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

June 9

Model release required?

I read the page at WP:Uploading images, which discusses determing copyright/licencing needed to upload an image. If the picture is of a person, is a Model release also required? The image upload page doesn't mention it. I know legal advice is not allowed, but it seems that this falls under the same umbrella as licencing/copyright, so hopefully someone can answer the question. RudolfRed (talk) 03:14, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

It would probably be best to ask the copyright specialists at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions; someone there should be able to give you an answer and point you at the policy to support it. Karenjc 17:53, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I can't search my new article

Hello,

I recently made an article days ago and clicked save changes. For the past days, I tried to type the heading of the article in the search box, but it doesn't appear. Did i miss a process here? Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.177.158.157 (talk) 03:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Without knowing the title of the article, this is your only recent edit at this IP address. If you saved it from another address, its talk page would have received the deletion notice, and you'd have a red link where the article title was. Even if correctly saved, it might take days for the search filter to catch it, although you could still go directly there. Dru of Id (talk) 04:03, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

It could also have been saved in a namespace not searched by default. We really need the page name, or a user name or IP address to find it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:03, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Policy about vandalism

I am worried about the user Dilek2 who is distorting and threading misinformation into articles concerning Ottoman history. Tags have existed for many months asking for references etc, which, however, are never provided. See the Prens Sabahattin entry, for instance, claiming that there are diaries lost in World War II that only exist in "photocopies" pointing to Prens Sabahattin's bisexuality. Can I just remove misinformation -- or could perhaps somebody more experienced review Dilek2's articles Proche-O (talk) 04:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

If a tag requesting references has existed for months then you can probably assume that no reference is soon to emerge. Best practices suggest that you should perform at least a perfunctory check on the internet (google, yahoo, bing, etc.) to see if there are any reliable sources that can be used to back up this information, but if not then you can remove the information yourself. If sources do exist and they have at least the color of reliability then the material must be discussed prior to removal. If you are concerned that an editor is inserting subtle vandalism into articles then he should be warned and if the problem persists, you can report the problem to WP:AIV. -Thibbs (talk) 18:00, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Actress in the movie Prometheous

The main actress in the movie is actually from Iceland. She was born and raised there. Your info say Sweeden. I just saw her on a talk show and she told the host. The movie was filmed there. Noomi Rapace is her name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.2.126.10 (talk) 04:37, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

All the online sources I can find all say she was born in Sweden and then moved to Iceland at a young age, which agrees with the article Noomi Rapace. RudolfRed (talk) 05:16, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

First time creator...thank you

I just wanted to "thank" those who helped make some corrections on typos, and unnecessary sentences. The page "Cathy Segal-Garcia" is my first try at submitting anything to Wikipedia. Is there a way to send a Thank You note? signed Redlippedlady Redlippedlady (talk) 06:18, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Have you seen the heart icon that appears at the top of someone's talk page? That is for Wikilove and is the best way to leave a thank you note. Ryan Vesey Review me! 06:39, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Alternately you could leave a {{Wikithanks}}. :-) benzband (talk) 12:07, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Creating an article

I hope ive got to the right place - i can't make head or tail of how to navigate this wikipedia - it's very old fashioned - it took me ages just to find out how to get to the spot so I can ask a question! How do I create and article - it keeps sending me in circles! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karenjackman2010 (talk • contribs) 12:28, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I added a header to your question to separate it from the one above. You've asked another one immediately below, and I have replied there. Karenjc 13:53, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

hello?

HI there I just asked a question and it didnt show up argh! Please help - why is it so complicated to create an article??“” — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karenjackman2010 (talk • contribs) 12:30, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Karenjackman2010. Wikipedia has various criteria to which articles are expected to conform, including verifiability, notability and neutrality, to name but a few. The mechanical process of creating an article is actually pretty straightforward - Wikipedia:Your first article is a good place to find out more - but creating an article that satisfies these criteria to the extent that it will not be tagged for deletion; well, that's more difficult, particularly for a new user. Hundreds of new articles are deleted every day because they fail the criteria, or even violate policy to the extent that they cannot be salvaged. This is a shame, because many were created in good faith and represent a lot of work on the part of the creator, who may then get disillusioned and walk away from the project, which could certainly put his/her efforts to good use. The best way to start learning your way around editing Wikipedia is by improving existing articles. If you do start drafting a new article, the best format is a draft in your userspace, and I see that this is what you have done at User:Karenjackman2010/KindyNews. You seem to be on the right track there, although the draft is a long way from being ready to move into articlespace, but what jumps out at me is that the publisher on KindyNews is one Karen Jackman - is this you? If so, I'm afraid you have a very large conflict of interest and you're not the right person, in Wikipedia terms, to be writing an article on this subject. If KindyNews is notable, then a neutral someone, somewhere, will eventually write an article about it. Alternatively, you can pull together all your information and references and then ask at Wikipedia:Articles for creation for someone else to create the article, although there is usually quite a long wait there, unfortunately.

Do feel free to ask here for more advice - there is plenty of guidance for new users available on Wikipedia. Best wishes. Karenjc 13:50, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Page sources

(1) You can never use 'too many' reliable sources :) and (2) I could not find the article in question as the only article you have edited is still standing, but try putting it through articles for creation. AndieM (Am I behaving?) 15:18, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

The article is at Omar al-Muqdad. It contained a massive list of all the articles the subject has written and related lists, each with a source provided. I have stubbed it, removing all this material, which has caused some consternation (see the post at my talk page here).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:27, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

"Reliable sources" here should mean "reliable sources that confirm the statements made in the article". The huge mass of material deleted by Fuhghettaboutit was not relevant for this. Maproom (talk) 09:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

New admission

detail process of new admission — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.198.168.140 (talk) 14:02, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi, 117.198.168.140. I have added a header to your question to distinguish it from the others on the page. If you are asking about how to create a new article, please have a look at Wikipedia:Your first article, and see my answer on the same topic two questions above this. Karenjc 14:42, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6 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.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 17:47, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

restore

is it possible for you to restore a page please i want to restore the page i deleted called foreign relations of the united states — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollister121 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Already  Done by LuK3 (talk · contribs). -- John of Reading (talk) 16:21, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Exact search

Hi, Is there an advanced directive that will return only exact results in Wikipedia search? I am trying to get all pages that include a publisher such as Publish America or American Biographical Institute. And this search also returns "published American", because the search engine tries to be too helpful.

I am actually using API:Search to get the number of times a publisher is used, but it seems to work the same way and gives inflated counts. Anyway, clarification will be appreciated. History2007 (talk) 16:47, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

The search engine works with boolean operators so you can restrict the search from finding false positives with something like this. A Google search is easier and more exacting I think: <site:en.wikipedia.org "Publish America"> You can also restrict this to the mainspace though I won't go into that here because it doesn't look like you wanted that.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:17, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

I will probably try the Google route. The Boolean route does not work in Wikisearch because I do not do the searches by hand, I have a program that generates them, and it can not know which terms to exclude. The results from API:search are easier to parse, that was why I wanted that. But I guess I will have to parse the Google results. Thanks. History2007 (talk) 08:04, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

By the way, I assume there is no way in Wikisearch to search for PublishAmerica only when WikiProject=Physics. Is there? Or where Category=Physics? Thanks. History2007 (talk) 08:17, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The only way I know that this can be done is where the category has a sufficiently distinct name. For example, Category:Foundational quantum physics‎ can be searched by putting quotes around it (without "category:") together with a term you're looking for, say "laser": [1].--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 09:02, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Anyway, I have now almost figured it out through the program. I am doing this to generate a report of self-publisher usage in pages and the results are somewhat scary... they are all over the place. E.g. Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences states that one of its notable alumni is Louise Evans (‘49) - named 2001 International Scientist of the Year by the American Biographical Institute's 1000 World Leaders of Scientific Influence, while the page on American Biographical Institute states that its awards are "frequently denounced as scams". That is how degradation happens. I will leave you a link to the report when it is done, just FYI. History2007 (talk) 10:03, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Help getting my band onto Wikipedia (Search results)

I want to get my band onto Wikipedia so that when you google our name it will pop up in search results linked to wikipedia - how do I do this? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fireflyband (talk • contribs) 18:55, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

If your band is notable then you can ask that an article be created at WP:REQ. You could also create the article yourself, but that's not recommended since you have a conflict-of-interest. RudolfRed (talk) 21:32, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

The purpose of Wikipedia is to have articles covering things that reliable places have already talked about. Posting anything - a band, a company, a film, a charity - for the purpose of telling the world about it is promotion, and explicitly forbidden on Wikipedia. That is the reason for the criterion of notability that Rudolf refers to. --ColinFine (talk) 21:49, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

How do I use an image within the text, as a "character"?

I really should know this, but I don't know how to set an image inline with the text. What wiki markup and image size should I use?T3h 1337 b0y 19:15, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Assuming that you mean something like this clock—C—you would use the same markup and usually a 20px sizing. 71.146.10.213 (talk) 04:18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Publishing an article that is meant to be viewed from a link within a major article

Hello,

I have written an article on a minor battle of WWII and intend that article to be accessed from a link in a major article about the campaign of which the minor battle formed a part. How do I achieve this end? When I submit my article, will reviewers assume it is supposed to be a stand-alone piece? It could stand on its own, but it really is meant to shed light on a minor engagement of note in the opening days of the Battle of the Bulge. Is there some way I can post for review and let reviewers know my aim? I don't feel I can go forward with my submission until I have more information to go on. Many thanks...

Steve Wheeler July5ly (talk) 20:08, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

All articles are expected to stand on their own, and meet the relevant requirements of notability, referencing etc. The only other option is to make it a section in an existing article. --ColinFine (talk) 21:51, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

You can add {{Campaignbox Battle of the Bulge}} to show the context but as Colinfine says, the article should stand on its own. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:20, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

In the article on the larger battle, if there is a section that discusses the minor battle in summary, that the article you submit sheds more light on, you can add to that section {{Main|Name of discrete article}}. This will produce a note in the form:

Main article: Link to other article

--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:34, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

removing flags from edited page

If I correct the issues for which a Wikipedia page has been flagged, is there a process I go through to have the flags removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmasiulewicz (talk • contribs) 20:58, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

No. If you believe that the issue has been corrected, you may remove the tag. (Of course, other editors might not agree with you). --ColinFine (talk) 21:53, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Movie quotes

I've visited the page before, but it escapes me at this time. What is the guideline that discourages adding movie quotes to articles? Thanks, SwisterTwister talk 21:05, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Not sure of one specifically for movies, but you can look through WP:MOSQUOTE, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Film, Wikipedia:Quotations (an essay), and WP:COPYOTHERS. If you are referring to having a section in a film article devoted to bulleted quotes from the film, like IMDb and Wikiquote has, I think what keeps those out is a need for reliable sources providing enough prose for the Wikipedia article on a given (non-iconic) quote. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 06:21, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Finding a (hopefully) published Wiki Page "the National Capitol Radio & Television Museum"

Hi

I created a Wiki page earlier this week. Over four days have passed and I believe the page and account have all been approved. I can not find the page I created though, called "The National Capitol Radio & Television Museum". I am wondering if I mis-categorized the page or did not properly publish the page.

Thanks for any insights. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Radiomuseumbowie (talk • contribs) 21:36, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

You have entered the text in your user page: I have moved it to a subpage of your user page, so you can find your text at User:Radiomuseumbowie/National Capitol Radio & Television Museum. When the article is ready for release you will need to move itto National Capitol Radio & Television Museum (which currently appears as a red link, because the page does not yet exist. (Note: do not move it to [[Wikipedia:National Capitol Radio & Television Museum]] - this is a common error).

However, do not attempt to move it yet: it is nowhere near ready. The major problem is that there are as far as I can see no references at all to independent reliable sources. Without these, the article does not establish that the museum is notable, and it is likely to get deleted. Less serious, but a major impediment to anybody trying to read it, is that you have attempted to format the article using a completely different system from Wiki-markup. You need to change it to use the proper markup.

Incidentally, there is no concept of "approval", unless you specifically ask for review. Anybody may edit (almost) anything on Wikipedia. I suggest you read your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 22:06, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

template section

Hi - I want to add a POV template to a section - not the whole article - please help - regards - Youreallycan 21:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Use {{POV-section}} RudolfRed (talk) 22:35, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Error on Bernie Sanders Page

I noticed an error on your Bernie Sanders page on the right hand side of the page (as I am looking at it). Under his picture you state he is a United States Senator. Further down in the "summary" you show him as a member of the US House of Representative. He can't be both. He is, in fact, a United States Senator. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.229.231 (talk) 21:47, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

The infobox at Bernie Sanders is referring to the person he replaced, Jim Jeffords, who is now in the House. RudolfRed (talk) 22:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Bernie Sanders
Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Vermont's At-large district
In office January 3, 1991 – January 3, 2007

I'm not sure which part you refer to but I guess it's the one to the right. Note it says "In office" with a period ending in 2007. It does not claim he is still there. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:52, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Citing what I've added.

You are probably asked this a lot, but how do I properly cite what I add or change? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chainsfan85 (talk • contribs) 22:38, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

See Referencing for Beginners RudolfRed (talk) 22:41, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

June 10

harsh, delayed messages displayed indefinitely

In march I inserted a link that I thought was relevant to the section it was under, and misunderstood the nature of Wikipedia, thinking it would simply be deleted if it was found unuseful. Sorry if that was rude. I received a bunch of messages that didn't show up until some time after I was blocked, and when I read them now I worry that they could be seen. They contain a harsh tone that I would certainly have heeded if I had seen them in real time. Is there a way to have them removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.77.177.189 (talk) 02:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

If you aren't going to readd the links don't worry about it. If you are worried about the messages, you can blank your user talk page as that information is old. GB fan 02:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, the messages were intended to inform you that you had broken some of Wikipedia's editing rules. As long as you remember not to repeat these previous mistakes, that's fine! You are free to delete the messages from your talk page (doing so supposes that you have read an acknowledged them). benzband (talk) 17:08, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

delete account

can you please delate this accound thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Musikkille (talk • contribs) 02:57, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

See WP:RTV. - Purplewowies (talk) (How's my driving?) 04:39, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Sorry accounts can not be deleted. This account has made edits to the encyclopedia and those edits must be attributed to an account. You can request to vanish. This would entail your account being renamed and links from this account to the new account name would be removed so the two accounts aren't easily connected. GB fan 04:43, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

{{Cite JSTOR}}

Does anybody know why the Cite JSTOR template hasn't done anything on Vincent Price (educator)? Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:11, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I even tried "Jumping the queue". Ryan Vesey Review me! 03:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

See the discussion here. It is not clear from the description which bot is supposed to act on that template. I don't know whether Citation bot handles it or whether there is another bot. User:Citation bot#Function doesn't mention {{Cite jstor}} at all. I suggest to bring this up at WP:BON. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 15:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I left a note there. Ryan Vesey Review me! 17:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Unsure of how to flag an article for improper form

There are two edits to the Bit_(money) page that are not in proper wikipedia form. Unfortunately I do not know the correct way to flag the article and I do not know the appropriate "style violation." Both edits include discussion of the article in the actual article. I am not sure what the author of edit #1 is disagreeing with, nor can I find what was deleted and it is not clear why he author of edit #2 thinks the article is up for deletion.

I hope this is the appropriate place to ask for advice and/or ask for a review. I apologize that I could not be of more help.

Edit #1: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bit_%28money%29&diff=493716850&oldid=493716600

Edit #2: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bit_%28money%29&diff=493716600&oldid=493533640

DouglasCalvert (talk) 06:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Both the edits above were added by the same user (166.249.131.162), I think they are requesting that section be deleted because they don't think its relevant to the article. I have moved the parts of that section that seem to be discussion of the content to the talk page and maybe someone with more knowledge of the subject will take a look at it and address the IPs concerns. Sarahj2107 (talk) 13:36, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Help needed with project banner code

I've posted information on a change needed to the WP:ships banner on the banner talk page. Personally I haven't a clue how to code this change hence the help request. TIA. Brad (talk) 07:26, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm afraid these things take me a lot of head-scratching and trial-and-error as I copy portions of the code I need from currently existing templates and test them in sandboxes. If you want to make a study of it, you could start with WP:TEMPLATE, meta:Help:Advanced templates, and select the "view source" option at Template:WikiProject Biography. Another suggestion is to contact editors who have created such templates (e.g. the WP:Biography or WP:Ships templates) in the past. There may be editors here who can help you, but if not then that's the best I can do for you without learning the advanced markup for myself. Good luck. -Thibbs (talk) 18:10, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Sign

Is there a script or something to remind us to sign our posts on talk pages? Roshan220195 (talk) 08:19, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

If you want, you can go to 'My preferences' in the uppermost row, 'Editing', and check Advanced option 'Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary'. Dru of Id (talk) 08:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, answered the question I thought I saw. Dru of Id (talk) 08:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

You could add {{YesAutosign}} to your userpage or usertalk page, and SineBot will sign for you if you forget. ^Avic_ennasis @ 08:59, 20 Sivan 5772 / 08:59, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

You could only edit Wikipedia while in a giant skinner box and hire someone to wear a white lab coat and reward or punish you when you remembered or forgot to sign.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 09:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Sackett

Hello!

The article on the Sackett family name, and the associated books by Louis L'Amour incorrectly states that the Sacketts are a fictional family. The books are fiction, though they are based on family journals, so the path of the Sacketts at the very least is verifiable. Further, as we are a real family, I resent that we are labeled as fictional. There have been Sacketts or Sackett anscestors in this country at the very least since the founding of Virginia.

Please rectify this. The Sacketts are not a fictional family, nor are we extinct. We are well over 200 strong in surname alone, much stronger if you number the descendants of this very American, very alive and well Clan.

Thank you,

Rob Sniffin (Paternally descended from the O'Sniffins of Cork County Ireland, Maternally a Sackett, desceneded from the Reeves family) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.120.18.103 (talk) 09:06, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The article Sackett is about the fictional family. The article Sackett (surname) discusses the actual surname. ^Avic_ennasis @ 09:47, 20 Sivan 5772 / 09:47, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I have added a note to the top of Sackett:

For the real surname, see Sackett (surname).

PrimeHunter (talk) 09:50, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps Sackett should be moved to Sackett family?--ukexpat (talk) 16:49, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I have donated money to Wikipedia...

...and after my donation, I then created my account. Is there any way I can have my $5 donation show up under my contributions?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skimino78 (talk • contribs) 13:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

That is not what we mean by "contributions" here! Your contributions to Wikipedia consist of the edits you have made, the files you have uploaded, the articles you have written; not the money you may have donated to the Wikimedia Foundation. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:40, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

You can show that you are a donor by placing the code {{User wikipedia/Donor}} or {{User wikipedia/DonorWM}} on your user page User:Skimino78. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:00, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Several things

Hi,,My question is about several things.First how do you edited a ,open page,,in my case,coca tea and coca,,,with verifiable laws,referrence numbers to find said laws,and ,new knowledge about this argricultural product,also 100 percent verifiable,,without someone deleting it who never ever took the time to actualy look up said laws,verifiable information,just delete it because they could.Second,if there is a dispute,which there obviously is,why I still dont know,,again no-one but the department of justice for the united states of america can make laws,,,but if there is a dispute,,,how do I get someone to actually look up said laws quoted,to verify this proper information so it is not deleted again,cause no-one has as of yet,except 1 person,something like copenhagen,ie user name.3rd this information is vital to the united states public,as drug testing has literally now a days in the united states is the difference between life and death if someone will succeed in life there.So how do I get this 100 percent lawful,verifiable information on this product listed on your wikipedia site into the article as the ,new verifiable knowledge it is?4th I gotta say,for me,,wikipedia is the most confusing site I have ever enter,,,anyway to make it a little less confusing?Also ,for me,,since it has been soooooo confusing to use,,Is there anyway to actually be more concerned about the verifiable knowledge,then how it get into the article.My point here is I really thought wikipedia was about knowledge for the people by the people,but in this case it appears to be more about how the knowledge gets to the public.I have tried several times to try and stick to the information and knowledge only.However several times it appeared to be more about ,you didn't do y to get to z,,,like I said earlier,wikipedia for me is way to confusing,but also to me this knowldge is vital to the public,thus more important then ,how it get in the article as long as it all is verifiable laws and knowledge.Thank you paita — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paitalona (talk • contribs) 14:45, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

There are already discussions regarding your edits at Wikipedia:Help desk#Definition of censorship and several pages linked there. Starting another discussion here does not seem productive. Let me just point out that articles don't mention everything that is verifiable. Editors of an article choose which verifiable things to include, and below the edit box it says "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here." PrimeHunter (talk) 15:21, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I think there is some confusing here,again,of course I welcome the information given to be used,re-distrubuted,it is very useful knowledge,so I don't know where that came from.Again,I am responding to your comment,,,,my question again is,if someones wants to delete something simply because they can,is there a place to verifiy all information before anyone deletes it?Does someone actually verify the knowledge in the article before they delete it?paita — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paitalona (talk • contribs) 15:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

This is WP:FORUMSHOPPING. See User talk:Paitalona#Regarding this user's edits. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:48, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

time difference in roza iftikar

i want to know that if there is time difference between opening of roza on the ground floor and the top floor of the world tallest building burj khalifa. if there is difference how much is it — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.96.100.198 (talk) 15:55, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand exactly what your question is but I do know that it is not a question about how to use Wikipedia. That is the purpose of this page. You probably need to go to the reference desk. That is the area of Wikipedia that answers questions about things other than how to use Wikipedia. GB fan 16:14, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

If you are thinking of gravitational time dilation then "Time Moves Faster Upstairs, Confirming Einstein's Relativity" says: "The world's tallest building is about 850 meters (half a mile) tall," said Alan Kostelecky, who studies relativity at Indiana University in Bloomington. "If you lived there for a million years, the difference would be a few seconds."

If this is about when muslims consider sunrise to have occurred for the purpose of fasting then I don't know how or whether they precisely define things, but from a tall vantage point you would generally see the Sun earlier. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

inaccurate link for Tony Osborne on this wiki page Black Gunn (1972)

inaccurate link for Tony Osborne on this wiki page Black Gunn (1972). Tony Osborne is not Anthony "Tony" Osborne[1] (July 13, 1926 – August 27, 2010) was an American professional wrestler who wrestled under the name "Tough" Tony Borne. but a music creator Thanks, Tommy Carl — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.216.8.94 (talk) 16:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Tommy! i have removed the link. benzband (talk) 17:00, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

search

why i cant find the page i created in Google search ? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mumdo_%28illusionist%29 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domdom18 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The page Mumdo (illusionist) has been deleted. benzband (talk) 16:57, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

What to do with unused user sandbox page?

I came across this user subpage: User:RLHobbs/sandbox. It looks like the user is a school student whose group was given the task of improving the candy article, with feedback from their professor. The improvements were added to the candy article at the end of March, and other Wikipedia editors have since built upon them. This user subpage hasn't been edited in over two months now, nor has User:RLHobbs edited anything in that time either. What should be done with this page? JIP | Talk 17:09, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Unused sandboxes don't hurt anything. If you really want to, you could take it to WP:MFD under WP:STALEDRAFT - but it's probably best to just blank the page and move on. ^Avic_ennasis @ 18:12, 20 Sivan 5772 / 18:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Normally only User:RLHobbs has the right to have it deleted. However if the page violates the rules regarding userspace content it may be deleted by someone else. The first option would be to post a message on User talk:RLHobbs asking them if they might request deletion. Roger (talk) 18:15, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

How to cite this book

If a book is a translation of another book from another language, which parameters of {{cite book}} should I use for the title and author of the original book? The book in question is this one. Or is it sufficient to list Adamson, Lemmermeyer and Schappacher without mentioning Hilbert? -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 18:07, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

You shouldn't mention Lemmermeyer and Schappacher at all unless you're citing something from their introduction. Otherwise, use "Hilbert" and "David" in the "last" and "first" fields, "Trans. by Iain T. Adamson" in the "others" field, and the English title in the "title" field. Deor (talk) 22:06, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I guess I should clarify that I'm assuming that you're quoting and/or citing the English translation. If you have access to the original German version and you're quoting or citing that, you'd use its title and date and omit the "Trans by . . ." business. But it's difficult to see why you might want to do so when a translation is available. Deor (talk) 01:22, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Unfortunately I don't have access to the original German version, so the english version on Google Books must do for now. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 17:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Average article size

Out of curious, what is average article size represents? in this link. Thanks!Yeucongbang (talk) 18:13, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

This question was also asked at WP:RD/Humanities#Average_article_size. It's usually better to not post the same question in multiple places. RudolfRed (talk) 18:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Is there a problem? Is Wikipedia's policies against this? And I don't agree with you on your statement! I would say it is usually better to post the same question in multiple places, especially when someone can't the answer in the first place!Yeucongbang (talk) 19:49, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes there is a problem. The Help Desk (this page) is for asking questions about Wikipedia itself. The Reference Desks are for questions about other stuff. Posting the same question in different places is regarded as WP:Forum shopping, which is not allowed. Roger (talk) 19:57, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

You already got the correct answer at WP:RD/Humanities#Average_article_size: It's the average size of the article after edits by that user. They also told you how to test it. Instead of doing that you assumed the answer was wrong and reposted the question here without saying there were already answers elsewhere. That means you are wasting our time by making us investigate your question in the same way others have already done. It should be common sense to not do that. "Ask questions" in the box at top of both this page and the reference desks links to Wikipedia:Questions which starts: "Please choose the most appropriate place to ask your question". We are all volunteers. Perhaps you think it's better for you to get more people to spend their volunteer time examining the same question, but try to also think of others. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:49, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Setting up pictures for access on Wikimedia Commons and appropriate licensing

Would appreciate some help over assigning access to media images. I appear not to have set up an image I have just uploaded correctly as it seems not to appear when I try a search for it. I have two images which do appear against the search of 'Badgeworth buttercup' on Wikimedia Commons. The image I have just uploaded is Badgeworth_buttercup_closeup_2012.jpg and it is appearing on the page on which I have coded the link. Perhaps I have not set the access correctly or the licensing correctly? I have cleared my cache in case a local problem but no joy to date. Have a small set of photographs I would like to put up for anyone to use against the normal copyright license protection so do wish to get my routine correct to do this. What have I failed to understand or allow to happen? I notice I seem not to have chosen the same licensing as I did on the first 2 images. Sjeans (talk) 20:09, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

File:Badgeworth buttercup 2008.jpg, File:Badgeworth buttercup closeup.JPG, File:Badgeworth buttercup closeup 2012.jpg

The indexes used by the "Search" box are updated only every 24 hours or so for efficiency reasons. This has nothing to do with the licenses. Just be patient, and try again this time tomorrow. All three images have the same licenses, as far as I can see, but the two license boxes are displayed the other way round in the latest image. I don't know the reason for that, but I'm sure it makes no difference. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:03, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for this information - I did wonder if this might the case as it appeared my image had been uploaded. Thanks also for confirmation about the licensing. Sjeans (talk) 08:25, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Question about foreign sources

I am translating the article from Russian Wikipedia (Underground rocket). While there's a lot of English sources to claim notability, I'm not sure how to document the Russian sources. When inserting the names of journals, books, etc. and names of the articles into appropriate cite templates, should I leave them in the original language, or should I translate them? -- Wesha (talk) 20:55, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Use the original language in the cite, you can add an explanation in English as a hidden note. Roger (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

The article uses Citation Style 1— the templates have fields for translated titles; see the template documentation. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 01:33, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Not able to use wikitravel on iphone

Hello,

I am unable to view wikitravel pages on my iPhone. When trying to load a page it just continuesly shows it as loading but doesn't go through.

Works fine on my PC

As an example I've been trying to look at Swedens page.

Cheers, Brent — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.176.65.66 (talk) 22:03, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikitravel at http://wikitravel.org is one of thousands of wikis on the Internet. Wikipedia or the Wikimedia Foundation which runs Wikipedia is not associated with Wikitravel. See http://wikitravel.org/en/Wikitravel:Technical_details. You can try http://wikitravel.org/en/Wikitravel:Help instead. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:00, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Articles for creation/Ballyhannon Castle (aka Castlefergus).

Hi Wikipedia,

I have been working on my first article for Wikipedia, and have been excited at the prospect of its publication. Your penultimate reply to me advises that it has been deleted because it appears to infringe copyright as being a cut and paste from http://www.ballyhannon-castle.com/history.htm

I posted a question to one of your volunteers, and Houn very kindly and swiftly replied to me with how I go about obtaining the permission of the copyright owner to the publication of his work (as is posted on http://www.ballyhannon-castle.com/history.htm). I am now pursuing this as I know the author personally (he is a local historian).

In the meantime I also mentioned that I had spent many days reading your editing and formatting procedures, and posting the article for approval, but I saw that it seems to have been permanently deleted (or at least it is not visible in 'my contributions'). As I really could not afford the same amount of time writing, editing and formatting it again, I asked if I could be emailed the full (html) text of my most recent submission, so that I can either pass it on to Mr. Breen for him to attend to, or I can at least save it on my pc until such time as you have approved its submission.

Houn replied that I can ask the deleting admin (Nyttend) to provide me with the article text (probably wiki-code, not full HTML), and he also advised that 'until the permission has been obtained and confirmed, the text should not be put on Wikipedia, not even in userspace. Huon (talk) 21:54, 10 June 2012 (UTC).'

I would therefore like to ask deleting admin for this, but I can't see any options or links on Wikipedia.org to request this. I'm wondering if this question now suffices as such request, or if not, I would really appreciate if I could get the link to where I can do so.

Many thanks for all your help to date.

CorneliusWilliam (talk) 22:56, 10 June 2012 (UTC)CorneliusWilliam

You can ask at User talk:Nyttend for him to e-mail you the text of the article. Alternatively, after the author's permission has been confirmed, either by his changing the "©2004 Ballyhannon Castle Quin County Clare, Ireland" at the bottom of the web page to "Licensed under Creative Commons license CC-BY-SA" (by far the easiest way) or by sending an OTRS e-mail as explained at WP:PERMISSION#When permission is confirmed, you can post a message on User talk:Nyttend (citing the OTRS number) in which you ask him to restore the article. Deor (talk) 23:30, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Also note that the copyright problem is only one issue. Even if permission is obtained or the license of the original text changes, the tone of the text may not be appropriate for an encyclopedia, and it will still require references to other independent, reliable sources to demonstrate notability.--ukexpat (talk) 01:00, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Deor & Ukexpat,

I really appreciate your helpful replies. I logged a message with Nyttend to email me the text of the most recent draft of the article, and they have replied with it already! Fantastic, and much to my relief that I won't have to start again from scratch!

I am approaching the copyright issue from both directions you mention, namely seeking to change the "©2004 Ballyhannon Castle Quin County Clare, Ireland" at the bottom of the web page to "Licensed under Creative Commons license CC-BY-SA", as well as the author emailing in his permission/authorisation to 'permissions-en AT wikimedia DOT org.

Sincere thanks again for your continued support. CorneliusWilliam (talk) 14:54, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I am afraid that I have had to tag User:CorneliusWilliam/sandbox for speedy deletion as a copyvio of the same source material. Copyvios are not permitted anywhere, including user sandboxes. When the copyright issue has been resolved, you can recreate the draft.--ukexpat (talk) 15:20, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I understand. Thanks Ukexpat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CorneliusWilliam (talk • contribs) 15:37, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

June 11

JSTOR Access!

Is JSTOR giving access to their site to some Wikipedia editors for free now? --Tito Dutta ✉ 00:00, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Requests for JSTOR access. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:32, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Book search

I want to find a copy of 2 older history books, probably printed in England in the 1920-30's. How do I go about finding thrm - they have not shown uo with a "google book search" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.67.163.155 (talk) 01:03, 11 June 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. RudolfRed (talk) 01:07, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Created an account at Commons... and found that I inadvertently created a new account here

I've been active on EnWiki since 2009 as User:Buffalutheran. I decided today to create an account at Commons and I inadvertently created a new account here. I don't want to be accused of being a sock, and I want to keep editing EnWiki under my old account. Is there any way that this account (the one I am using now) can be merged or deleted, without destroying my new Commons account? BuffaLutheran (talk) 01:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Redirect the BuffaLutheran to the original account. If you are logged into the original then visit another Wiki you should be logged in there with the same account as here. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:53, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Check Unified login for more information. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 03:56, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Rendering problem on New Stevenston?

Resolved

I've looked at New Stevenston in two different browsers (Safari and Firefox) and both show an odd problem with overlapping text for the coordinates above the infobox. Is it working in other browsers? If not, can someone fix it? RudolfRed (talk) 01:29, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

There were two sets of coordinates listed on the page, in the infobox and in the template at the bottom of the page. I removed the template and the overlapping has gone.Sarahj2107 (talk) 02:40, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. RudolfRed (talk) 03:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Can a title be changed?

I found a page with an inaccurate title. Can it be changed and keep referenced links?

is: Plane Driven PD-1 Roadable Glastar

should be: Plane Driven PD-1, roadable Glasair Sportsman

CliffGerber (talk) 02:35, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

See WP:MOVE for how to move a page to a new title. RudolfRed (talk) 03:08, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Madonna

I have posted a proposal on the Madonna (entertainer) talk page a while ago and no one responded. I then deleted said proposal and re-posted it for good measure. Yet still no one has responded. Why is this? Considering Wikipedia is said to be a place where you can "Ask questions, get answers." and "Make proposals." I believed that were true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.181.62.167 (talk) 06:05, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Are you refering to Talk:Madonna (entertainer)#Charity and Controversy? If so, it may take some time for interested people to respond, so wait a few more days. Meanwhile you can read the manual governing biographies of living people which has strict rules regarding the content allowed in articles about living people. Roger (talk) 08:04, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

General Enquiry

Hi,

Could you tell me how can i send a wikipedia to my email? I need to send someone's wikipedia to my email. Pls help.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.54.125.199 (talk) 06:43, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

If I understand correctly you want to email a copy of an article to someone. The easiest way to do that is to first download it as a pdf file - the print/export menu in the left margin has the option. Once you have the pdf file on your computer you can email it. Roger (talk) 07:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Alternatively, if you're using FireFox, under the "File" menu there is a "Send Link" option which will attempt to open your email program and automatically prepare an email with a link to the page you're currently looking at. Other web browsers probably have similar functionality. This is more efficient because less data needs to be sent; it also means that your recipient will see the updated version of the page, not how it looked at the time you were looking at it. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 08:02, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Inaccurate University of Wales article

Hello there,

Recently I attempted to apply edits to the largely erroneous University of Wales Wikipedia article, only to discover they'd been undone almost immediately by an editor who offered no explanation why. The fundamental change I was trying to affect in the article was to convey that the University of Wales is still fully operational, and is not "abolished", as the article in its current state would have you believe. One only has to visit the University of Wales webpage to find overwhelming evidence to support this - www.wales.ac.uk. The University is, in fact, within the next 12 months to enter into a merger with the University of Wales: Trinity Saint David and Swansea Metropolitan University.

I would therefore greatly appreciate if you could offer me any advice on how I should go about applying amendments that actually stick to the article in question. Much of the information currently displayed is not only inaccurate, but also carries the potential to cause much harm to the University of Wales brand, as well as its commercial operations, not to mention a lot of confusion and upset to prospective, current and past University of Wales students.

I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Do not hesitate to ask if you require further evidence to support the above.

Warm regards,

Jocelyn — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jocelyn88 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Jocelyn88. I went to check your edits and found that the the edit you made removed a large number of references, thus violating the policy of verifiability. I hope I have addresed your issues. Thanks and regards, Dipankan ^{(Have a chat?)} 13:25, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The bulk of what you were trying to remove seemed to be supported by references which appeared to be to reliable sources. You provided no edit summary to justify your edit. I would suggest that you explain on the article's talk page why you think that the existing content is incorrect, and that you give there new references to published reliable sources to support your statements. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:28, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

The article about the post merger university is at University of Wales, Trinity Saint David. Perhaps a few hatnotes would help clear up the confusion. Roger (talk) 13:39, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I must point out, however, that fuss about harm to the "brand" of a university is not likely to be taken seriously by most of our editors. Wikipedia is not an advertising venue nor a trade directory. --165.189.32.4 (talk) 16:09, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

According to the articles, these are legitimate public universities: so the use of phrases like "the University of Wales brand, as well as its commercial operations" seems grossly inapppropriate and oddly askew. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:14, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Francois Lamore

Hello!

I just created a wiki page for an artist (painter, sculptor and poet), who is still alive and so I have to have reliable sources, the only web (internet) source that I have is his official website: www.francois-lamore.com, For the newspaper/magazine publications I wrote under the mention the source (like 'in Le' Figaro, by 'name of the journalist' n°80, May 31 Paris.) As I wrote in the article, he is a French-American artist, and his work is exhibited all over the globe, especially at famous Maeght Gallery in Paris, and in Beirut Lebanon. Please let me know if his official website is considered as a reliable source, Best regards, CC — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diegocc (talk • contribs) 13:59, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I have moved the page to Francois Lamore (with the correct capitalisation), but it is likely to be deleted. One of the links you added is (as you say) the artist's own website (and therefore not independent), and the other doesn't mention him. Without published coverage in independent reliable sources, he doesn't get a Wikipedia article. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Help required immediately. What should I do now? Whom should I approach?

It was noticed when an IP user says in the article that the information given are terribly wrong. Here. I checked whether there is a anything reasonable and found that he was right as the articles have a conflict of information. Hence I checked the references and found that they were of 2009 but is given as of 2012. Thus there must be some big vandalism occured. But it will take some time to find the real vandalism as all the edits are dome by IPs and without any edit summaries. What I did was that I put the section in the comment tab... I mean inside . So that no one will see it (it may affect the trust-ability of Wikipedia). But I donot know what to do and was I wrong. Please help me and the article because it is almost impossible to find the real vandalism and a real good constructive edit in this article. List of religious populations. Is there any method to find the rivision history of only one section so that I may find what changes a particular section has undergone. Section tab in editsummary wont help as it can be removed or the full page itself can be edited. Vanischenu m^Talk 16:16, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Well... Please tell me was I wrong to hide the section because it had incorrect information.Vanischenu m^Talk 19:38, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

If you look back you'll see that the vandalism was in a succession of edits by one IP on 4th June. I've reverted it now. Best not to hide sections that have been vandalised; if you can't find where the vandalism was you'd be better tagging the section and/or putting a note on the article's talk page. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:12, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind and clear reply. I really appreciate and thanks you for reverting the vandalism. I was very much confused that I thought the vandalism might have been done by multiple IPs.
Please clear me this too; if I talk it in a talkpage, it will take very much time to have a reply, particularly if the article is less watched by editors. At the same time the tagging and the incorrect information may affect the faith of readers on Wpedia. Is that just my speculation or in the other case, can I have any other alternative?Vanischenu m^Talk 21:42, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

If you find something wrong in Wikipedia, obviously the best thing to do is correct it; but often we are not able to do this: we may not have the necessary knowledge about the subject, or we may just not have time. In this case, it is surely better to tag the page so that the reader is warned that there is some doubt about the validity, rather than just leave it unmarked. --ColinFine (talk) 22:46, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

How can I read entries WITHOUT the distracting blue links and citation numbers

Is there a way to read entries WITHOUT the distracting blue links and citation numbers? I am often put off, badly, by the Wikipedia format when I just want to quickly glance at a subject. The links and numbers clutter the page, much like the endless ads on commercial sites. Surely there must be a way to click the links and numbers on or off, as the reader desires. Thank you greatly. I love Wikipedia, but . . . . . 50.34.40.181 (talk) 16:40, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

On the toolbar on the left hand bar you could select "printable version" which shows the page without any links or anything (although the little numbers are still there)--Jac16888 ^Talk 16:50, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

You can also download an article as a PDF file, where all the links and citation numbers are rendered as plain text in black, like in say a scientific paper. Just click on Print/Export (if it is collapsed, which would be indicated by the small triangle pointing to the right, otherwise, if the triangle points down, don't click it). After that, click on Download as PDF. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 17:10, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

See also WP:PDF. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 17:55, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Science articles

I sometimes try to read articles of scientific interest. I'm not a scientist, but I am a very well educated (2 BAs, 2MAs, 1 PhD) layman, and I'm accustomed to reading difficult material outside my immediate field. I regard an encyclopedia as a source for clear information on any given subject, and have written many articles for other major encyclopedias. I have recently been reading a large book on physics by American academic Brian Greene, and I have found it a model of clarity and intelligent explanation. But next to all of the science articles I have tried to read in Wikipedia are gobbledegook to anyone not already knowledgeable in the subject. Can something be done to provide guidelines for science editor to show that this is not the place for articles aimed at fellow scientists, but that they have to learn from Brian Greene Greene or Brian Cox and many others how to explain their subject without resorting to jargon and in-references? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denis MacEoin (talk • contribs) 16:42, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

This is a known problem with Wikipedia science articles. We would appreciate any help you could give. --Jayron32 16:54, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

A few years ago, when I was a Wikipedia newbie I read a guideline somewhere that said articles should be aimed at a reader with only a high school level of education in the topic. I think that was possible back when many articles were about fairly basic concepts. As WP grew new articles became more specialised about narrower topics their "reading level" inevitably increased to the extent that understanding some science articles require at least a Bachelors degree in the subject. Roger (talk) 09:34, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

User abuse on vandalism flagging/reverting

Hi, I don't really know where to report this behaviour: User:Mdann52 is using some sort of tool or script to flag as vandalism and revert edits made by other users.
Even on their own talk pages, see mine here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Maxxyme&action=history
And I can't even discuss with the guy, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=497079755
How do I handle that? Many thanks. PS: you can try cleaning my talk page by yourself... Maxxyme (talk) 16:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

It seems Mdann was being a bit overzealous here, I've left him a note to ease it back a notch, and you're free to remove whatever you want from your talk page. And for future reference when you want to contact someone you need to go to their User talk page, not their User page (i.e. User talk:Mdann52 not User talk:Mdann52)--Jac16888 ^Talk 17:01, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for the message you left. By the way I noticed the mistake I made by confusing his user page and his user talk page. Not really used to all that WP-behind-the-walls stuff. Maxxyme (talk) 17:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia search

Is it possible to do a case sensative search? Id like to search for words like "facebook" in lowercase only as part of a typo cleanup. Currently search seems to return any case as far as I can tell. Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 17:31, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

You'd have to use an external search engine. Oddly enough, our internal search engine is not case sensitive, even though articles titles are! --Orange Mike | Talk 17:43, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I found a solution to this once before. See Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2011 June 26#Case Sensitive search on Wikipedia?. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:10, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

digital signal processing

The basic definition is muddled and needs improvement. Since there's no "edit" box for the basic definition, how do I enter better information? Striznauss (talk) 19:08, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

If you click the "edit" tab at the top of the article, you should be able to edit any part of it, including the lead section.--ukexpat (talk) 19:18, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Also you may put one for the lead section (basic definition) by switching it on from [Your prferences]. Go to My preferences > Gadgets - Editing, then select Add an [edit] link for the lead section of a page. And click save!Vanischenu m^Talk 00:59, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

External Link

Is there the potential of an issue occuring if I am adding the same external link to multiple pages? The link is to a university map collection concerning state geography/history of Oklahoma. I have identified certain pages that researchers would benefit from using this external link. I am not adding it to random pages. Please let me know what I need to do so that any problems are limited. Can I avoid the issue of these links being considered spam? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Athiker99 (talk • contribs) 20:39, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, only adding links to one site falls under Wikipedia:Single-purpose accounts (note that that's not necessarily a bad thing). The 5th one threw up a warning tag, and they were all reverted. The link to an educational institution, for historical maps, should probably have been given more consideration, and discussion, but I don't see whether you answered the questions asked at your post here in November: are you affiliated with the university, specifically with the maps? and what value do you think they add to those articles? User:Orangemike's questions to you near the bottom of the page. Dru of Id (talk) 22:12, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes,I am connected to the university library and the McCasland Digital Collection of Early Oklahoma and Indian Territory Maps project. I am a graduate student/intern. To answer the second question. Would this link contribute? I would say "yes". This collection is housed and being digitized at Oklahoma State University. It is currently the largest digitized collection of Oklahoma maps in the state and growing. Close to 4,000 digitized maps. If a Wikipedia visitor is searching a historic/geographic page concerning Oklahoma they could find maps that are not available anywhere else. Primary sources like maps are invaluable to researchers. If there are other question please let me know. If you have advice for me I would appreciate that as well. Thanks.Athiker99 (talk) 20:37, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I suppose that it's possible for someone to be spamming academic library links, but I'm confident that this isn't it. Athiker, please be careful only to add these links to relevant pages (county articles, city articles, regional articles, historical articles, etc., but not articles on things only remotely related to Oklahoma history), but you're definitely helping as far as I can see. Nyttend (talk) 05:53, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Exposure to radiation

how much of the human capacity expose in radioactive? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.198.82.212 (talk) 20:48, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

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.Template:Z37--ukexpat (talk) 00:56, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I want to make for Thomas W. Jones born in 1841, but a different Thomas W. Jones born in 1956 already has a page.

Hello Wikipedia,

What is the etiquette and procedure for making pages if two famous people have the same name?

Thanks,

James — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.53.46.144 (talk) 20:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

See WP:DISAMBIGUATION. Dismas|^(talk) 20:53, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Jonathan Waxman (physician)

My article was published but with a 'weasel words' banner at the top. I asked for help in getting it removed, and an editor kindly removed a few offending words and recorded an item on the Talk page saying that the banner would be removed in 24hrs if there was no objection. That was on Thurs 7th. I'm not sure if objections have been raised but the banner's still there. Can I remove it myself? Many thanks. Francesca w (talk) 20:54, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

I removed it for lack of any objections. Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:03, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

review

Hi

I am wanting to put up a new article with sources and want it reviewed to see if it is ok, before publishin, how do I do this . I am new here — Preceding unsigned comment added by MaryofMod (talk • contribs) 21:41, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Create it in a user subpage, and submit it for review. I suggest you look at the Article Wizard to begin with. --ColinFine (talk) 22:54, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Bias against Ron Paul

I'm just wondering why Wikipedia is participating in the blackout against Dr. Paul? I posted some very good news about his campaign today with THREE links confirming, and here it is 20 minutes later and it's gone. This is outrageous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.143.26.147 (talk) 21:53, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

At the time of my writing this, the last edit to the article on Ron Paul was made on June 5th. You did not add anything to it today. Nor to Ron Paul presidential campaign, 2012. Maproom (talk) 22:11, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

This was on the front news page, not a particular article. Although I should add it to those as well, thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.143.26.147 (talk) 22:15, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Your edits to Portal:Current events were reverted by User:Chrism with the comment "Tools for Justice is a campaign group, not a news source". If you want to insert that information, find an independent source that reported it. --ColinFine (talk) 23:09, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

June 12

Chemspider, pubchem, CAS. Are they reliable sources?

Of course, MoS doesn't give much (any) info about this. But I would like to know whether they are reliable sources from which information can be obtained. I mean, like the IUPAC name, melting point, BP, etc. Note that Wpedia worships them all, still there are plenty of compound which needs citations for IUPAC names and synonyms.

Also suppose that I found a missing or incorrect Chemspider ID or likewise things of Pubchem and CAS, shall I change it correctly. There is Chembot, so is it needed to add a reference to the chemspider itself for citing its own ID for a compound.Vanischenu m^Talk 00:24, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Pubchem is run by NIH / NCBI and is definitely a reliable source, the same as their other databases like pubmed and omim. I have never used chemspider but given that it's owned by Royal Society of Chemistry I would say it's a reliable source. CAS is part of the American Chemical Society and are responsible for assigning CAS registry numbers which I've used in the past as part of my job, so it's definitely a reliable source as well. You could ask at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard as well if you're still not sure. It's always possible that there could be missing or incorrect information here on Wikipedia and if you come across it you should try to correct it or leave a note on the talk page. Sarahj2107 (talk) 09:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your kind reply. Now I can give citation for those IUPAC names and synonyms. But I still doesn't understand why there are hidden categories named Chemical pages needing a CAS Registry Number and Chemical pages needing a ChemSpiderID. Shall I put the IDs myself? Or will it be done by ChemBot?Vanischenu m^Talk 10:31, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I think those categories are automatically created if the ids are missing from the infobox. I found this project page, they might be able to give you more information on adding the IDs and what the ChemBot is doing at the moment. Sarahj2107 (talk) 12:04, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I had read this earlier, but at that time, I failed to understand. Now I read it carefully and I got it almost right. Thank you so much. So it is our duty to change the information to correct value while the Bot verifies it. But along with this the article also says that the Bot will try to add, update and/or check as a number of other identifiers (InChI, InChIKey) by comparison of the data with the ChemSpider website. I am a little confused at that pointVanischenu m^Talk 22:24, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Article about Boeing 777 (or other commercial aircraft for that matter)

Lots of technical data which interests me, but no mention of passenger comfort.

What is the noise level in the passnger cabin at cruise as compared to other equivalent aircraft? The quietest aircraft I ever flew on was an Airbus A340, the 777 was distinctly louder.

How about cabin altitude during cruise? What's typical, is it adjustable?

And also relative humidity? Do I arrive parched and dehydrated? Especially on a long flight.

Compare these critical passenger comfort factors, if possible.

Respectfully, Frank............ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.85.25.148 (talk) 00:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

This page is for questions about editing Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer 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. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. RudolfRed (talk) 00:50, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I think you're asking for improvements to particular articles. The best place to ask this is in the article's talk page Talk:Boeing 777, or (since you're talking about a class of article) at WP:WikiProject Aircraft. --ColinFine (talk) 11:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Is Lexisnexis a valid source to use to make an edit on a page?

Is Lexisnexis a valid source to use to make an edit on a page?

Mattsky (talk) 01:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Lexis/Nexis covers a lot of territory. Can you be more specific about what you're planning to cite to verify what content?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:18, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Maybe. Wikipedia's use of sources depends on the author, the article, where the article is published, how it is archived, what encyclopaedia article the source is being used for, and what claim the source supports. Lexisnexis is a search system for a variety of publications containing a wide variety of articles. See The Reliable Sources Noticeboard and ask a specific question regarding a specific source in a specific article for a specific claim. Fifelfoo (talk) 01:23, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

In general, LexisNexis itself isn't a good source, because search tools aren't the type of sources that we use to write an encyclopedia. However, many of the periodicals that LexisNexis indexes are very good sources; I'm not familiar with it enough to be sure, but I'd expect that there are not-so-good sources also included. Please be careful and use sources wisely — that's the biggest and most important part. Nyttend (talk) 05:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

delays in updated posts/publishing

I've noticed the past 2 days updates to articles can take over an hour to be incorporated into Wikipedia. I find this troubling at best, mostly a nuisance, and warily a step toward censorship.

Why have updates that I and other editors been delayed in the system??! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doyna Yar (talk • contribs) 03:35, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Unless there is a technical issue I'm unaware of, any update you make will take effect immediately. It could be some reverted your edit, or your cache needs to be refreshed. CTJF83 03:51, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I see you have edited some portal pages which are transcluded in other pages. In such cases it sometimes takes time before the other pages are updated. You can purge them to force an update. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:10, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Retreiving a draft article

Hi, I am new to Wikipedia and started working on an article yesterday but it was not ready for review so I did not publish it but saved the draft (I thought?) and now I cant find it. Any tips on how to retrieve my article?

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarajp (talk • contribs) 05:04, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Did you create it with your current account? Because it isn't showing up in your contributions to Wikipedia. Perhaps you forgot to save it. If you did, your work is probably lost, and will need to be recreated. If that is the case, please be sure to use the "save page" button to save it. If you use the "show preview" button, the file will not be saved until you press the "save page" button. --Jayron32 05:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

The best place to work on a draft article is in your userspace. We have an Article wizard that can help you start a draft (when you save using this program, select the option to save in a user sandbox space). We also have guidance at Wikipedia:Your first article. Karenjc 05:56, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

How can I add a page about my company?

We are trying to create a page for our company, while being as neutral and factually correct as possible. We see plenty examples of other companies that have done this on Wikipedia, such as SugarCRM, Guidewire, Accenture, IBM, and Adobe. In the absence of any externally published information about our company (we are relatively new), what do we have to do to publish a page about our company without it getting flagged for deletion? It is not at all our intent to use it for marketing purposes, it is just to provide a quick and informational summary about our company on the very effective database that is Wikipedia. We welcome any suggestions and tips! Thank you very much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by EBaoTech (talk • contribs) 05:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

First, make sure your company meets the guidelines for being notable. Then, find some reliable sources. You can then request an article at WP:REQ, in your request explain why you think the company is notable and provide the reliable sources you found. You can also write it yourself, but this is not recommended due to the conflict of interest. RudolfRed (talk) 05:45, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) After you read the page on our conflict of interest policy, you can go to WP:AFC. Here you can write a page, and someone else will review it and either decide that it's good or point out problems before it becomes an article. Please be careful to provide citations to multiple reliable sources when writing the article. Nyttend (talk) 05:47, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) There is something you have incorrect. IBM did not add the article about IBM to Wikipedia, any more than George Washington wrote the article about George Washington. People wholly unconnected to IBM (and those other companies) have added those articles. That's how Wikipedia is supposed to work. Companys and their employees are not supposed to have any control at all over Wikipedia articles about them. That's because Wikipedia's interest is in publishing works which are neutral and based on independent, reliable sources. If there are no independent reliable sources on your newly created company, there won't be any article at Wikipedia until such sources exist. Furthermore, no one associated with your company should be creating or editing any article about your company. Please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information. --Jayron32 05:49, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Question - "In the absence of any externally published information about our company (we are relatively new), what do we have to do to publish a page about our company without it getting flagged for deletion?"

Answer - Without such sources an article cannot be written. Comparing yourself to the likes of IBM is useless - IBM is over 100 years old, the books, chapters and articles that have been written about it (by outsiders) can fill a substantial library. Roger (talk) 12:56, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

additional mathematics

I am a grade 10 learner.I have just recently heard about additional maths and its many benefits.I do very well at core math.so I wanted to know if I would cope with additional math if I took it in the middel of grade 1093.186.16.243 (talk) 09:16, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. This is the page for asking about how to use or edit Wikipedia. You might ask at the Reference Desk, but I doubt that anybody here can give you better advice than the people at your school, since they are the people who know you and your capabilities, and the syllabus of the courses. --ColinFine (talk) 11:07, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Edward Ladd Betts Article

In your history about Edward Ladd Betts you refer to the fact that he married the daughter of Sir Samuel Morton Peto. This is incorrect.

He married the SISTER of Sir Samuel Morton Peto and NOT his daughter.

I am his great grandson and have all the family information. There are several sites which refer to the fact that he married Samuel Morton Peto's daughter - obviously all copying each other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.225.118.168 (talk) 12:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Which page are you referring to? Edward Betts has not been edited since April and says "In 1843, Betts married the sister of another railway contractor, Samuel Morton Peto. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:20, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

If you can identify the place where this mistake appears (and it's on Wikipedia) you can change it to say it was the sister and copy the source and formatting I just added to the main article on Edward Betts, verifying that fact. I cannot find where the actual mistake appears.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Stub RAF West Kirby

I made an expansion to this stub, as per your request. But I now need to correct a couple of minor typos and slightly improve grammar by making paragraphs. But I can not now find the "edit" bar in order to get back into the text of the article to enable me to do so? The only edit bars I can see are for REFERENCES and EXTERNAL SOURCES but no edit click on bar appears at the top to enable me to get into the text. Is there some fault on your software? Yours etc. Daviddru — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daviddru (talk • contribs) 12:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

No, it's the left-most tab attached to the upper right with the Search box and the magnifying glass. Dru of Id (talk) 12:30, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

At the top of the page, above the article's title, there should be a link for (aptly enough) "edit" right next the the "read tab". The editing tabs that appear in the side of articles are for section editing but there isn't one by default for the first section (though this can be turned on in preferences). You can also click on one of the side links and then change the end of the url in your address bar to section=0 to edit the first section, or you can take out the section extension entirely from the url and that is the same url as provided when you click on the main edit button. --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:42, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

WP:non-free content review

This was recently nominated for deletion, although tagging it as "historical" was the main purpose. There were concerns of very low traffic of this page, and people used it as an excuse to propose mergers. Nevertheless, I believe that it could be useful as an alternative to deletion or as a pre-deletion. I don't want it to become historical... yet. I want this page to be more useful than it is now, but I don't know where else to turn. I have yet to find an idea about what to do with this page about non-free image reviews. People say that it is redundant to WP:FFD and WP:PUF. I don't know what to say, but I'm torn. --George Ho (talk) 13:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

The decision to make the page historical was a community decision that was achieved through a discussion leading to consensus. As such, you would be operating in opposition to the community if you were to continue using it. The proper way to handle this is to bring your case in favor of it before Deletion Review. I haven't looked at the deletion discussion myself, but you should make sure you can address the issue(s) centrally underlying the decision to delete prior to filing with Deletion Review as a single voice of opposition isn't enough to overturn a community decision unless there is a solid basis to the argument. Good luck. -Thibbs (talk) 18:22, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

No, no, no. I'm not nominating it for deletion. Actually, to what page must I turn to make this page stronger and busier? --George Ho (talk) 18:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Although it hasn't been tagged as historical yet, it looks to me like the result of the Deletion Discussion was that the page should be made a historical page. Historical pages are not intended to be made stronger and busier. If you want to contest the decision to make the page historical then I think the place to go is Deletion Review. Deletion Review is a place to discuss the reversing or modifying of decisions made during a Deletion discussion. Alternately, you can try to re-propose its use or re-promote it by following the steps outlines here. -Thibbs (talk) 18:43, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Userbox issues

On my user page, my committed identity template overlaps my user language template. I've tried adding <br>, but it didn't seem to do anything. How would I push the babel template down?—Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 14:21, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Not sure what effect you're going for, but it will appear below the "girfriendwish" template if you add {{-}} immediately above the committed identity template. Let us know if that solved the problem. -Thibbs (talk) 17:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Apologies, I just noticed that I forgot the word overlaps, so the problem wasn't clear. I'm currently testing that {{-}} out.—Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 15:05, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I ended up simply placing the committed identity template at the bottom of my page, as it made things much easier, and it looks better anyways.—Yutsi ^Talk/ Contributions ( 偉特 ) 15:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Literature reference incorrect in literature list

In Osmotic power there is an error regarding 2 references 12 and 14 to one of my publications. I read : 12 (Brauns, E. “Toward a worldwide sustainable and simultaneous large-scale production of renewable energy and potable water trough salinity gradient power by combining reversed electrodialysis and solar power?” Environmental Process and Technology. Jan 2007. 312-323.) 14 (Brauns, E. “Toward a worldwide sustainable and simultaneous large-scale production of renewable energy and potable water through salinity gradient power by combining reversed electrodialysis and solar power?.” Environmental Process and Technology. Jan 2007. 312-323.)

The Journal "Environmental Process and Technology" referenced to and the year is however not correct. The correct Journal is "Desalination" and so the correct reference is :

Brauns, E. “Towards a worldwide sustainable and simultaneous large-scale production of renewable energy and potable water trough salinity gradient power by combining reversed electrodialysis and solar power?” Desalination 219 (2008) 312-323

Please correct this in ref 12 and 14

regards

Etienne Brauns — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.190.191.242 (talk) 14:59, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Is it [2]? (My computer is on pdf strike). Dru of Id (talk) 15:10, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Updating the content on the google search

I've updated some information for my page (Children's Museum of Houston), but when you Google it, the snippet in the Google box on the right has the old information presented (taken from Wikipedia). How can I update that to show the new information I've put in? Is this more of a Google issue than a Wikipedia issue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.65.252.66 (talk) 15:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Google usually takes a few days to update information based on Wikipedia; but if they don't update it, we as Wikipedia editors can't do anything about it. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 16:05, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Whether or not Google shows the article is the least of your concerns. First, I have removed the advertising puff which you added (assuming you are User:CMHouston). Secondly, it is not "your" page (see WP:OWN). If you are that user, you should not be editing this article at all (see WP:COI), and your username is possibly contrary to Wikipedia's username policy. Finally, the article has no independent references at all, and thus does not establish that the subject is notable .(I am not saying that it is not notable, but that the article does not demonstrate that it is.) I have tagged the article for these issues.

My advice to you is to read the links I have given, and then start looking for independent reliable sources that discuss the museum, and post them on the article's talk page, so that somebody other than you can add them to the article, and thus take it out of the liable-to-be-deleted realm. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 22:31, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

By the way, the Children's Museum of Houston did have a reference from the Chronicle of Philanthropy and I just added another from Parents. It appears to be notable with references from national publications. 72Dino (talk) 22:38, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Changing the path name of an article on Wikipedia

Hi,

I know how to edit an article on Wikipedia but I don't know how I change the path name of an article. The issue is with this article: St Francis D'Assisi High school. As you may notice, I'd like for the word "school" at the end of the path name to be uppercased to "School" thereby making it St Francis D'Assisi High School but I'm not too sure how to go about doing that. The reason I want this done is on Facebook it shows the school lower-cased which kinda looks ugly. Can you advise me on this. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.99.8.11 (talk) 16:47, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

See WP:MOVE. Because you're not using a registered account, you can't move pages. However, please note that the article is currently at Saint Francis D'Assisi High School — someone appears already to have moved it. Nyttend (talk) 17:08, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

And also note that Facebook community pages may incorporate content from Wikipedia— such use complies with Wikipedia policies on reuse of content. We at Wikipedia have no control over how the content is included nor can we help to remove it. Facebook does have a topic on Community pages and profile connections on their Help Center.--ukexpat (talk) 17:20, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Participating in discussions

Hi there, I have been a member for some time now and I am starting to learn a fair bit of policies, etc. I see that there are lots of discussions that you can take part in. Are there any places where I may help out? Zaminamina (talk) 17:23, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

There are indeed. Wikipedia only exists because of editors who are willing to participate and form community-based decisions. If you are interested in helping by building new articles then one good place to start is by joining a WikiProject. These smaller groups will be able to help you direct your focus at the areas they need the most help with. If the WikiProject covers a topic that you are familiar with or interested in then this can be an extremely satisfying way to help. There are hundreds of WikiProjects and a list of them can be found here. If you'd rather operate independently, you might be interested in visiting Wikipedia:Requested articles to find a list of all articles that have been requested by others. If you are more interested in helping by discussing policy, guidelines, and by participating in community decisions, you might start at Wikipedia:Requests or Wikipedia:Village pump. These just scratch the surface. There are hundreds of ways in which a motivated editor can make himself invaluable to the community. Thanks for your enthusiasm, and I hope you discover a stimulating area in which to help us! -Thibbs (talk) 19:00, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorting problem

hello,

please someone fix the sorting in the second column here? Thanks.--GoP_T^C_{N 17:47, 12 June 2012 (UTC)}

Y Done. Inelegant perhaps, but done. -Thibbs (talk) 19:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Hey, GoP has asked an elegant question. Still there is no use for sorting because everthing gets disordered on clicking it. GoP asked for sorting the second column and that is not yet possible. I think we cannot sort tables in that way. I suppose that the question is to make each section sortable, but the headers should not get away along with the sorting. ...sorry that I cannot explain this correctly but I hope you understand this. Just click on the sorting button, see what happens. mwHelp and wHelp does not show this. Something is said in the Table help page but I don't understand it.Vanischenu m^Talk 20:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure? It works for me now. If you don't mind, would you try clearing your cache and then verifying that the sorting is still broken? -Thibbs (talk) 20:25, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't work form me. Here is a simplified version of the table.

Alphabets
First three
A
B
C
y Last three
X
Y
Z

Clicking on the sort button will make everything in disorder. I do not know whether this is a problem of my browserVanischenu m^Talk 20:51, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

For me they sort to:

• First three
• A
• B
• C
• X
• Y
• y Last three
• Z

Is that the same order that you see when you click the sort button? -Thibbs (talk) 22:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, they sort to me in the same way. But I think that GoP has asked us to make it sortable to

• First three
• C
• B
• A
• y Last three
• Z
• Y
• X
  

OR

• y Last three
• Z
• Y
• X
• First three
• C
• B
• A
  

Please not that each entry that you have bolded in that page was supposed to be the heading of its followings. So what I mean is that, those bolded items should not be dispatched from its followers while sorting. Rather it should stay along with its sub-entries in such a way that the sorting applies to the sub-entries' local alphabetic order. To make the point simple, here in this table, C should not come along with Z, X or Y., and should stay under the heading First three.Vanischenu m^Talk 22:39, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

What you need then are multiple tables. If you don't want the non-bolded sub-entries sorted together with each other then they must appear in different tables. The multiple tables can be positioned so that they touch and the collection of tables can be surrounded by a frame so that the whole thing looks like a single table, and the surrounding frame can possibly even be a table itself so that clumps of figures can be sorted as a unit, but due to the way the coding for tables works what you are interested in will require multiple tables. -Thibbs (talk) 22:44, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

It would be better if it works good (and does not get separated) for all screen revolutions, Wiki skins and mobile phones. Also, if its construction takes extra effort, then the necessity for such a sorting in that article should be discussed. The table should not be affected when further entries are added.Vanischenu m^Talk 23:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I was under the impression that GoP's problem related to the fact that the sorting produced 1, 10, 100, 2, 23, 3, 5, 9 instead of 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 10, 23, 100. If that was GoP's problem then I've fixed it. The table now sorts pseudo-numerically instead of alphabetically. If GoP's problem related to the mingled sub-entries then the best solution I can think of is to use multiple tables. I think at this point we need to hear from GoP. For all we know his question may already be answered. -Thibbs (talk) 23:46, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks. Regards.--GoP_T^C_{N 09:58, 13 June 2012 (UTC)}

• • You're very welcome. So that's solved the issue, has it? -Thibbs (talk) 11:26, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

IDEA - Accelerate the learning process...

When reading an article, it would be very convenient if I could simply hover my cursor over any of the blue links and be provided with a 2 or 3 sentence definition/summary of the term. Now if I'm reading, and my understanding of the topic at hand is dependent upon some other term highlighted in blue, I'm forced to click away and then come back. I could learn much faster if there was some page action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.107.188.5 (talk) 17:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

We already have something like that, although you need an account for it: Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups--Jac16888 ^Talk 17:50, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Upload Wizard Help

Hi! I have tried to upload a small j.peg of a logo on the page Astro Studios. I believe because I haven't edited enough I am not an entrusted editor and able to download this. Can someone else upload it for me? Pretty Please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.90.214.146 (talk) 17:56, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Place your request at the page for upload requests. 71.146.10.213 (talk) 21:34, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Searching a page (ctrl f) can't find terms that are hyperlinked

Why doesn't firefox search/find words on your wiki pages that are hyperlinks? This seems like a huge miss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.171.191.60 (talk) 19:03, 12 June 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. We have nothing to do with how Firefox functions. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:05, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

In contrast to Orangemike's response, many people here do in fact have a significant interest in faults you may encounter when browsing Wikipedia in Firefox. Which version of Firefox are you using? Does this happen on one page or many different pages? Do you have "match case" ticked? Regards, - Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 20:00, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

If you're talking about the fact that the targets of wikilinks are unsearchable, this is due to the layout guideline. You can get around this by clicking the "edit" tab at the top and then using your ctrl-f search function to find a string in the wikicode. -Thibbs (talk) 20:22, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Or are you talking about the Find feature not searching the displayed text of links? For example, if you look at this page and search for "due to the layout", it says that it doesn't exist, even though it quite obviously exists in what Thibbs just wrote. Is that what you're talking about? I've long been annoyed by this fact, as it gets in my way a lot, and I don't know why it works that way. Nyttend (talk) 21:03, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Ctrl+F in my Firefox 12.0 finds "due to the layout" in the post by Thibbs, and all other displayed link texts I have tested. Can you answer the questions from Jarry1250? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Is logic allowed?

If there is a source for (A imply B) and for (B imply C), by pure logic this imply that (A imply C) .

Is the statement that (A imply C), considered original research? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.181.241.242 (talk) 19:07, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

It depends on how clear cut it is. The source for "A implies B" might have a different definition of B than the source for "B implies C" does. Or maybe the sources are simplifying and there are some unusual cases where A does not imply C. Jc3s5h (talk) 19:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

If the conclusion that A implies C is entirely obvious then its fine. However if it is not the only possible conclusion, and it is original thought not found in reliable sources, then it is WP:OR and should not be included. If someone has challenged the inclusion in this type of a circumstance claiming its OR, it probably is. Monty₈₄₅ 19:15, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

In many cases, it may constitute synthesis and original research. We are constructing a fully-sourced reference work, not a syllogism. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

How about this (CT examination imply xray ionizing radiation dose is absorbed by patients) and (xray ionizing radiaton dose absorbtion by people imply adverse effects). Conclusion (CT examination imply adverse effects) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.181.241.242 (talk) 19:29, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I think you will find plenty of sources that discuss concerns about radiation exposure and CT scans, for instance [3], just off the top of a google search. Better to find some sources and not need to worry about anyone thinking its OR. Monty₈₄₅ 19:46, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Not a lot of research about cognitive decline due to CT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.181.241.242 (talk) 19:50, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't think this question belongs at the Help Desk. RudolfRed (talk) 19:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Orange Mike's nailed it. What 79.181.241.242 has described is exactly what is meant by synthesis. Interestingly, there used to be an exception for simple logical deductions, but that hasn't been in effect since 2009. It sounds counter-intuitive, but it's really just another example of WP:V trumping WP:TRUTH. In actual practice, I'm sure it goes on all the time and there's probably little harm in it, but in a content dispute the person engaging in synthesis will lose the argument (ignoring IAR, etc.). Incidentally, RudolfRed is right. The underlying issue should be taken up at WT:NOR or dropped. -Thibbs (talk) 20:19, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello. This should not be treated that way. You must see that second case is depends on the quantity absorbed. Also adverse effects means having a visible adverse effect. 75 glasses of water is poisonous but this does not imply water is poisonous. You must verify that the second statement given is always correct. If it's true for every case, then of cource A⇒C. Otherwise not.Vanischenu m^Talk 21:06, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

79.181.241.242's language suggest English is not his or her first language. "Imply" is used in a special way in Boolean algebra. "A implies B" means that every single time A is true, B is true. If you test an integrated circuit that is supposed to carry out the logic "A implies B", and on one test out of 1 million, it gives the result "B is false" when A is true, you discard the integrated circuit. So 79's example "in CT examination imply xray ionizing radiation dose is absorbed by patients" that meets the boolean algebra definition of "imply". But the example "xray ionizing radiaton dose absorbtion by people imply adverse effects" does not meet the Boolean algebra definition of "imply". Perhaps the CT examination reveals that a bullet has passed through the patient's heart, there is no thoracic surgeon in the local hospital, and moving the patient to a better hospital is impossible due to a blizzard. That patient isn't going to suffer any adverse effect from ionizing radiation, because that patient is going to die from cardiac trauma before the ionizing radiation can have any effect. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:35, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

been hackedsorry name is dion berriman

sum one has been in my computer 4 along time thay have put lies about me all over face book and this site i nead it removed asap face book name also that and frank furt — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.179.146 (talk) 19:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

We can only help with questions about the workings of Wikipedia. Rcsprinter (talkin' to me?) 19:21, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Assuming you are spelling and typing your name correctly, I can't find anything about you on Wikipedia. The first page of Google about "Dion Berriman" seems to be apparently tame information about a painter in Australia. If someone is posting lies about you, they are not doing a very good job of it. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 01:51, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Also if your account here has been compromised, then please refer to WP:GOTHACKED to get a new account, and make sure to report the incident to an admin. -Thibbs (talk) 02:16, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Setting a link from Wikipedia article to Wikimedia to do a search against all categories?

Would be grateful for help. Have explored the help files for linking between wiki products but don't seem to have found what I want (particularly Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons for searches). I have resolved my problem (temporarily?) by setting a URL link to the precise search, but presume that there must be code to do this more easily i.e. code which sets up a search and is not a particular single category link? I have read up on categories and galleries but these do not seem to meet what I need as where particular images may be is basically where someone has chosen to put them and thus there is no particular single category which pulls the images down. Thus the type of link I have built in is Wikimedia Commons for Gloucestershire nature reserve images or Wikimedia Commons for Badgeworth Buttercup images. Thank you. Sjeans (talk) 20:17, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

For linking to a specific page or category you can use [[commons:]] links (see Help:Interwiki linking#Interwiki linking from and within Wikimedia). Also, to "disguise" your urls you can surround them in <span class="plainlinks"> and </span> tags (example: Wikimedia Commons for Gloucestershire nature reserve images). However i don't know exactly how to do what you are trying to achieve. benzband (talk) 20:41, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

It appears you want something going against WP:LINKSTOAVOID point 9. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:05, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you both for your replies. I have taken the initial advice of including the coding to diguise the URL. The word 'normally' is included in the 'Links to avoid' help file. I would expect that joint products such as Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons would have a simple way to do this e.g. against a switch say on 'catagory' as they are such comprehensive products. This is their internal search engine and not some external search engine in the wider world, but perhaps there is not a 'simple coding' route? What I have done is working just perfectly in its selection routine to support the content of the article, and would prefer not to remove it, unless it is truly against policy (as said policy does not specifically exclude it, it would appear from my reading of the help file). If anyone has anything further on this would be grateful to receive coding instruction, so thanks once again.Sjeans (talk) 08:41, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Links to search pages should be avoided. Wikipedia:Template messages/Sister projects#Wikimedia Commons has templates to link to a specific category or file. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:21, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for further info. I've tried to use the category link, but because the images are in various categories and sub-categories it cannot be used efficiently. Was hoping that there was something similar which did a cross category search, which it seems there is not. What a shame as something which is so easy and gives readers something quickly without hassle is best not done even internal to Wiki products. I've removed the two coded entries I've made regretfully. Thanks for your time.213.120.22.158 (talk) 11:20, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Interested readers could probably find far more images with Google or other external search engines. If a topic is suitable for a Commons category then you can create the category and link it, but Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust is about an organization and shouldn't have a category for assorted wildlife images in the area. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:49, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, you are right, but have been trying to encourage people who are not 'confident' on technology to use Wikimedia Commons and even Wikipedia by ensuring all possible links are done to help. The straightforward use of the search engine for the Commons has been a real boon as have found images far quicker than searching categories/subcategories. I suppose this is as far as I can go on this one now. Thanks again.Sjeans (talk) 13:13, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

my wikipedia page is not longer visible.

my name is shelley hirsch-someone had created a wikipedia page for me and i suggested that there needed to be more info. now it appears that the whole page is deleted. i would like to keep up what was there until i make changes...thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shelley hirsch (talk • contribs) 22:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

There is a page at Shelley Hirsch. However, if that is you, please read the guidelines for dealing with a conflict of interest. RudolfRed (talk) 22:25, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Please help students like me make pages expand in size without having to scroll from side to side

Dear Wiki,

I am a graduate student that often uses Wiki. I was wondering on behalf of all students, if it is possible to expand the pages without having to use the side to side scroll because the lines expand and not really the size.

Thanks, Annie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.143.169.143 (talk) 23:12, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Can you explain this a little better? What do you mean by "expand the pages"? What actions are you taking when you see the "side to side scroll"? -Thibbs (talk) 02:18, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Have you entered a line with one or more leading spaces? That causes the text to display oddly, extending off to the right. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:37, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

June 13

Biography of living person references

My aunt sent me information and asked me to edit what she thought was a wikipedia page on her. It is actually her husbands page which she is mentioned on. I made the page but don't know how to reference the fact that she sent me all the info typed on stationary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lmayart (talk • contribs) 00:32, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

You can't. Information needs to come from published reliable sources. See WP:RS RudolfRed (talk) 01:45, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

This is not necessarily the case, so long as:

• the material is neither unduly self-serving nor an exceptional claim;
• it does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities);
• it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
• there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity;
• the article is not based primarily on such sources.

see WP:SELFSOURCE. The third party bar and the fact that she has not published the material openly would seem the biggest hurdles. If you think the third party bar can be met and she publishes on some open source you may be able to use her material. 02:34, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Miami_cannibal_attack&diff=497323169&oldid=497319028

Two questions. First, how can I highlight the difference between the old and new version of this edit http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Miami_cannibal_attack&diff=497323169&oldid=497319028 so I can actually see what was changed at a glance?

Second, where are these "updated since my last visit" edit summaries coming from, and if they are just dummy summaries how can I agitate to get rid of them as a vicious crutch and a waste of bandwidth?

Thanks. μηδείς (talk) 02:24, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

For the first part of your question, click here Special:MyPage/skin.js and add to the page

 // install User:Cacycle/wikEdDiff enhanced diff view using ajax
 importScript('User:Cacycle/wikEdDiff.js');

After you save, bypass your cache. This will provide a much enhanced diff view but you have to know where to look. Go to a diff, like your link above, and then look for a new button at the bottom of the page with a green triangle inside. Click on that to see the enhanced diff view. As to the second part of your question, many users have complained about this new feature (including me, though at a time when it was bundled with other more intrusive changes). See the shitstorm at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 99#Watchlist - bold letter article titles! I'm not sure where discussion is continuing.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:08, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Preferences → Gadgets → wikEdDiff, improved diff view between article versions ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 10:20, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Since when, D'Oh!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:12, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the history of MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition, it was added June 2011. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 12:41, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Did Monobook die?

Hmm. I'm having trouble getting Wikipedia to display correctly. Unfortunately I noticed this around the time when I had decided to update my preferences, so I'm not sure if I'm the only one with this problem. Basically the whole Monobook skin is gone, and I'm left with a bare-bones view of pages. It does this in Firefox, Chrome, and EE. Is this a system-wide problem, or do I just have a problem with Java Script or something like that? ~Adjwilley (talk) 03:15, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Ok, it's back now. (That was really weird.) Sorry for the bother. I think my internet may have just slowed down to nothing and it just couldn't load the fancy stuff. ~Adjwilley (talk) 03:24, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

That has happened to me intermittently. It's never lasted more than a few minutes.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:01, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

World's Tallest People

My ancestors, Anna Haining (Swan) BATES and her husband, Martin Van Buren Bates, are not on this list. Both were tall enough to be included:

Anna Haining Bates 7 feet 5.5 inches tall. See Wikipedia listing for her. Born 6 August 1846, Nova Scotia, died 5 August 1888, Ohio.

Martin Van Buren Bates 7 feet 9 inches tall per Guiness Book of Records (Wikipedia listing). Born 9 November 1837, Kentucky, died 1 January 1919, Ohio. He was a Civil War veteran, Confederate Cavalry, rode a Percheron to battle.

Richard Johnson 03:30, 13 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.122.33 (talk)

You need a more reliable source than that, and you can't cite Wikipedia for a Wikipedia article. 71.146.10.213 (talk) 06:02, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

You can use reliable sources from those articles, however, to cite the addition of these two people to the list of tallest people. It would help to add in the notes section what your ancestors were the tallest in though because it seems like most of the people listed at List of tallest people were "the tallest professional wrestler" or "the tallest player in the NBA" or "the tallest volleyball player" or something of that nature. But feel free to add your ancestors along with references to the list of tallest people. If you need help editing, please let us know. -Thibbs (talk) 11:32, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Acknowledging Sources

Will i be penalised if I use information on the Wikipedia website without acknowledging the source? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.242.164.65 (talk) 06:43, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

That would depend mainly on where and how you used it. If you use it in a conversation with a friend, no one is likely to know or care; if used in an educational assignment paper, plagiarism might affect your grade or expulsion. If used for commercial purposes, the publisher is required to do "due diligence", depending on jurisdiction, they may become as liable as you for damages, court costs, litigation fees, and incarceration. Easiest just to attribute correctly. Dru of Id (talk) 07:09, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Radical change in average page ratings of an article

I just need enlightenment on how this could have possibly happened.

Some three months ago I checked the ratings on the Reproductive Health Bill and it was 4 out of 5 in most if not all of the 4 categories. There were around 70 ratings then per category. Today I came back and I am surprised that in all categories the rating is 1. The number of ratings has climbed to around 90.

How do you explain this when this is about current average ratings, meaning that the rating should have averaged to around 2 or 3 but not 1 given the previous ratings of 4? Is there something that can be done about this? Neutr8 (talk) 06:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

What is stranger still is when I added just now my personal rating, the average ratings jumped from 1 to 3 or 4! And that's just one additional rating! Neutr8 (talk) 07:17, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Old ratings are discarded once the article has been edited thirty times. See this FAQ and some of the others on that page. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:33, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, John. That was helpful. Neutr8 (talk) 07:42, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Classical Pantheism

trying to restart a page (Classical Pantheism) that was nominated for deletion and then merged to Pantheism by consensus. I have redone the page and removed the redirects but the link on the Pantheism page still redirects to "Pantheism" as it did before. How do I fix this? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allisgod (talk • contribs) 07:52, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

You changed Classical pantheism but not Classical Pantheism with upper case P. One of them should redirect to the other but I'm not sure which one. I would have thought the article should be at upper case P. See Help:Redirect#Creating and editing redirects. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:08, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Possible vandalism?

I was just looking at the page for Longside, a small village in Aberdeenshire. This is the page I mean: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longside I'm a bit concerned about the alterations made by 194.105.165.157 on 25 May 2012; is this possibly vandalism? Sorry to ask on here but I can't find anywhere else to ask. Sagaciousphil (talk) 08:43, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes. Vandalism for sure. I've reverted it. You could have done this yourself. Have a go next time, and thanks for alerting us. HiLo48 (talk) 08:47, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

changing Grammatical error on title

Russell morts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Russell Morts (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I am a new contributor and I wish to correct a grammatical error on the title of a page. Help would be appreciated.

Russell morts to Russell Morts

Russell morts

Russell Morts (born around October 1979; disappeared May 5, 1982) gained national attention as one of the first missing children to appear within articles in national publications, such as Newsweek Magazine in 1982. His abduction from a New York wheat field also helped bring to light the plight of missing and exploited children in America. Russell Morts was born in New York to Mr. Morts and Ruth Morts, a working-class family. He was a 2 year old and lived in a mobile-homes court. On May 5, 1982, Russell was left outside his parents trailer in a wheat-field, New York and by 12:25pm he was missing. His mother checked for him outside and he was missing. By 5:00 pm local people, plus the police, the volunteer fire department and blood hound were searching for him. The bloodhound traced his scent to a road leading out of the trailer park, and police have since followed his leads in 21 states and Canada. But Russell Morts is still missing and Ruth Mort may still be crying. It has been 20 years since his disappearance and it is likely possible that he is dead as no new coverage has been made to his reappearance that is the likely outcome. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohamedaddeen (talk • contribs) 09:23, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, an administrator has deleted that page. Dru of Id (talk) 11:26, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Titles - forms of address

Who do I contact if the title of a person is incorrect - I have been asked to amend an individuals entry (by them) as the title is incorrect and I cannot find a way to do this Lee lambert (talk) 10:05, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

You can post the page name and title here. Note that Wikipedia content requires reliable published sources. A private statememnt from the subject is not enough. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:10, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I guess you are referring to [4] but I don't understand what you are trying to do. Your edit was misformatted and I have reverted it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:13, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Wallachian Revolution of 1848

Hi I've noticed that at the "Wallachian Revolution of 1848" you have written Nicolae Balcescu and Alexandru Ioan Cuza without Nicolae Balcescu and....my gggguncle through my ggggfather Barbu Balcescu,brother of Nicolae Balcescu. Thank YouAristiderazu (talk) 10:51, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

So I have changed them into name. I hope is all right with your policy.Aristiderazu (talk) 11:02, 13 June 2012 (UTC) Aristiderazu

While genuinely helpful, I've undone the last two links to Cuza; he doesn't need to be linked more than once in the six-sentence portion of the same section. Dru of Id (talk) 11:18, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

For the record, this user has very little understanding of English and seems to have no interest in learning how Wikipedia actually works. Their edits seem to be in good faith which is the only reason I haven't suggested a topic ban (at least). OlYeller21^Talktome 12:01, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Citation formatting: Jayne Mansfield

Is there any editor, project or any other place where I can request aid/help to cleanup citations ion Jayne Mansfield? A lot of citations need proper formatting, using templates and all. Some are repeated citations and will need to be consolidated using "ref name" codes. And, some may be redundant altogether. It's a long article, and help will be appreciated very much. BTW, it's getting ready for an FAC now. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 13:40, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

How about WP:CLEANUP? AndieM (Am I behaving?) 14:12, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikibreak template on my user page

As I have finished exams, I wanted to post a Template:Back from short wikibreak template on my userpage, but a placeholder shows instead of my username. You can see it here.

Thank you! AndieM (Am I behaving?) 14:20, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Fixed, and also fixed the link to your simple: user page at no extra charge. Hope the exams went well. Bencherlite^Talk 14:34, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! I didn't know I had to type my username as a parameter. I won't know the results of my exams for two weeks, but I'm hoping I did well! AndieM (Am I behaving?) 14:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I have made the username automatic if no parameter is given.[5] PrimeHunter (talk) 14:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Word definition - help!?

I am racking my brain to recall the word used to describe a person who abuses their authority within their work position. Their is a name like a condition for it - it's one word which was used recently to describe a pollie. Please help?!?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.170.127.230 (talk) 14:33, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

This page is for questions about editing Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer 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. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. AndieM (Am I behaving?) 14:35, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

a need to have copy of Encyclopedia of Psychological Problems, Naramore

About 24 years ago when I was a Psychology student at a University, I read Encyclopedia of Psychological Problems which impressed me very, very much. Since then, I tried to get its copy either freely or on sale. But I couldn't succeed. For all these past years I used to serve as a counselor both in Church and secular world all the time of which I sensed the importance of the book. I want get the book , please help me.... Thank you. My email address is (Redacted), Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.9 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.Template:Z25 – ukexpat (talk) 14:55, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Claiming an article edit

I recently edited an article while I was logged out and would like to know how to claim the edit or in some way show that I made the edit. Any help is appreciated.

I recently made an edit to an existing article while I was logged out and would like to know how to show that I made the edit. Any help is appreciated!