This is even more important when you have a conflict of interest with the website. The see also section in an article should only be used for Wikipedia links to articles which are related to the subject. Some articles have an external links section, but these tend to be restricted to a few, where they are important (such as the official website of a football club). I'll review the links you added and let you know what I do in a moment. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:12, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Dr Jaskeerat Singh. I'm afraid I have removed the links from each of the pages you added them to for the reasons I posted above. There might have been scope to keep them as a reference; however, because they are blog posts, they do not pass Wikipedia's standards of reliable sourcing. Thanks for trying to help - if there are any areas of medicine which you could help improve, I would encourage you to do so. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:17, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I forgot to say: If you disagree with my actions, feel free to start a discussion on the issue. I would suggest posting a comment on the talk pages of one of the articles. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 20:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Translations within articles

I've been editing on WP for several years, but haven't ever come across these two related issues that I find perplexing. I'm editing the article Wen Miao (Taiwan Confucian Temple: Tainan Kong Miao) (really just trying to add sections to it). First, it translates all years into another calendar style (for example: "It was established in 1665 (19 years Yong Li)." This is done about four times in the article.

Second, much of the article is written using Chinese terms, then translates them into English. For example: "The Wen Chang Ci (scholars’ shrine) and the Tu Di Ci (land’s shrine) were built inside of the Ling Xing Men (a big gate)." I haven't counted, but this is done at least 70 to 100 times in the article, sometimes three or four times within the same sentence.

Are either of these styles acceptable? Thanks in advance for any assistance. JimVC3 (talk) 19:51, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I looked at a few of the names beside dates. One seems to match close. 1665 (19 years Yong Li), is 20yr after the death of a similar name Li Zicheng. In 1684 (23 years Kang Xi) seems to not relate to a birth or death.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

(note) It was 23 years into his reign.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:35, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

There is already an article about the subject at Taiwan Confucian Temple.--Joshua ^{Say "hi" to me!}_{What I've done?} 20:43, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Is one of those 'merge' templates in order then?--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:56, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Good catch Joshua. The articles are substantially the same. I'd recommend deleting the one I'm working on rather than attempting a merge and will tag it. Thanks for the help. JimVC3 (talk) 21:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

adding external links

We are a 60-year old non-profit archives with online published finding aids on people and institutions covered by Wikipedia. We wanted to add external links to these finding aids, but received a threat that we may be blacklisted for spamming. The links do not go to our homepage, but directly to the finding aid where detailed inventories of collection material on that person or institution can be researched. Are we able to add such links? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyn Pederson (talk • contribs) 21:05, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I think threats are a no-no on wikipedia. You may have to discuss adding the links on each of the talk pages for the articles. If you get consenus or no response, you should be able to add them. If it is a good database I doubt it would be blacklisted. IMBD is used extensively, is not recommended as reliable; but it is not blacklisted.--Canoe1967 (talk) 21:25, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

For greater clarity for other editors, the archive spoken of, appears to be onearchives. It appears notable enough to have it's own WP article.ONE National Gay & Lesbian Archives --Aspro (talk) 21:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Editing Wikitables

Hello, I would like to ask how to you get a "Wikitable" next to another one. For example in this article, in the charts and certifications section, the certifications wikitable is placed next to the charts table but in this article the certifications are under the charts table. How can I place them side by side? Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WWETrishMickiefan (talk • contribs) 21:59, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

It's function of between these nowiki tags, which you can see spaced ordinarily in edit mode: ==Section== {{col-begin}} {{col-2}} ===Subsection 1=== {| class="wikitable sortable" |- |} {{col-2}} ===Subsection 2=== {| class="wikitable" |- |} {{col-end}} .

Just add additional tables next to the others for spacing, if desired, and drop the nowiki tags. Dru of Id (talk) 22:37, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

NJ Charter Study Commission

Finding the right place for this comment is too time consuming...........but your firt line says that only those under a Faulkner Form of Government can use the Charter Study option to change their form...........very wrong. Any form of government can use the Charter Study Option. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.115.170.37 (talk) 22:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Which article are you referring to, Charter Study Commission? —teb728 t c 23:55, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

If so, the best place to discuss questions about it is Talk:Charter Study Commission. --ColinFine (talk) 09:27, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Time format

I am trying to locate a Wiki policy on how to present the time in an article, 5PM,1700, 5'o'clock etc.

I believe the guideline you are looking for is MOS:TIME. —teb728 t c 23:58, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

March 30

'Listen' link

The embedded 'Listen' links used to work fine, but recently, using it opens a page with a media player. To get back to the original page requires pressing the 'Back' button. -- Very annoying.
Example: Mongolian pronunciation: [tʃiŋɡɪs xaːŋ] From Genghis Khan -- Is it just me? Or does this happen to everybody? -- Is it a problem with browser (Firefox), or WP? ~Eric F184.76.225.106 (talk)

Works fine for me in MSIE 9 under Vista. VLC Player comes up and plays the word without fuss. Click to close the little player window afterwards, or just click on the Web page to continue with whatever I want. Jim.henderson (talk) 00:35, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

For me it opens page: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cd/GenghisKhan01.ogg which is blank except for player. When done, I have to use 'Back'. It used to (and should) play in background as an OLE embedded object. ~E Falk 184.76.225.106 (talk) 00:40, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Looking for ancesters

Italic text' I read your article on Ed Asner. I am currently researching my ancestors. My grandmother's maiden name was spelt Asjner and came from Poland by was at the time Russia. She made a trip to New York in 1907 and always wondered whether she went to visit relatives. As she died very young not even my father knew anything.

As most people who came out of Poland and Russia changed their names. I wonder if Ed Asner's family dropped the "J" ? I am looking for anyway that you may contact him to answer my question. Our family came from Warta or Blaski as it has changed names according to the country in power.

Thanking you kindly, Mathilde Cobb {nee Scheps) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.146.65.235 (talk) 03:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

His IMDb page suggests their premium service may have contact info for his agent. —teb728 t c 03:34, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

These findagrave.com entries here are, respectively, his brother, mother, and father. No indication of the name origin or changes. Good luck. Dru of Id (talk) 03:42, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Template help!

I am coding User:Calliopejen1/Expand language sandbox to replace {{Expand language}} and all of its progeny like {{Expand Spanish}} with one standard template with a language parameter. The last step of merging them that I'm having trouble with is setting up a certain set of standard topic categories applicable to large languages, that may be added to as needed (say, Dr. Blofeld tags 1000 municipalities in Argentina with the template and the potential translator doesn't want to wade through all of them to find the other geography articles). Here is what I had that didn't seem to work so I removed it: [2]. Any better solutions? Feel free to edit in my sandbox. Thanks!!! Calliopejen1 (talk) 03:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I've made an edit. I haven't tested it, but I hope the general idea is clear enough. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:53, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Great, thanks! That worked perfectly! Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Under Miss Minnesota USA

How do you add that Anne Marie Moore Miss Minnesota USA 2001, later became Mrs. Minnesota United States 2011 as Anne Marie Moore her married name? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.139.155 (talk) 03:57, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't follow. Her surname was the same when she was "Miss" and as "Mrs.", and both were 'Moore'? She married somebody also named Moore? ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 04:09, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

It's possible. It's also possible that she never changed her name. It's not mandatory. Dismas|^(talk) 04:20, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

When she was Miss Minnesota it was under her maiden name: Anne Marie Clausen. If I understand what you want to add -- you could add that she was later Mrs. Minnesota United States 2011 as Anne Marie Moore her married name, in the table under 'Notes' column. -- on this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_Minnesota_USA ~Eric F184.76.225.106 (talk) 04:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

The only problem is -- the only reference I could find for "Mrs. Minnesota United States 2011" is a flikr photo (which implies that she was there, but not necessarily the winner); and "Mrs.United States" for 2011 was MRS. FLORIDA - Shannon Ford. I'm not up on pageant terminology or whatnot; but I assume you are referring to her as being the Minnesota contestant in the Mrs. U.S. pageant. ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 09:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

image visibility

Hello -- I've asked for a duplicate image of a chart to be deleted, but now the one I want is not becoming visible in my article: AUI_symbols,_AUI_chart.jpg in the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AUI_(artificial_language) though the markup is that same....?? Also I want to change the title of the article to aUI, The Language of Space (constructed language) but haven't found how to edit a title, it's not visible under the edit function. thanks, Andrea Weilgart Patten — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andiweilgart (talk • contribs) 04:52, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Is it appearing the way you wanted it to now? (There was a pipe ( | ) where there should have been a period). - Purplewowies (talk) 05:19, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Re: image visibility/title change

Hi -- my image of the chart is now visible, thank you! So now I just need to edit the title of the article...can't find where you do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andiweilgart (talk • contribs) 19:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

What article are you talking about? Is it possibly aUI (artificial language)? It helps if you don't assume we know what you're talking about since we may not have read or been part of your previous discussions. If you want to change the name of an article, the article must be moved to the new title. See WP:MOVE. Dismas|^(talk) 20:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I think it is aUI (artificial language), but I don't see any reason to move that article from its current title, which seems to comply with WP:TITLE.--ukexpat (talk) 20:18, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Is the title it was moved to a better title or not? - Purplewowies (talk) 20:21, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

The OP seems to have figured it out. It's now at aUI, The Language of Space (constructed language) which seems quite awkward and wordy. Dismas|^(talk) 20:22, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Re: image visibility/title change

Thanks! In the meantime I had figured it out and moved/changed the title. aUI, The Language of Space is the complete title of the language; the part in parentheses was there before, but I changed it to constructed....thought it better, functions as clarification, but one could leave it off if you think it's too wordy....?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andiweilgart (talk • contribs) 20:32, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I've moved the 3 parts of this thread together. It was confusing to have 3 threads on the same topic. - David Biddulph (talk) 23:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Want feedback on new article

I would like feedback from other editors on an article I have been working on in my sandbox about Michael L Trope, a trial lawyer and previous sports agent and see if it is ready for prime time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JoeyD2010/sandbox I would appreciate any feedback on the sandbox talk page. Thanks JoeyD2010 (talk) 06:21, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks good to me. I haven't read it in depth, but it's very well referenced, and appears to be well-structured. I would say move it to article space. If there are problems the New Page Patrol may pick them up, but I don't think it's under any risk of deletion. --ColinFine (talk) 09:31, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Article creation problem

I failed creating an article for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Cook_%28oil_executive%29# There used to be a one-click article creation. Now it is a multi-step process with lots of advice and pages explaining what to do but I got lost at the step where I was asked to enter the article Name. I used cut & paste and that was it then. I got an error message. I then tried to file a bug report but was asked for a username and password so I couldn't file the bug report immediately. Here I am now trying to raise the issue hoping that some improvement is possible to get a one-click article creation solution again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.224.11.67 (talk) 07:41, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's not a friendly error message, is it? I suggest you try again, entering only Chris Cook (oil executive) in the "name" box. You can jump directly to the final step of the wizard using this link. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:53, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Error in Wikipedia

Hi,

I would like to bring your notice to an error in the page for "Roberto Mancini".

In the personal information section, it is mentioned that he played for Bologna in "1581–1782" and for Sampdoria in "1483–1497". The correct entries should be "1981-1982" and "1983-1987".

Please make the changes and also guide me in creating a new pages.

Thanks,

Rahul Pandey <phone # redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahul8171 (talk • contribs) 11:39, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Reverted to pre-vandalism version. Dru of Id (talk) 11:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Best way would just be to click the edit button and change it yourself, but please make absolutely sure you have the correct dates first.

Ion Zone (talk) 15:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Or you could have visited the page history and clicked on the undo link. Astronaut (talk) 14:58, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Ref sorting

hello,

see Wikipedia_talk:Citing_sources#Ref_sorting. Any help appreciated. Regards.--GoP_T^C_{N 13:02, 30 March 2012 (UTC)}

What is your question? RudolfRed (talk) 19:30, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

What is your answer? (you need to click the link with the left mouse button)GoP_T^C_{N 19:34, 30 March 2012 (UTC)}

Categorizing a template

Which of the template categories at Wikipedia:Template messages#Article-related namespace would be considered the most appropriate for Template:Stub redirect? -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 14:38, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Noticeboard

Which noticeboard is the most appropriate one for reporting experienced users who have indulged in harassing other users and repeated unethical behavior like bad faith comments? Secret of success (talk) 14:48, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Probably the best idea is to follow the guidelines at dispute resolution. You could also open a WP:RFC/U. TNXMan 14:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The only one I can think of off the top of my head (having read but never used it) is WP:ANI (though the stuff I see getting reported there is usually pretty bad, so it's not a first step). You might also want to take a look at WP:DR. - Purplewowies (talk) 14:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, it involves multiple articles, so I think DR would not be really effective. Secret of success (talk) 15:06, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance? DMacks (talk) 16:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Like I said, if it is for experienced users, WQ assistance would prove nearly ineffective. Never mind, I'll try ANI itself. Secret of success (talk) 04:20, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Non-factual polemic sources are clogging up Wikipedia

I really need to talk to somebody about something that has been bugging me for quite a while but I honestly don't know where to do it. For me it is one of the biggest problems on Wikipedia, it's a problem that, as much as I love Wikipedia, makes me feel very uncomfortable about trusting it as a reference tool. Here's the thing, the most controversial articles on Wikipedia are, quite often, either entirely made up of opinions lifted from popular uncited and unresearched polemics and other non-factual sources or, at least, give a lot of undue weight to them and cite them as thought they were leading experts in the field. And even when the evidence contradicts them on every level, they are still given precedence in articles, as thought they were preferred to the facts.

While I appreciate there is a place on Wiki for various opinions, I think we really need to take a good hard look at the weight and preference that seems to be given to them, particularly the ones that are not backed up by any evidence. Very often wiki articles are being spammed with polemical arguments and claims lifted from works written by people who have very, very, POV opinions on the subject and cite little or no actual evidence to back up their case. These sources are not peer reviewed, they are not by experts in the field, they are not in any way endorsed by experts (though they are often endorsed by friends of the author), they do not use much of any evidence (anecdotes don't count), and, most of the time, they are not in any way factual. And once they are in there, and no matter how discredited their opinions are are, it is almost impossible to remove them or replace them with factual sources. And when actual evidence is added it almost always gets added in as a small end-section as though the facts are not as important as popular rhetoric.

I'm not saying we should stop citing non-experts, non-experts can sometimes be as good as experts (if they really do their research) and their opinions can often be useful, even if they are only useful in so much as they state a public opinion that can then be weighed against the evidence. However, I am a bit fed up with sifting through endless Wiki articles plagued by one-sided arguments made by people who make no attempt to back up what they are saying. I appreciate Wikipedia has an established way of working, but in my mind this is something that really needs looking into, it is by far the quickest and most common way to turn an article into a POV mess and keep it that way. Ion Zone (talk) 15:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

In an encyclopedia of 3.8 million or so articles, this unfortunately cannot be completely prevented. Due to the way we are structured, this must be addressed one article at a time: there is no magic bullet, no global solution. It might help if you offered some examples of articles which you feel are exemplars of this problem, and outline what you've tried to do to address it. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:01, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

The biggest one I know of would be the Criticism of Religion page. I spent a couple of hours on one section a little while ago. If you removed the stuff that is just plain opinion you wouldn't be left with enough to fill a postcard, however any article citing the main offenders on that page would qualify here.

Ion Zone (talk) 16:13, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

After a brief skim through that particular article, I don't see a major cause for complaint, even though there is always scope for improvement. And I wouldn't call the opinions of Christopher Hitchens, Karl Marx and Richard Dawkins, nor the counter opinions of Ayatollah Khomeini, the opinions of non-experts in this field. Astronaut (talk) 14:56, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Need a second opinion

I started an article about the Gelehrtenschule des Johanneums, an universitory preparatory school, which educated many notable scientists and politicians in Germany. The school does not charge any fees. I included this fact into the article, because I held the opion that this would be an interesting opinion as similar schools in other country typically charge high fees. Prestiguos schools in Germany often do not charge fees and students at statefunded schools typically outperform students at private schools. Yet many people from other countries may not know this. I know in other countries it often is the other way around. Another keeps deleting it, but has added the information that the school is operated and financed by the city of Hamburg (which is true). So my question is: 1. Do you think the information is relevant? If your are from another country and only learn that the school is financed by the city of Hamburg, would you understand that it does not charge fees? If you would understand, I think the article should stay like this. hope this is the right place to ask that kind of question.--Greatgreenwhale (talk) 16:34, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Could add both

Ion Zone (talk) 16:37, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I would add both points as well. Just because it's financed by the city of Hamburg does not tell me that it is free to students. I wouldn't assume anything of the sort. I went to a state school here in the US and had to pay many thousands of dollars to go there. Dismas|^(talk) 16:40, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your opinions.--Greatgreenwhale (talk) 16:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Question on Template:cite video

Is there a way to specify minutes after the citation to avoid using the same reference multiple times? For example, when citing reports, you can use this template {{rp|page=143}} to show page(s) number. Like this, this and this.

I'm asking because I want to use a documentary film as a source. (details) Mohamed CJ ^(talk) 17:55, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

See the |time parameter described in the template documentation at Template:Cite video.--ukexpat (talk) 18:01, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I think you missed my point. If I want to use the same video multiple times, for different parts of it, normally I'd have to cite it about 10 times. However, I'm asking if there was a template for videos that works in the same way Template:Rp does for reports/paper references. Mohamed CJ ^(talk) 18:25, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Oops yes I did, apologies. I don't know the answer to that question.--ukexpat (talk) 18:32, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Um, the documentation for {{Rp}} says that the page-number field "can also be used for non-paginated sources, e.g., '0:35:12' for a video source", so you would just use <ref name="foo" />{{rp|0:35:12}} and the like. Deor (talk) 22:36, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Deor! Mohamed CJ ^(talk) 07:26, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Problem

A user recently created an article that I was in the process of creating and stole all the information from my userspace to do so. How can I get it deleted? --KAVEBEAR (talk) 18:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Should we assume that this is about Julia Alapai? Most times, it's easier to give precise answers if we have examples to work off of. Without knowing what articles people are talking about, we' just making guesses. Dismas|^(talk) 19:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "stole" from your userspace. If you put information anywhere on this site, you agreed to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agreed to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License and the GFDL. You agreed that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license; so you could ask that there be some sort of credit on the talk page of the article; but that's about it. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

That being said, if you were creating the article, it sounds a bit rude, and if he submits it for DYK credit, you may wish to start a discussion at WT:DYK.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

It is Julia Alapai. I know that users don't own articles, but I am sure that wikipedia doesn't allow people to simply steal another users work off their private userspace and create the article. So does this mean I could hunt out other users' userspaces and create the articles, right? I was looking for some sort of regulation or rule that can give me the right to delete this article. If I can't delete this I will redirect the entire page back to my userspace. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 00:57, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Or can I request for deletion of the article as the original author even if I wasn't credited.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 01:02, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Don't start an edit war. Try WP:DR RudolfRed (talk) 03:06, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

A weird case with interwiki

Hi! I created the art. Nature versus nurture in the Czech WP two weeks ago. Ever since I did that, bots have not been adding interwiki to other language versions of the article. As for the English article, I added the link by hand at last. But that hasn’t changed the situation. All the other language articles still remain to be without the Czech link. Why bots do not perform their work? --Solus ipse Inc. (talk) 20:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

It might have to do with the fact that there's a week-long replication lag on Toolserver (I heard it was causing problems with some bots). I created an article on Simple and a bot did add it to the en interlanguage links during the replag, though, so I don't know if that's the reason or not. - Purplewowies (talk) 20:18, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Linebreak prevention (in a link)

How can a linebreak be prevented between "C" and "+" when used in a link? Example: Interactive Disassembler - screenshot. --Mortense (talk) 20:44, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Is it fixed now? - Purplewowies (talk) 20:49, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes! This can be generalised - I thought nowrap was not working for links, but as you have demonstrated ({{nowrap|[[C++]]}}) it does if the link is put inside. [[{{nowrap|C++}}]] would not work. --Mortense (talk) 21:06, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

user channel- favourite

Sallam

does Wikipedia has a user channel or favorite, something similar to youtube channel or favorite webpage on any web browser, if you dont can you please add this service we would like to keep a record for the articles we read Abradj (talk) 20:50, 30 March 2012 (UTC) thank you

You can add articles to your watchlist, and be notified whenever they change. Or, your can bookmark your favorite pages in your browser. RudolfRed (talk) 22:10, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I would like my pre-2012 contributions to be deleted

According the Help:User contributions page, you mentioned under the "deletion" section that "In some limited circumstances individual contributions (that is, specific edits) may be removed from public view by administrators using Revision Deletion". Since I'm not an administrator, I can't access this program, but I still would like to delete my contribution history from before 2012 (which were from 2006-2007). I feel it is outdated information that isn't necessary for other people to view or let alone "undo" (because it wouldn't be possible anyway; the information is so old). Could someone else (an administrator) please delete my 2006, 2007 contributions? I can't do it myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CastleBuff (talk • contribs) 22:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

An admin can speak to this with more authority, but I believe the answer is no. Revision Deletion is used only is certain limited, specific cases, which are outlined at WP:REVDEL#Criteria for redaction. Your 2007–2008 edits to articles are integral parts of the articles' histories and, assuming that there is evidence of them still in the articles, cannot be removed, as they are necessary for proper attribution of the articles' content. Deor (talk) 22:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Deor is correct. Revision Deletion is intended to be used extremely rarely, and in very limited situations. The possibility that some edits may be "outdated" isn't one of the reasons. I glanced at a couple of your pre-2012 edits and don’t see any that would qualify for RevDel. If there is something that is particularly an issue, and you are trying not to call attention to it, that's a smart decision. Send me an email (look on the left panel for "email this user" although it may only exist if you have email enabled.) I will be happy to look at anything privately, and see if it qualifies.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 14:15, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

How can I add a Category to an article but have the article appear on the Category page under a different name?

How can I add a Category to an article but have the article appear on the Category page under a different name?. I want to add the Category "Cars assembled in Australia" to the article "1957 Ford" which includes details on the the 1957, 1958 & 1959 US Fords. However as only the 1959 model was assemled in Asutralia I would like to see the article appear on the Category page as "1959 Ford" rather than as "1957 Ford". Is this possible please? GTHO (talk) 22:53, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

You can add the category to 1959 Ford then it should show up on the category page as 1959 Ford and then the link will take you to the page 1957 Ford. You should put a note why the category was added. GB fan 23:02, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

That's interesting GB Fan. I've never thought of adding a redirect to a category like that before. To answer the original question, though it may no longer be strictly relevant, you can pipe the name you want, in the form [[Category:XYZ|name you'd like to appear inside]]. The "|" symbol separating one side from the other is the "pipe".--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

The category page will always display the real name of the page or redirect. The code [[Category:XYZ|name]] will sort the page under name on the category page, but it will not display name. See more at Help:Category#Sort order. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

club pogo

I've been a member for several years and bought a used laptop from someone when the laptop was 3 mos. old, but now pogo won't let me in unless I download java plug-in and I contacted the previous owner to get his password and he won't give it out. Can you tell me some way that I can bypass his password to download this so I can go back and start playing again — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.150.126.134 (talk) 23:27, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6.8 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. - Purplewowies (talk) 23:32, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

You might want to ask at the Computing Ref Desk for advice on how to gain access to your PC if the previous owner won't tell you the administrator password. Astronaut (talk) 14:44, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

"Log out" link

It is only available when I navigate to another page. Thanks. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 23:57, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Please clarify. Do you mean you don't see the link here on the help desk? What is your skin and browser? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:03, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

March 31

reporting disruptive editing

I posted a complaint about disruptive editing on 03/29/2012. The person I complained about and another person who had had a similar experience with the problem editor responded. THEN THE WHOLE SECTION DISAPPEARED...and the problem individual is back to arbitrarily deleting my stuff again (as in WP:IDONTLIKEIT. What happened, how do I report it, and how to I undo it?Smm201`0 (talk) 01:01, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

It was archived. The archiving [3] said: "Archiving 5 thread(s) (older than 24h) to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive744." PrimeHunter (talk) 01:28, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Wizard of the Grand and Honourable Order of Geeks required...

... for a glitch regarding a new Wikiproject: Wikipedia:Small News. For some reason, the display is all scrunched up when viewed on my browser (Windows 7, Google Chrome), with all the text lines for each section, apart from the headings, superimposed on top of each other. I assume that it was displaying properly when entered... AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

P.S. I've just checked, and it displays properly on Internet Explorer. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:16, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

PPS - Top of page heading (35px) over-writes itself in Firefox. Others seem OK. Ariconte (talk) 03:22, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

It's scrunched in Safari, and so is the Adrienne Rich poem excerpt at the bottom of the page. ("Scrunched" being a technical term involving the vertical axis: i.e., the font size or x-height is too large relative to the leading or line height.) Rivertorch (talk) 05:32, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Evidently we've proved beyond reasonable doubt that we've broken the internet, or at least the bit that we were trying to use - but a Wizard is still required if we are to mend it. Rumour has it that such Wizards never sleep, so I still live in hope that one will come to our rescue... AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:55, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Sometime actual Wizards are busy in real life. Having tried a number of "fixes" (fortunately in preview mode) to no avail, I'd settle for anyone with just a bit of a clue. Rivertorch (talk) 06:30, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Maybe the clueful are congregated at the geeky pump. idk—I'm going offline now. Rivertorch (talk) 06:34, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

UFC Pages

Can you turn back to having specific events please. If not I will find another site to find all my information from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.208.83.40 (talk) 04:08, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Which UFC are you referring to? We aren't mind readers - and neither are we a site for 'all information'. This is an online encyclopaedia, not an exercise in telepathy and omniscience... AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:09, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Likely a reference to this, which we're currently in the process of pruning. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 06:58, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Recent changes: what's the red exclamation mark against the new page indicator?

On Special:RecentChanges, there's a red exclamation mark against some "N" new page indicators. What does the red exclamation mark signify? --A bit iffy (talk) 07:04, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

It means "not patrolled yet". Bielle (talk) 07:14, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. --A bit iffy (talk) 07:23, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Verification of reliability

The article on Jayne Mansfield has the following content.

First marriage

In May 10, 1950, a pregnant 17-year old Jayne married 22-year old Paul Mansfield at Fort Worth, Texas. One biographer, Raymond Strait, wrote that she married Paul publicly in May 6, had an earlier "secret" marriage in January 28, and her first child was conceived after the secret marriage. Some sources cite Paul as the father of the child, while others cite it to be a result of date rape. The marriage certificate of Jayne and Paul lists their date of marriage as May 6, 1950.

Can someone verify the following part of it?

The marriage certificate of Jayne and Paul lists their date of marriage as May 6, 1950.

I don't have access to the certificate and have no clue of its credibility. 13:18, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

References

I suggest you ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request or perhaps Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Genealogy. When you ask there, try not to copy so much of the article - it will be enough to give the article name and the footnote number or name. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:20, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Trying that. But, I don't think a request for verification should go without the content that needs to be verified. If the marriage certificate is true then almost all the biographers are wrong. How would someone who can't even read three lines of post find that out of a whole article? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 03:30, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Contacting wikipedia is a nightmare!

Contacting wikipedia is a nightmare! I didn't know before I needed to. For conacting you guys, i think, there needs to be different formats other than standart wikistyle. When i clicked on the left "contact wikipedia", i found myself in a mess! There is a loooong list for contacting which makes it very difficult for a first time usage.

Anyways I want to say why i needed concact wikipedia: The Eastern Turkestan issue seems to have been in big dispute, but the chinese editors do not allow it to be in "biased state" with POV mark. Can you please call the attention of an expert on this issue. I am afraid if i do that, the chinese editors will revert it instantly.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.104.30.234 (talk) 13:23, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Chinese editors prohibit you from editing? Who are those to stop you? Remember, be bold, and edit the pages yourself. Always remember to follow Neutral point of view before publishing your edits; as like "Example's candy is not better than me" is violating NPOV. I hope you understood. Dipankan says.. ^{("Be bold and edit!")} 14:25, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Could you be more specific? The East Turkestan article has had only four edits in the last week. Dismas|^(talk) 14:59, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Maybe I feel, the IP does not refer to this article, or probably not on the English wikipedia, the Chinese one. Anyways, I am not sure. e^xtra999 (talk) 15:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

After an earlier encounter with the Live Help Desk, I was quite disillusioned to discover that the principles - Be polite, and welcoming to new users - Assume good faith - Avoid personal attacks were completely obliterated in a few sentences. I still have no idea how to flag the neutrality of an article, and the tone was hostile like Fox News. If that's the mentality, I have little choice but to refuse appeals for fiscal help as well as endorse the credibility of the articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.223.85.236 (talk) 22:34, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

user name on Commons

Hi, I previously made an account with the same username on Wikipedia Commoms (before unified logins were create). I seemed to have forgotten the password, and the email address associated with the account is now closed, would I have to usurp the account or is there another process for this? Thanks. Gsingh (talk) 17:46, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

You have to usurp. See commons:Commons:Changing username for the procedure. Neither your account here nor commons:User:Gsingh has specified an email address at Special:Preferences. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:56, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

But I don't yet have a username yet for commons, so what would my current name be? Gsingh (talk) 22:48, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Create a Commons account with any name before filing the request. Explain that you are the user with the unified login. You can state so on your user talk page here at the English Wikipedia with mention of the temporary Commons name, and then link to it from the Commons request. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:10, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi, 24.5.131.52 keeps vandalizing the article Terry Whitfield.--LIbertyInSpace (talk) 19:08, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

I have reverted the vandalism and warned them to stop. If they continue, please report them to WP:AIV. --Jayron32 20:31, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Menton

Would you please add the following to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Menton

Lesley Blanch MBE, FRSL (1904-2007) British writer and legendary literary figure, formerly married to novelist and diplomat, Romain Gary, who lived in Menton Garavan from the early 1970s until her death in 2007. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.25.51.138 (talk) 19:14, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

•  Done, based on what I found here. However, in the future, you too can do this. You don't need any permission to edit a Wikipedia article and make it better, and every word written at Wikipedia was written by people exactly like you. --Jayron32 20:27, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Does anyone know what's wrong with the edit counter?

For every day that passes, the backlog gets a day longer. What gives? Vranak (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Replication lag. See the discussions at the village pump. RudolfRed (talk) 20:44, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

The link is Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Toolserver replication lag. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:48, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

April 1

April Fool's AfD

I would like to nominate Wikipedia for deletion as an April Fool's joke. How should I get permission for this? Interchangeable|talk to me 00:29, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Read WP:POINT for instructions. --Jayron32 00:31, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Am I the only one who thinks this April Fool's Day stuff is complete and utter bollocks?--ukexpat (talk) 00:34, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

No, properly executed, it can be fun, and funny. The problem is that it is so rarely properly executed. --Jayron32 00:40, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

It only works if everyone goes along with it, it's only just outside the bounds of credible, and it's utterly funny once pointed out. The Guardian newspaper did a brilliant one years ago, leading with a front page news story that scientists had worked out a way of controlling the weather, and were going to transform Britain's climate to be like the Riviera. Several big advertisers got behind this, particularly Guinness, who announced they were going to open a toucan park (toucans were used in their advertising), ran job adds for zoologists specialising in toucans, there was an article that printed plans for the proposed toucan park, other advertisers joined in. That was a truly great April Fool's joke. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Making a hoax just outside the bounds of credible is one strategy. Another is making it seemingly incredible yet actually factual, as with the TFA blurb for April Fool's Day 2007. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 01:50, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Another clever and well-executed hoax is Sidd Finch. The trouble is that it can't be automatic and repetitive. It needs to be well planned and well executed, else it just looks silly. --Jayron32 01:21, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

John Chung was another one (it's a redlink, I've been meaning to research this for a while); same concept with college football in (IIRC) the 50s. Had people going for months. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 02:26, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

No ukexpat, you are not the only one who thinks this April Fool's Day stuff is complete and utter bollocks. There's at least two of us. HiLo48 (talk) 01:11, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

It may not be funny, when someone already did it for real: WP:DDMP and [4]. Also, April Fools jokes aren't funny if you announce them in advance. RudolfRed (talk) 01:31, 1 April 2012 (UTC

April fools jokes should be kept out if mainspace. This means a real article like Wikipedia should not get a deletion tag. In previous years there have been several pranks about deleting process pages. See Wikipedia:April fools. There are already a couple of pranks about deleting articles in 2012. The pranksters sensibly omitted to place deletion tags on the articles but then a bot discovered the "missing" tags and added them: Special:Contributions/Snotbot. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:20, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Snotbot continued adding such tags (and warning two users for removing them) until it was blocked until midnight for "April Fools' Day-related malfunction". PrimeHunter (talk) 03:05, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

And not everyone knows what April Fools' Day is. It's not a universal concept. 71.146.8.88 (talk) 04:39, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag;

I am making my first Wikipedia page. I have read many pages of tips about getting started, and watched the video about how to add citations. And I thought I knew what I was doing. But after spending hours and hours trying to create this page, I still have two "Cite error" comments on my page in my Reference section.

The page I am creating is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_DeFilippis

The error messages I am getting are: Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag; and Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{Reflist}} template or a <references /> tag;

Can anyone tell me what I need to do to fix these errors? I have read the descriptions of how to fix these problems but apparently I do not understand what I am reading because nothing I am doing seems to succeed at correcting the mistakes.

Thank you!!— Preceding unsigned comment added by CRiley1985 (talk • contribs)

I'm on this... Give me a couple of minutes... Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 01:55, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I've fixed it. What you had missed was that when you insert a citation, {{reflist}} automatically formats the list of references. You don't need to type them all out again. Elen of the Roads (talk) 01:58, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I see Elen beat me to it. You might have been combining two different referencing styles. In some articles, such as Fungus, the details of all the references are written out down the bottom, and the article prose just contains <ref name=whatever/>. More commonly, the reference details are interspersed with the article prose, between <ref> and </ref> tags. But the two styles aren't normally combined within one article. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 02:10, 1 April 2012 (UTC)