Wikipedia:Help desk

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

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

Ask a question

March 26

not sure how to correct citation error

It looks fine to me. I have a link inside of the <ref> tags and have tried deleting and re-pasting, I can guess that it's buggy but I'm also a new wiki contributor. Can you check this out (scroll and what I did is in red) and let me know how I can fix it? Thank you. Technology integration — Preceding unsigned comment added by StephanieThoma (talk • contribs) 00:41, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I've put NOWIKI tags around your Ref tag above. This page, like any other, sees the ref tag and tries to make a reference out of the text after it. So most of your question was not visible. Just a note I thought I'd point out... Dismas|^(talk) 01:08, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I've fixed the error. You didn't close two of your ref tags. Each tag that you open with ref you have to close with /ref. And if you're going to use the same reference several times, you can just name the reference and then on each subsequent use, just use the name instead of the entire reference. You might benefit from reading Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. Note: I didn't actually read what you posted, so I have no opinion on the text. Dismas|^(talk) 01:14, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Genitalia in photo to left in "Hello Kitty" article

Who is responsible for providing or removing the genetalia with a ring pictured in the bio to the right of the article on HElLLO KITTY? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.125.167 (talk) 01:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The picture was added as a bit of vandalism. It has already been removed by another user. Thank you for reporting this, however! --Jayron32 01:28, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

A user with two identities

Dear editors: From time to time on talk pages I have read of "sockpuppetry", and it seems to be frowned on, so I thought that I should report someone who has created two identical drafts of the same article, one after the other was declined, with two different user names. User:Ijazul Haq Engineer created Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Wijdan Research Consultants, and User:Ijazulhaq716 created User:Ijazulhaq716/Wijdan Research Consultants. —Anne Delong (talk) 01:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Unless there is a deliberate attempt to either a) deceive other editors into thinking two different accounts are two different people OR b) to avoid a block on a prior account, then multiple accounts are allows. Unless you have evidence that this has been done in this case, there isn't any problem. Many people create one account, lose the password, and have to create a second account, for example. That's allowed. The fact that they share similar names is evidence that the person who created them isn't trying to be deceptive or disruptive. If they aren't trying to be deceptive or disruptive, or are not dodging a block, there is no problem. --Jayron32 01:46, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

If the first account is no longer active that would be an indication that it is indeed a legitimate case of creating a new account after losing access to the first one. If both accounts are currently active there would be grounds for an investigation. Multiple concurrently active accounts are normally only allowed for very specific purposes such as operating a bot. Roger (talk) 11:18, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, there are several situations where multiple accounts are allowed (see WP:SOCK#LEGIT) and it's not always required to disclose it publicly as long as they are not used for illegitimate purposes (although it's a good idea to let the checkusers or arbcom know beforehand). Anyway getting back to this particular case, Ijazul Haq Engineer (talk · contribs) has not edited since 21 February and Ijazulhaq716 (talk · contribs) was created only on 5 March so there is no issue as yet; for now we can assume good faith. Jayron32's explanation is probably correct. Chamal ^T•C 11:43, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Help to Remove Child Abusive Sexually Explicit Content.

Here is the PAGE URL: File:Still from Chatrak - Paoli Dam and Anubrato.png From the respectable Wikipedia site. Please Remove the Copyrighted infringing material from the site. Regards, Team Intelligence Branch. India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Intelligence.branch (talk • contribs) 03:16, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion here about this topic. You're free to add your opinion at that discussion, as it little will be done here to address your concerns. --Jayron32 03:32, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The file has been deleted. You can refer to the discussion that Jayron32 has linked to, if you need further details. Chamal ^T•C 11:47, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Creating Wikipedia page

Hello Can you please help me out in creating a Wikipedia page of our firm ? From where do i start with? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smart Trade Online (talk • contribs) 07:30, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The first step is to read Wikipedia: Notability (organizations and companies) — It's possible that your firm is not a suitable subject for an encyclopedic article. If you believe notability can be established, the next page you should read is Wikipedia: Conflict of interest. If you then wish to proceed, the next place to check out is Wikipedia: Your first article. ~Regards, 74.60.29.141 (talk) 07:45, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

WHAT IS THE BEST APP/SOFTWARE TO CREATE COLOR CODED MAPS LIKE YOU SEE ON THIS... AMAZING.... SITE CALL WIKIPEDIA

HAS TO BE FREE

WILL CHECK BACK HERE ONLY -- DO NOT CHECK/READ TALK PAGE EVER

THIS IS MY NATURAL REACTION UPON VISITING THIS... SITE THAT I VISIT SO FREQUENTLY...... -- DO NOT MIND IT

Coginsys (talk)

What? --Closedmouth (talk) 08:51, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

NO WORTHLESS RESPONSES! THANKS! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coginsys (talk • contribs) 08:51, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Have a look at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Resources/Tutorials. From there it looks as if most of these maps are created using Inkscape. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:04, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

First of all stop shouting. You might be looking for this tool. --Ushau97 ^talk 09:07, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The Wiki tutorials also cover GRASS GIS and Quantum GIS, so presumably those are used too. -- Q Chris (talk) 09:09, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

listed buildings

whilst searching for a possible missed listing in High Green ,Sheffield S35, I could find no reference to St.Saviours Church,Mortomley, Formerly in the West Riding, It was given Grade 2 Listing in 1973 by Sheffield Council when they took over admin of our area can your lists be modified to include the church. Edward Bellamy. Church Archivist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ted bellamy (talk • contribs) 10:09, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

If you can cite a reliable source for the information it can certainly be added. Something like a newspaper article mentioning the church's status would do very nicely. Perhaps you can find something usable in your archive. Roger (talk) 11:09, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

British Listed Buildings Online has a very thorough list of listed buildings in the UK, with a search facility. I can't find this church there. Maproom (talk) 14:28, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I have added it to Listed buildings in Sheffield as it appears in the official Sheffield list at https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/dms/scc/management/corporate-communications/documents/planning/conservation/Sheffields-Listed-Buildings-December-2012/Sheffields%20Listed%20Buildings%20December%202012.pdf it also appear on the English Heritage list at http://list.english-heritage.org.uk/resultsingle.aspx?uid=1286375 MilborneOne (talk) 17:34, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Best selling album

List of best-selling albums

HI IM HAVING PROBLEMS WITH THE BEST SELLING ALBUM PAGE , Michael jACKSON ALBUM history PAST PRESENT AND FUTURE HAS A REFERENCE THAT INDICATES 20 MILLION SOLD HOWEVER IT CONTINUES TO BE DELETED,,,,,,,CAN SOMEONE HELP,,THANK YOU,,,,--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:43, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

There is a discussion about this album on the article's talk page, you should discuss it there. And please don't SHOUT. Maproom (talk) 14:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Update info please

Hi, we need to update the link for The King's Church Chesham on the CHESHAM page. Could a volunteer help please? Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.89.161 (talk) 14:58, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

This is about Chesham#Religion. There was a red link King's Church, which I have removed. What did you want it updated to? Maproom (talk) 15:11, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The article King's Church does not exist. That is the reason it was red-linked. Since the article does not exist, I have removed the link to it. The King's Church article was deleted because it has no claim of notability. So it is unlikely that the article will be retained even if it was created again. --Ushau97 ^talk 15:17, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Off-topic: I removed the link too. But it doesn't appear in the edit history. Does anyone know why? --Ushau97 ^talk 15:27, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, if a user makes the exact same edit as another user at around the same time, the software only counts it once and uses the first user's edit. You and Maproom were making the same edit at the same time, but Maproom saved the edit first. When you saved your edit, Maproom's edit had already been saved. Since there was no difference between your new edit and the now current revision, the software disregarded your edit. Does this make sense? The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 15:50, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

My internet connection is very slow tonight (well, it is night for me, might not be the same for you). Maybe that is the reason for the problem. But there should have been an edit conflict notice when I saved the page, right? But enigmatically there was no such notice. Anyways, thanks for the reply. I should probably get this off my mind. But, if there is anyone out there who is savvy with this, please let me know. --Ushau97 ^talk 16:04, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I think the edit conflict notice is only displayed when the edits conflict each other. Both of your edits did not technically conflict each other since they were exactly the same edit. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 16:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

If the edits are identical there won't be a conflict and the system will simply discard the second one. Roger (talk) 16:18, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Exactly,! Why couldn't I have thought of that? Thanks a lot, both of you. --Ushau97 ^talk 16:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Just a question for curiosity's sake

What would happen if someone created [[Template:~~~~]]? Would it affect the signature syntax? - a boat that can float! (watch me float) 15:42, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

No. It could only make a difference if someone typed {{~~~~}}, four tildes enclosed in double curly brackets, and even then, the signature expansion seems to take effect first, thus: {{John of Reading (talk) 15:55, 26 March 2013 (UTC)}}

It's not even possible: "A title cannot contain 3 or more continuous tildes. (~~~)". (WP:Page name#Invalid page names) When I try to create a page with that title, I get "Bad title". The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 16:21, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh yes; all I did was a search and nothing showed up. Thanks, both of you! - a boat that can float! (watch me float) 17:16, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Valid editing has to be applied and approved...

Hi,

Many user who refer Wikipedia have said that the last user who have viewed this\that page have edited some unwanted updates, so i request u that only valid users or owners can edit the pages or please ensure that updating has been done regularly by admin or employees of Wikipedia.. Because users refer many websites and blogs for information and there are possibilities to make changes according to him..

Thanks in Advance.. Regards, Parthiban — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parthivdude (talk • contribs) 15:45, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

We editors are all volunteers. We are all "valid users", there are no "owners", and we are not paid. Maybe that is not ideal, but it is the way things are done here. Maproom (talk) 15:49, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia is a wiki. That means almost anyone can edit and add content. So such an idea is against the whole point of Wikipedia itself. --Ushau97 ^talk 15:58, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 16:23, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Book disappeared

I was compiling a book, and when I logged on today there were no pages in teh book, all were gone. There was nothing. Is there a way I can recover it? Why did it go away? How can I prevent this from happineing again? I wish I had taken a screen shot of the contents, it would be easy to recover, but I didn't. I did update Java today, would that have done it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsis301 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

If you had saved a book it would have been listed in your contribution record. You will not, however, have been able to save a book yet, as your account is not yet autoconfirmed. See Help:Books#Saving and sharing your book with others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Biddulph (talk • contribs) 17:02, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Article star ratings have gone - TAKE 2

The article star ratings that used to be at the bottom of each article have gone. Why ? They were very useful. Take 1 of this question is here: Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2013_March_21#Article_star_ratings_have_gone_-_why_.3F --Penbat (talk) 17:09, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Article feedback was disabled last month for improvements. Now, article feedback is available on an opt-in basis by adding Category:Article Feedback 5 to an article. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 17:18, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

It seems a very drastic retrograde step to delete "Feedback 4" from all articles for a long period of time while "Feedback 5" is being tested. "Feedback 4" may not have been perfect but it is far better than nothing.--Penbat (talk) 17:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Apparently, the old five-star system was good to find which articles are good and which aren't. But it didn't help to find ways to fix articles. That's why the new feedback tool has a text box: users can write comments. --186.53.147.49 (talk) 17:05, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

CSD log constantly deleting chunks of itself

My CSD log keeps auto deleting large chunks of itself, how can I solve this glitch? Valenciano (talk) 18:04, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Hmm... I've never seen this before but I'm wondering if it has something to do with the size of the page? Twinkle does have a bug report feature on its Github if you wanted to report it there. I'll make a note about it on the Twinkle talk page. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 23:32, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I thought it might be down to the size of the page myself so I moved all the pre-March stuff to an archive. I'll keep an eye on the twinkle talk page. Valenciano (talk) 05:30, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Looks like that's probably the issue. See here. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 01:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Help with someone vandalizing a page

Resolved

We've been fighting a user all day who is spamming/vandalizing a page, and changing information. Is there an administrator who could help lock this page, or block this one user? The URL is Chad Connelly.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexstro (talk • contribs) 18:10, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I have warned User:Knarfxii for vandalism. If it continues, you can request page protection at WP:RPP.--ukexpat (talk) 18:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

User:Knarfxii now blocked.--ukexpat (talk) 13:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Old Manuscript

Dear Folks: I would appreciate if someone could please visit the GWON BEOP article and provide me with a judgement on a picture I have just uploaded. The "picture" is actually a jpeg of one of 9 pages from a military manual written in the 16th Century. My intention is to clean-up each of these reproductions and post them to the article in a gallery and do the same with the same material from the comparable Korean manual published in 1795. However, I want to be sure that I am working within Wiki policy. A copy of the original manual---at least a reproduction of it--- is kept at the Library of Congress so the matter of public access is not a problem. Needless to say the author has been dead about 4 centuries, but I would still appreciate a judgement call before I put in all of the work. Thoughts?

File:Boxing Upload.jpg

Pg 464 of the Boxing Canon published as Chapter 14 of the Jin Xiao Shin Shu written by General Qi Jiguang

Best Wishes.--Bruce W Sims (talk) 18:55, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The article is Gwonbeop. Can you explain how you obtained your jpegs? Did you scan the Library of Congress's copy? or do you have a copy of your own which you scanned? Are you in the US (where, I believe, scans of an out-of-copyright work may be freely copied)? It's hard to answer questions about copyright law without knowing. Maproom (talk) 23:52, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I have a copy of my own which I scanned into my computer and then cleaned-up with Photoshop. Since I live here in the US I was pretty sure that I'm OK but I thought I would ask just to be safe. Best Wishes --Bruce W Sims (talk) 12:42, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Dj Steel

Yesterday I attempted to create an artist page for myself but it was flagged for speedy deletion due to copyright infringement but the link that they referenced was the actual link to my website. www.Djsteelworldwide.com/epk.html. I contacted the user who deleted my post Username: INevercry, and they replied stating I need to either place an explicit free license directly on my site or contact WP:OTRS to give permission to use. I cliked on the WP:OTRS link that they provided but I saw all kinds of warnings at the top of the page telling people not to post anything there. Im confused. I am the owner of www.djsteelworldwide.com and I am just trying to create an artist profile for myself on Wikipedia. Can someone please help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steelworldwide (talk • contribs) 22:02, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello! A detailed explanation of how to grant copyright permission in these types of cases can be found here. Essentially, you would email the OTRS team at the email address listed on that page. However, I need to caution you that other policies are in effect here. Your material would still be deleted if it is found to be promotional, non-notable, or unencyclopedic. You would also need to familiarize yourself with the conflict of interest policy and understand that, since you are affiliated with the subject of the article, editors are going to scrutinize your contributions. Material that is copied from the subject's own website is usually not written in the proper format for an encyclopedia, so it will be much easier for you if the article is written using new wording, rather than granting permission to copy from your website. If you want to help make the article to last, I strongly recommend that you make sure you meet the criteria listed here and then run your article through the article wizard process to get some help. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 23:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Frank Darby new article

I today created a wikipedia page on myself, but I cannot find it ??Darby48 (talk) 22:13, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

It is on your user page at User:Darby48 RudolfRed (talk) 22:55, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Because you've created this page on Wikipedia, I'll presume that you intend for it to become an article here at some point. With all due respect to your accomplishments, however, there are a number of issues with it as written, not the least of which may be notability. If you should want to proceed, please read WP:BIO and WP:AUTOBIO and use the WP:AFC process to submit it for review. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 01:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Formatting break

It seems that there is some sort of formatting break at Wikipedia:Vital articles/Expanded/Arts.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:45, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

 Fixed? if you mean the level 2 headers from Music on down and the Navbox being included in the columns. That was broken here and is now fixed. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 01:12, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

March 27

Category being added to my talk page by another user

Resolved

A user is adding a category to my talk page through HotCat, even though it's not an appropriate category. What is happening with his scripts? WhisperToMe (talk) 03:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

• I think it was resolved on its own WhisperToMe (talk) 03:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Error that made it into Russian Wikipedia -- how to alert them?

Resolved

At Cockcroft–Walton generator an incorrect schematic was just fixed.[1]

Looking at the file for the incorrect schematic, I see that it is used at ru.wikipedia.org.link How do I alert them so that they can fix their page? I don't speak Russian. --Guy Macon (talk) 04:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

ru:Википедия:Посольство is the link to their Meta:Wikimedia Embassy. Ryan Vesey 04:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! See link --Guy Macon (talk) 06:16, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The reply at ru.WP is a bit cryptic if you're not very familiar with working with images. The corrected schematic cannot be used on ru.WP because it exists only on en.WP, please move it to Commons so that all WPs can use it. Roger (talk) 14:31, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Steve Warren Masters V

Masters V (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Steve Here. I Joined the Masters V in 1983 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.105.24.222 (talk) 04:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Please provide us with a reliable source. If you provide us with a reliable source, then we could change it easily. --Ushau97 ^talk 04:22, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Third-party hosted source

Resolved

I've stumbled upon a source I'd like to use. The problem is, it's not hosted on the publisher's website, and most likely never was. Instead, the only available online copy exists on a privately hosted website by a third party ([2]).

Obviously, it would be possible to use the privately hosted web copy for my own reading (trusting the host that his copy is unaltered from the original), and only use the original source data (title, author, publication date etc) for the reference in the article.

I'd like to include the link with the reference for the obvious purpose of easy verifiability for the reader. My question is, would it be possible to use this link in conjunction with the reference, or would it be advisable to leave it out due to the questionable situation regarding it being hosted by a third party in this manner? --89.0.245.24 (talk) 04:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

It would be best if you could get a copy of the original print source. You shouldn't link to websites that host copyright violations, and there's no requirement that a print source have a linkable online version, so it's best to do as you say: use the original bibliographic information about the original print source, and avoid linking to the questionable online reproduction of it. --Jayron32 04:52, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, for my own reading purposes I don't need another copy. I see no reason not to trust the available copy. So that's what I'll do then, no link. Thanks for your advice, --89.0.245.24 (talk) 05:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

sockpuppets

What are the guidelines on sockpuppets? I had a few a while back at Commons because I was trying to shake off a stalker, but now someone tells me I'm being naughty and could be blocked for sockpuppetry. I always thought they weren't a problem unless they were being abused.

Sardaka (talk) 06:41, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

WP:SOCK is the policy at English Wikipedia regarding sockpuppets. You could report them at WP:SPI --Ushau97 ^talk 06:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

If you're using for a purpose listed at WP:SOCK#LEGIT, then it would be okay. --Ushau97 ^talk 07:00, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

If you're using a legitimate alternative account but don't want to disclose it publicly for whatever reason, it's a good idea to inform the Arbitration Committee about it confidentially, to avoid any future problems with suspected sock puppetry. Chamal ^T•C 08:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Alaska Libertarian Party

Resolved

Alaska Libertarian Party (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Update, Michael Chambers is the newly elected Vice-Chair. Please update — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.58.155 (talk) 09:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, If you provide us with a reliable source, then we could change the information without any delay. I came up with this after doing a web search. However since it is not from a reliable source, I have not updated it. Their official Facebook page have not been updated so far and I don't think their official web site https://www.alaskalibertarian.com/ has been updated even once this year. Please provide us with a reliable source so that we can change the information --Ushau97 ^talk 10:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

But the "About Us" page at https://www.alaskalibertarian.com/ doew show Michael Chambers as the vice-chair. It's not independent, but I guess that's reliable, so I've made the change. Rojomoke (talk) 13:18, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Tony Ward

I have a verification from the Referees Officer of the Football Association in London, yet still my entry states it needs verification, can you assist please. Tony Ward Referee - Wikipedia. <email redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.175.84 (talk) 13:35, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Assuming that you are referring to the article Tony Ward (referee), the template at the top is currently appropriate, because there is only a single fact in the article that is referenced. If you have another published reference, it may be added, following the procedure in WP:Referencing for beginners. Anybody may remove the {{refimprove}} if they believe that it is no longer applicable - but if you or anybody else remove it at present, it is likely to be reinstated by somebody else, because the article does lack references. It is not that anybody is doubting that you are a referee, only that (especially for biographies of living persons), Wikipedia requires all information to be verifiable.

Since you appear to be Tony Ward, judging from your question, you should also read about conflict of interest: your best course is to mention the reference you have, and any others you may have, eg newspaper reports, on the article's talk page Talk:Tony Ward (referee) so that an uninvolved editor may edit the article. --ColinFine (talk) 20:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Bernie Nolan

YOU HAVE PUT THAT BERNIE NOLAN DIED YESTERDAY, HOW COME IT HAS NOT BEEN ON THE NEWS!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.220.239.77 (talk) 14:12, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

On what page did the information appear? Please don't SHOUT!. Roger (talk) 14:35, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Looks like it was Bernadette Nolan. The unsourced information has been removed several hours ago though. Chamal ^T•C 14:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

right-clicking h2;mw-headline opens the edit page ?

When I'm logged in, on every page with an editable section, right-clicking the header of that section opens the corresponding edit page for me. There seems to be some kind of script connected to either the h2 span tag combination or the mw-headline class. If this only happened with the actual title text, I wouldn't further think about it, but it also does that on the white-space right from the "[edit]" span, which I find rather irritating. I often right-click there because I want to open my browser's context menu and I don't want it to relate to text, images or anything on a page, that's why I'm clicking the supposedly empty space on that page. (Tested this with Firefox, Chrome and Opera, which all seem to extend the span tag to 100% available width when undefined.) - Is there any way to turn this feature off or at least prevent it from responding to my clicks? (except from staying logged out when not intending to edit) -- Harl (talk) 14:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Go to your Preferences → "Editing" tab, and uncheck the "Enable section editing by right clicking on section titles (requires JavaScript)" checkbox if it is checked. Chamal ^T•C 15:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The checkbox wasn't checked. I just: checked it, saved settings, unchecked it, saved settings, reloaded an editable page, to see if that would change anything, but right-clicking section titles still acts as if the checkbox was checked either way. (Thanks for trying to help though.) --Harl (talk) 15:29, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

How do I make a link to google books appear in the list of references?

I am using textbooks to edit wikipedia. Some editors have said that this is bad for verifiability, because most people do not have easy access to these textbooks. How do I integrate a link to the google books preview to the relevant page with the reference, to appear in the list of references? Here is the article where this issue was raised: aphthous stomatitis. Thanks in advance, Lesion (talk) 15:25, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Sources do not have to be easy to access, they just have to available somewhere. Please do not use Google Books links. Even a unique source (only one "copy" exits) is acceptable as long as it can be accessed. College textbooks are not hard to access, at the very least the library of the college(s) where they are used will have them in their collection. WP:Verifiability does not require everyone to be able to access a source, only that it is possible for someone to do so. Roger (talk) 15:51, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Why would you say please do not use Google Books links? Even if I read something in a hard copy of a book, I'll include a link to Google Books or Questia if it exists there. Here is a tool you can use to semi-automatically create a Google Books reference. Ryan Vesey 15:55, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

As Ryan says, there is no reason to not include a link to a legitimate online copy of a book (you shouldn't link if there is a copyright infringment, but that issue doesn't even arise with Google Books considering that they only provide books under the necessary permissions). If you use the {{cite book}} template, it has a parameter for including a url as well. Chamal ^T•C 16:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

As I understand it you are suposed to cite the source you have actually used. If you used a physical "dead tree" book then that it what you cite. The Google Books version could be a different edition, so you should only cite it if you actually sourced the information from Google Books. Roger (talk) 16:41, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

In that context, yes I agree. But from the OP's question, it looks like he wants to reference the pages in the book preview itself. Chamal ^T•C 17:09, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The way I read the OP (and the relevant article talk page topic) Lesion is using actual books as sources but wants to add "convenience links" to GB as he/she has been told incorrectly "Some editors have said that this is bad for verifiability, because most people do not have easy access to these textbooks." WP:V does not require sources to be easily accessible, thus the reason why he/she wants to add the links is bogus. Roger (talk) 17:33, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the responses. 2 separate editors advised me that when using textbooks it is good to use a link to google books (neither went as far as saying mandatory though). I had a look at the links and I still don't fully understand how to do this as I am imagining. Sorry to be a pain, but if someone could show me how to do this eample then I could apply this to the rest and in future.

So e.g. this is the source on google books [3] which defaults to the TOC. The existing markup from the article is <ref name="Scully 2008">{{cite book|last=Scully C|title=Oral and maxillofacial medicine : the basis of diagnosis and treatment|year=2008|publisher=Churchill Livingstone|location=Edinburgh|isbn=9780443068188|pages=151–157|edition=2nd ed.|chapter=14: Aphthae (recurrent aphthous stomatitis)}}</ref> If I wanted to link to page 151 (assuming it is included in the preview), is there a way to do that? Thanks again for help. Lesion (talk) 20:16, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Hmmm. I was once told that Google Books links were discouraged: User talk:Bzuk/Archive 5 § Removed Google Books link.3F and User talk:AlanM1/Archive 1 § Google books link. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 21:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Bzuk doesn't know what he's talking about. It's certainly not spam. The editors above who state that you shouldn't use a google book link if it is a different edition or version are correct, but if it is the same, then including it is unnecessary but better than not including it. As far as using a link to a page, for some reason when I try to link to any page using &pg=151 or any other page number it either links me to the cover if the page is previewable or to a plain page saying the page is not available for viewing if it is not. In any case it's fine to cut off the URL at the end of the id (before the first ampersand). Put it into the cite book template using |url=. Ryan Vesey 21:43, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

This preview is not a good example because the pages needed don't seem to be viewable, however I can now use this any time I use a textbook as a source, thanks. So you would add &pg=151 to the end or the url to make a link straight to page 151. A link to the book on google even without the actual page is still a step up in accessibility... Lesion (talk) 22:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The url in the reference seems a bit untidy...could someone show me an example of linking to google books in any page so I can copy it? Lesion (talk) 22:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh no wait, my bad... put the url outside the template close brackets. It looks correct now, thanks again! Lesion (talk) 22:10, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Not exactly to the end of the URL. Like I described earlier, the URL should be stripped to everything before the first ampersand. You can append &pg=151 to that. Here's an example of a Google Books reference without a page number at Botik of Peter the Great. <ref name="Hughes2004">{{cite book|author=Lindsey Hughes|title=Peter the Great: A Biography|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=-Ag2bbYzgacC|accessdate=19 January 2013|date=1 April 2004|publisher=Yale University Press|isbn=978-0-300-10300-7|pages=22, 141, 178}}</ref> Ryan Vesey 22:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

FWIW: The access date is not needed since that book is never going to change. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 00:24, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Macular Disease Society page

Resolved

Good afternoon,

The Macular Disease Society has this year refreshed its look and removed the word 'disease' from their name. I have updated their Wikipedia page to reflect this, but cannot change the main heading of the page from Macular Disease Society. Please could this be updated to show as Macular Society?

Here's the link, Macular Disease Society

Thank you for your help.

Tim Goddard

Macular Society — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.123.120.193 (talk) 15:47, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I have moved the page to Macular Society. Maproom (talk) 16:03, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Carl B. Squier

Carl B. Squier (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

To Whom can Assist:

I am the grandson of Carl B. Squier. I am aware that is not his picture attached to the biographical article.

I phoned my mother, his youngest daughter, and she also is aware that the picture attached to his on-line Wikipedia biography is not my grandfather.

As my mother is elderly, and upset by this error, it is of the utmost importance to me personal that the Wikipedia encyclopedic content be corrected immediately if not sooner. Please be sure to display an appropriate photo of my grandfather, he is my hero.

It is of interest that the incorrect photo is a friend of my grandfather and taken from a photo that has my grandfather standing near the gentleman in your incorrect photo. Please research this and if needed my mother or I can submit a photo of my much beloved and dearly missed grandfather.

Sincerely,

Thomas Squier Jones, MSCP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.164.50.212 (talk) 15:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I have removed the image from the article. It was cropped from this image. Is one of the other people shown there your grandfather? This may just be a case of someone cropping the image to isolate the wrong person.--ukexpat (talk) 16:03, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The identity confusion on the original photo is discussed at http://www.lockheed.adastron.com/altair/h71vhusb.htm. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

If I read that correctly, Squier is on the far left? If so, it's an easy job to recrop the image and upload the correct one, assuming that there is no copyright issue (the full image has a copyright notice).--ukexpat (talk) 16:32, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I re-cropped and uploaded. The online file was corrected in 2008 and our image was uploaded in 2006. We should have the right correct person now. It would be nice if the family were to upload a free licence one so other Wikipedias can use it as well. Admin can delete the older version anytime.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:27, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

OK looks good, I have tagged the image info page for the older version to be deleted.--ukexpat (talk) 17:47, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Table simplification

I want to simplify the first table at Citroën C3 Picasso#Data tables as a graph or image to save space. The problem is that i can't decide on a good layout and wanted a few tips. I was thinking a data graph of some kind but i'd like more opinions. Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 17:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I think my best bet is a Brick chart {{Brick chart}}...Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 17:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Does the data belong in WP? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 17:18, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Well it's factual. It's not majorly important to the topic though and could certainly be trimmed to either CO2 or just mpg with no real impact.

Due to the time and effort invested though, i'd prefer a solution which doesn't involve huge deletions of cited content. What do you think of a Brick Chart? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 17:30, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately "time and effort invested" is not a valid argument for keeping anything on WP. Entire articles that might have taken dozens of contributors years to construct are routinely deleted. Roger (talk) 09:00, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Roger, i'm well aware of that...but if you wouldn't mind answering my question for my third attempt now? This is the help desk right? Or better yet can i get a response to my question without having to find an actual editors talk page? Thanks ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 09:17, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not a tables and charts expert - I tend to avoid editing them. Roger (talk) 09:33, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Navboxes no longer collapsible

For the past day or two, I've noticed that a lot of pages with multiple navboxes aren't designed to collapse upon each other, most notbably pages like New Jersey Transit Rail Operations, and Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. I've also seen Talk page tags with To-Do lists that can't be closed, like Talk:Brandt House (Lafayette, Louisiana). Is this just on my PC, or is this a problem that should be reported to Bugzilla? -------User:DanTD (talk) 17:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, I know nothing at all about it, but I believe they switched to a Lua version of the navbox template yesterday. You might perhaps report your problems at Template talk:Navbox, where there seems to be a "bugs" discussion. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Using templates

I use what seems to me a very laborious method to insert templates into wp pages. If, say, I decide to add an {{infobox person}} to a biography, I open a new tab, load a random wikipedia page, type the template name into the search box and go to that page, copy the code, go back to the article page and paste it in. OK, it only takes a minute or so (or a good deal longer when I can't remember the name of the template), but I feel I must be missing something and am being even more than usually dumb. Is there any way to call the template, with its parameters, directly from the edit window? I've read the help, and it's no help. Or is there an add-on, a script or whatever, that gives you, say, a pull-down list of templates you've recently used, or of templates you have chosen to add to it? Any advice welcome.

By the way, has anyone else noticed the "new-line" and "redirect" arrow symbols hanging down off the "Advanced" toolbar into the edit window rather than sitting on it with all the other stuff like they used to? I think that began about three days ago. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:16, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I do it the same way you do. I just discovered Template:Quicktemplates and added it to my talk page. Perhaps someone could add infobox templates to it as well.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:29, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I use a clipboard manager called ClipCache Pro that I bought years ago. I have a folder of Wiki-useful clips stored there such as ibox templates that I use a lot, talk page project templates, etc. Very handy - also useful IRL for storing boilerplate text that I use when drafting agreements.--ukexpat (talk) 18:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you both, two very helpful suggestions both worth serious consideration. I will think about creating a personalised version of Template:Quicktemplates in my userspace, that could be a good way forward. ClipCache is not useful to me (my tent is pitched in the other camp), but I found a freeware called ClipMenu which offers some similar functions and looks promising. I think what I was sort of hoping to find was a script that would sit in the Move tab in the same way that the addpersondata script does. Maybe I should talk to the author of that script... Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:08, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at Twinkle too. It can add all kinds of maintenance templates, do CSDs, PRODs and AFDs etc (but not iboxes unfortunately).--ukexpat (talk) 00:36, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Can't find an image selection guideline/preference an editor claimed existed

In one of the edit history summaries, a user said that in selecting the lead image in history and biography articles, that a photo automatically takes precedence over a painting. However, this seems to contradict WP:MoS/Images (particularly WP:LEADIMAGE), where it says that for the lead image, a painting can often be better than a photo when it is of higher quality and clearer depiction, and seems to establishes no such automatic preference. Looking elsewhere, I can't seem to find any policy, guideline, or archived discussion that supports the editor's proposition. (My main curiosity involves subjects from the very early era of photography in the 19th century, when the choice is a poor-quality photo or a high-quality painting). If there is, I would like to know so I can try to make it more prominent for others like myself to know; if no such policy/guideline/consensus preference exists, then I will feel free to propose the edit changes with that knowledge in hand. Thanks! Morgan Riley (talk) 19:08, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

If the painting is of higher quality than the photo, and accurately depicts the subject (according to the photo), I would use it as the lead. If the painting is inaccurate about something important, use the photo and mention the discrepancy in the prose. Either way, I'd try to get consensus on the talk page. This doesn't answer your question directly, but I don't think a guideline is necessary for every possible situation. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 20:31, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Searching in history

Is there a way to search for phrases or texts that exist in the previous versions of articles? --66.190.69.246 (talk) 19:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

WikiBlame will do this. I think I saw somebody mention another tool recently. --ColinFine (talk) 20:08, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Isn't there a way to search in general, rather than one page? --66.190.69.246 (talk) 20:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

You're wanting to search all former versions of all four million pages? That seems a bit excessive. --ColinFine (talk) 00:39, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

There was an interesting phrase that I found somewhere, though I can't remember from which article it came. But sorry that I asked. --66.190.69.246 (talk) 02:41, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think you need to apologise. I have two suggestions: Google's search engine is much better than Wikipedia's, even for Wikipedia content; and, if you tell us here what the phrase is, it's possible that someone here will know where it appeared. Maproom (talk) 11:28, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I do not think that Google can search in article histories, can it? Anyway, the interesting phrase that I remember is ‘Black people are gay and should still be slaves.’ --66.190.69.246 (talk) 15:34, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

citation requirement

When editing an article a citation if requested. I found a page that was incorrect, but I only know this because I was there in person. I'm getting old and for years I have been seeing the incorrect observations. The event is kind of really important. How do I "cite" my personal observations?19:59, 27 March 2013 (UTC)98.28.70.200 (talk)

You are probably out of luck. You would need your observations published in a reliable source and then have that source cited. Otherwise it is called 'original research here. See: WP:RS and WP:OR.--Canoe1967 (talk) 20:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

If your observations are correct, then it is likely that you can find a reliable source that also has written about them. Of course, you too have the right to ask that a given statement be proven with a cite, which is generally done by adding a {{Citation needed}} tag and/or posting at the article's Talk page. Can you mention the specifics of this particular case? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 20:24, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

March 28

How to cite article within a book

Dear colleagues,
I am working in my sandbox (User:MarshalN20/Sandbox4) to improve the Peru national football team article. One of my sources is an article by Dr. Steve J. Stein ([4]), inside a book ("Futbol").
Could anyone please lend me a hand on how to properly cite this using the Wikipedia citation templates?
Thanks in advance.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:13, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

That article uses Citation Style 1, so use {{cite encyclopedia}}. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 00:21, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Perfect, thank you.--MarshalN20 | ^Talk 00:47, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

The Citation Style 1 help page has a list of templates by function. --— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 01:09, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Strong anti Russian bias in Wikipedia article Morjim

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

This Wikipedia article Morjim (in Goa, India) 'Russian Expatriates' section has a strong anti Russian bias not based on fact. This was raised in the Talk Page but as no one has rectified it I am raising it here.

Currently, there is no Government or Police report which is conclusive about any foreign crime group in Goa.

What are the facts?

- The facts are the Russians are the largest group of foreign tourists in Goa, India. In this article from CNN IBN in 2012, "1,33,683 Russians arrived in the coastal state as against 1,17,683 British tourists during 2011-12". But no substantial involvement in crime according to Government and police records. (Link below)

http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/goa-russians-pip-british-on-tourist-arrival-front/978436.html

- As published in India's largest English news paper 'Times of India' in 2012, "Foreign tourists from 50 nationalities were involved in crime cases in Goa in the last three years, the Goa assembly was informed the list of nationalities named include Swiss, Australian, USA, French, German, Dutch, Norway, Portuguese, Swedish and Italian besides British, Israelis, among others. " There was no mention in the parliament of any mafia by any country (link below)

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-15/goa/32684472_1_foreign-tourists-goa-assembly-crime-cases

- What about drug arrests in Goa, India? As published in India's largest English newspaper 'Times of India', "Breaking down the records for the year 2011, out the 56 persons arrested, 30 were Indian and 26 were foreigners. Out of the 26 foreigners, 10 were Nigerian, 5 were Nepalese, 3 were French, 2 were Italian, 2 were British, and there was a German, Korean, U.S and a Ghana citizen who were all arrested." (Link below). As you can see most of the drug activity is controlled by Indians and of the foreigners they were mainly from Nepal and Nigeria. No major drug arrests from Russia. (Link below)

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-07-08/goa/32587796_1_kg-drugs-foreigners-police-stations

- The Current Chief Minister of Goa, Mr. Parrikar, set up a Parliamentry Probe in August, 2012 to investigate the alleged role of Indian politicians to the drug mafia in Goa. The Current Chief Minister set up the parliamentry probe to unearth facts of the drug mafia police nexus in Goa. The chief minister described the issue as serious because he felt powerful Indian politician's were 'involved'. There is no mention of any foreign mafia (Link below)

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-08-04/goa/33035013_1_roy-naik-manohar-parrikar-atala

What is wrong with this Wikipedia profile? It quotes Indian politicians of one political party Congress making allegations and selective media reports presented as facts. Not a single academic journal or a National Commission report is linked to. These include allegations by one political party Congress politicians and MP even as it alleges in the same paragraph another Congress politician has ties to Russians. It quotes another politician as 'demanding a probe'. When does any politician's demanding a probe be significant enough to get a Wikipedia mention? Note that politcians from the same Congress Party were the elected Government in Goa for 5 years till 2012 and did not arrest a single person whom they could prove was from mafia of any country.

Someone has left a entry in 2013 in this Wikipedia profile which shows the anti Russian bias 'On 2012-2013 New Year's Eve at 0:00 Club Fresh (owned by a Russian and her husband) was trashed by an armed gang consisting of more than 20 men in retaliation over business quarrels, guests were injured including children, property damage to the resort was incurred as well.' If you see the hyperlink, it has names of the two Indian owners of this club. Also, the Russian lady is married to an Indian. But only the name of the Russian was used in Wikipedia. None of the 3 Indian names mentioned in the hyperlinks were published in Wikipedia. This seems like bias to me. And how does a fight in a club qualify to become serious enough to make it to Wikipedia?

Please could any Wikipedia Editor look into this and correct it if he / she feels this is biased. It seems that some people are using this forum to promote hatred against people from one country. We need a Wikipedia Editor to give a balanced perspective to cover both sides. Cheers from Goa.

GoanJourno (talk) 05:53, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Judge Judy article should be labeled as fiction

Resolved

There have been additions to the Judge Judy article that include libelous comments and obscenity. If the policy of Wikrpedia to allow such action, alleging lawsuits that don 't exist, quotes that never occurred. and obscene language, then there is no recourse other than a legal action. I'm all for first amendment rights. but false reporting based on tabloid sources equates your publication with damaged credibility. There may be no remedy other than that of legal action. To my knowledge your facts cannot be proven, other than "facts" that just don 't exist. Your credibility has been damaged as a publication. I would recommend that you not claim your writings to be factual. Fiction can be entertaining, but ruining reputations based on falsehoods does cause damage. You'll notice that I 'm using my real nAme, preferring not to hide behind a pseudonym.

Randy Douthit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.167.114.179 (talk) 07:08, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no such policy to allow falsehoods. On the contrary, editors generally keep an eye out for them and they are usually actively and quickly removed. Unfortunately, given the size of thos project, on occasions, misleading or dubious information does slip through. Per WP:BOLD, you as an editor are actively encouraged to remove them yourself. However please note that per WP:LEGAL, making legal threats is generally not the best way to solve disputes over Wikipedia content and continuing to do so will lead to your account being blocked and your editing privileges being removed until the matter is resolved. Valenciano (talk) 08:12, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

However User:Randydouthit has a conflict of interest here, particularly with regard to the section Judge_Judy#Lawsuits_against_Judge_Judy_.26_Randy_Douthit (which appears to have plenty of references confirming its content). Maproom (talk) 08:53, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

On reflection, this concerns the Judge_Judy article, about a television show and its principal character "Judge Judy". Randy Douthit is the producer of the show. Details of his squabble with his ex-wife, even if confirmed by reliable sources, really don't belong in the article. There is a strong case for removing the whole Conspiracy/fraud allegations subsection, not on the grounds that it's "false reporting based on tabloid sources", but because it's irrelevant to the subject of the article. Maproom (talk) 11:24, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree, someone should chop this stuff out.--ukexpat (talk) 14:09, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Maproom, please do not take it upon yourself to remove material that a lot of hard work went into sourcing and structuring based upon two user opinions, one of which is a vandalizing IP account [5]. I'm actually the contributor who incorporated the material on Randy into the Wikipedia articles "Judge Judy" and "Judith Sheindlin." Actually I'm the contributor responsible for most of the content within these articles as I regularly add, monitor, and properly structure the content so that it stays up to date, informative, and presentable. As the main contributor of these articles, as a longtime follower of the Judge Judy program [since early 2000], as a Master's degree student in Journalism, and as an experienced Wikipedia editor, I'm probably the best person to discuss concerns with about the article if there is contention as to its information. Not that other editors can't obviously, but pointing out that it's usually me keeping the article clean of vandalism, inaccuracies, etc.

Anyways, I would contend with the statement about Douthit and the lawsuits being irrelevant to the "Judge Judy" show. Mr. Douthit is the show's executive producer, that is, its leading producer. This is all sourced within the article by the way. My reason for the inclusion of the lawsuit information is that the highly publicized controversy in which Judy Sheindlin was sued, from a few weeks back, came from Douthit's ex-wife. The ex-wife had sued Sheindlin, alleging that she and Douthit had acted in a conspiracy-fraud together. (I make sure to make constant use of the word "allege" and quotes in the article). And I felt that a highly publicized controversy in which Sheindlin was the target of a lawsuit as of relates to an executive producer of hers on the Judge Judy program ought to be added into the artice. For a full week in fact, "Judge Judy" was trending on Yahoo News as of relates to this issue and the executive producer of her program. This was not a lawsuit involving Sheindlin and just any ole body from out of her personal life, but the leading producer of Judge Judy.

As for the 2 other lawsuits that also brought the show attention, these don't just present random lawsuits about Douthit and people from his personal life either; it involved Douthit—again, leading producer of Judge Judy—being sued by Judge Judy coworkers who worked for Douthit on Judge Judy, revolving around controversial conditions on the job backstage of the Judge Judy show. Moreover, the circumstances regarding the lawsuits are racism, ageism, and discriminatory practices, so they're significant matters allegedly going on backstage of the show enough so that it's spilt into heavy coverage by the media. I'd consider it relevant to the show if it's become such a highly publicized issue that has brought the show a lot of attention because the people responsible for putting the show together are having disputes behind the scenes of the show. Again, they're not simply lawsuits about Douthit and any ole' body from out of his personal life, but directly related to the backstage environment on Judge Judy and other crew members. In fact, Judge Judy herself was assailed by one of the former Judge Judy co-workers who was suing Douthit. The former coworker attacked Sheindlin for conditions backstage of her show because of Douthit's alleged behaviors. This is noted in the section I added to the Wikipedia article, where I quote this woman's comments from the source as stating:

"There is a lot of terrible stuff going on if two people file separate lawsuits. It's a toxic situation over there. This is supposed to be Judge Judy, the voice of justice, and yet her own staff isn't treated well. What is she getting paid all that money for if her own staff is treated with such little decency. (This is found at this source [6])

In any event, I think vandalizing the article as was done here [7] is not the way to get one's way here at Wiki. In this respect, I think that the lawsuits are very much relevant to the Judge Judy program. In any event, I've made a formal written request, inviting Mr. Douthit to discuss the matter further with me on his talkpage, giving a polite and detailed presentation of my position and guidelines here at Wikipedia. AmericanDad86 (talk) 15:33, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

It may not be irrelevent. But it is absolutely undue weight. The parts of the lawsuits take up an absurd amount of the article. They may perhaps be better suited to their own article if you think they are relevant enough. Livewireo (talk) 20:10, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Livewireo, have you read the guideline on undue weight you posted? It doesn't read about how much information is provided on a topic. It reads on giving an even amount of information on all the viewpoints as provided in a source. Again, it has nothing to do with how much material is in the article. And if there was such a rule, 67% of wikipedia articles would be trimmed of a good half of their information.

If you look at the sources I've provided, I basically restated their information in my own words so all sides they provided were presented. What are the Wikipedia guidelines on this supposed "too much information on a subject in an article" because I can point out numerous articles where controversies have been reported on greatly in excess of how much I've reported. As one example Two and a Half Men#Sheen's firing and replacement. This information in this section far and away exceeds the information I've incorporated on the Judge Judy controversies. And sorry to say but just because a public figure doesn't like what numerous credible sources are saying about them and comes along making legal threats doesn't mean it can't be added into Wikipedia. Take it up with all the outside sources like ABC News if you don't like it but don't get your panties in a bunch because I'm relaying it on Wikipedia. AmericanDad86 (talk) 21:12, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

For now, I've scaled down the section as per the suggestions here, but this is only so as to avoid further editing disputes at the article. However, this debate is still pending as far as I'm concerned as no Wikipedia guidelines have been presented that state that the prior was too much material. I've presented evidence in which controversies on other shows have been elaborated on far in excess of what I've placed in this article and no one ever said a word. Furthermore, I had to revert this IP's vandalism edits before he came here and made legal threats against Wikipedia. This was of course because he didn't like that the site would dare to relay negative information from numerous credible sources like ABC News on him. Rather than blocking the IP for vandalism and threats, I'm shocked that silly reasons have been forged to first remove and now scale down my material. First it was irrelevant and when I disproved that, it then became too bulky. So which is it? Or is it that individuals are scared of legal threats from an IP? I happen not to be shaking in my shoes.AmericanDad86 (talk) 22:13, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I've tried to compromise on the issue by scaling down but the editing dispute has attracted a belligerent editor, user:Canoe1967, who has now turned it into a content dispute when it never was one, stating that Judge Judy and Randy Douthhit were never even sued at all. This when the long list os sources show that they were. Could someone protect this article until this pending debate is over? AmericanDad86 (talk) 22:46, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

Full protection on article. Changes to article should now be discussed on article talk page or BLPN.--Canoe1967 (talk) 02:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Royal Jordanian Falcons

Dear sir My name is Riyadh Ayyoub, the director of engineering and maintenance in the team. I have read the article about us and found some mistakes in the information. I would therefore like to ask you to refer to our website to give you the proper information so that readers will have the true information about the Royal Jordanian Falcons.

Best regards

Riyad Ayyoub Director of Eng. & maintenance . Royal Jordanian Falcons — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.108.63.244 (talk) 13:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Normally I would invite you to edit the article and correct the information yourself. But in view of your conflict of interest your best course is to post the specific things that you think should be changed, on the article's talk page Talk:Royal Jordanian Falcons, preferably with citations to where the information can be verified. --ColinFine (talk) 14:20, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I changed the team list from 2011 to 2012 from the website. The link to the 2013 team is either broken or not on your site yet.--Canoe1967 (talk) 14:29, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Easter

Dear Sir/ Madam In the English article on Easter, the front page states at the end of paragraph 2: 'Eastern Christianity bases its calculations on the Julian calendar whose 21 March corresponds, during the 21st century, to 3 April in the Gregorian calendar, in which the celebration of Easter therefore varies between 4 April and 8 May.'

In the UK - Gregorian Calendar, 2013, Easter Sunday is 31st March contradicting the above. Nor is 2013 the first year that Easter has fallen before 4th April. The dates at the bottom of the article look more correct. Please could this be corrected.

Steven Hanna — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.12.220.11 (talk) 16:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

It seems correct. Eastern church Easter is May 5 this year. Western church Easter varies between 22 March and 25 April according to the same paragraph you quoted. Rmhermen (talk) 16:19, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Why only in the UK? Surely it should be "Western churches". Roger (talk) 08:20, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Where does it specify UK? Ryan Vesey 08:29, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Help finding town

In the past I could find an adreess inywhere. Now want was dhanged . I can locate the Town and that is the end of it. Help, please. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.45.241.248 (talk) 17:05, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

You should make an Account!--EatIcecream2 (talk) 17:19, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what making an account has to do with this. And in order to answer the question, I think you're going to have to be more clear what it is you are talking about. Dismas|^(talk) 19:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Inspiration art article

Hi there,

I uploaded an article linked with inspiration art and I made the changes the website suggested, however it's still saying there's issues.

Please can you advise me on what to do about this as I'm sure I have followed the guidelines to the best of my ability,

Thanks,

Sheila. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InAK12 (talk • contribs) 17:19, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

inspiration art

Hi,

My question wasn't answered in the links i was given.

The following messages came up but i have made the changes, please help!!

The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. Find sources: "Inspiration Art" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images (March 2013) This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2013) Wiki letter w.svg This article has not been added to any categories. Please help out by adding categories to it so that it can be listed with similar articles. (March 2013) This article needs more links to other articles to help integrate it into the encyclopedia. Please help improve this article by adding links that are relevant to the context within the existing text. (March 2013)

(InAK12 (talk) 18:18, 28 March 2013 (UTC))

Inspiration art

Hi again,

Thank you for helping to sort out with the error messages. The message "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. Find sources: "Inspiration Art" – news · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images (March 2013)" is still coming up.

I have already added news articles as part of the references from reputable Kent newspaper websites.

Why is the error still coming up?

Thanks, (InAK12 (talk) 19:19, 28 March 2013 (UTC))

The message is not an "error message" - it's something called a "maintenance tag". It's displaying because in your article, you have not indicated why the organization is notable. If you feel that you have, simply remove the {{notability|Companies}} tag. FrigidNinja 19:36, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

BOT for template

There appears to be strong consensus here to apply Template: COI editnotice more broadly. This is a short Talk page template that encourages PR representatives to use {{request edit}} to point out errors or suggest additions. Specifically we discussed apply it to Category:Companies based in Idaho on a trial basis, then to Category:Companies based in California before applying it to all org articles.

I need a bot to apply the template to the corresponding pages within the categories, but my request at Wikipedia:Bot requests went un-answered. I've asked a few editors for help, but none seem to be familiar with how to get things done in this area. CorporateM (Talk) 19:46, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

What about the WP:AWB request page? Dismas|^(talk) 19:59, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/killision

Despite an overwhelming amount of reliable sources mr huon continues to deny my request for a wikipedia page for a band called killision He has absolutly no idea what those guys went through just get the clubs to let us play and his excuse is false, he says because youtube vids of all the bands i listed that played during that scene demolition, dead and bloated, erotikill.mofohomeboys are not proof?its the excact opposite it is undeniable proof than he said my own personal bio?I metioned myself once his ignorance and arrogance leaves me to suggest you have a talk with him about how discern whats noteworthy and what isnt Thank You for your time — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.146.74.182 (talk) 21:27, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Please DO NOT make personal attacked on any editors. If you are to attack someone, I think we'd all appreciate you do with with the correct grammar. It is up to you to prove the notability of the band. There are other AfC reviewers (including myself) who look through these submissions. If you believe Huon is biased, then simply leave an AfC comment asking for another editor to review your entry. Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 23:24, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

To help explain Kinkreet's comment: the section title used to be something more attack-y. I changed it. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:31, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

What the band went through is irrelevant to whether it is, by Wikipedia's standards, notable. This is decided by references to reliable independent sources. The article for creation currently has no references at all. See Wikipedia:Citing_sources for an explanation of how references work here. Maproom (talk) 23:46, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• Also see: Wikipedia:Notability (music)--Canoe1967 (talk) 02:50, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Entry not being accepted

I wrote an entry about Michael T. Bradley a sports journalist and his recent work and it looks like u are not going to accept it, need to understand why?

Thank,

Henry R Bradley — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hankrbradley (talk • contribs) 22:23, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

The reasons your edits were reverted was because 1) for the category page, you should not change the category page itself - it will be updated once you added a template to the page. 2) for the disambiguation page, you did not provide a name for the "Sports Journalist/Recruiting authority on high school and college football recruiting". And 3) You need to write in the information in a style consistence with the community; you can refer to WP:MOS for this. Please do not be discouraged from furtheredits, but it'd be a big help if you'd read the guidelines first. Regards, Kinkreet^{~♥moshi moshi♥~} 23:17, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. I notice that you attempted to add a name to the disambiguation page for persons named Michael Bradley [here]. I would recommend you contact the editor User:Tassedethe who reverted your edit. I could make at guess at his rationale. There is currently no page on Wikipedia for Michael T. Bradley. I would recommend that you find relevant information with appropriate reputable sources and attempt to create an article on Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:My First Article for guidelines on how to do this. If you need help doing so you may contact me via my talk page. The entry you made was also not correctly added to the list. To edit a disambiguation page, please insert your entry in alphabetic order in the existing list. For further information see WP:Disambiguation pages.EagerToddler39 (talk) 23:17, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I see that you have created User:Hankrbradley/Michael T. Bradley Sports Journalist and submitted it for review. Unfortunately, the page has no text! For this to be accepted as a Wikipedia article, it needs to be expanded with some details of the person's life and achievements, with reliable sources to show how readers could check it for themselves. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:00, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Images template

I am looking for a template or tag that will cycle through a series of images in one frame. Anyone know of anything like this? — nerdfighter 22:36, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I found a MediaWiki software extension here that allows for slideshows on wikis using MediaWiki (like Wikipedia), but as far as I know, I don't think that or any other slideshow-type feature is installed here on Wikipedia. Anyone know any differently? --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 01:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Okay, I tested it in my sandbox but it doesn't work. — nerdfighter 01:22, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I need extra script. Any other options that will be visible to everyone? — nerdfighter 01:24, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

No, but something like this is being discussed at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Javascript Slideshow Widget for Board Games -- John of Reading (talk) 07:55, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

March 29

Jack Radics

From Jack Radics Management www.JackRadicsOnline.com

Jack Radics bio is incorrect. His alias is Balfour C Bailey

Bio Incorrect on the page below http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Radics

Correct Bio <<<copyright violation removed>>> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.31.147.174 (talk) 05:36, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I have removed the "Correct Bio" as a copyright violation. Please do not copy-and-paste text from external websites into any page at Wikipedia. Since you are asking about an article at the German-language Wikipedia, please post at the German Wikipedia help desk. Each Wikipedia project has its own rules and standards, but be aware that text copied directly from a performer's website is unlikely to be accepted there either, both for copyright reasons and because of its promotional tone. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:19, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Your complaint appears to be about an article in German-language Wikipedia. This is the help desk for English-language Wikipedia. If you believe that there is an error in that article, you should discuss it on that article's talk page.

The "Correct Bio" you have supplied above is far too promotional to be accepted for use here in English-language Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 08:23, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Measurements

Hi everyone. I have an article on a river (Okanogan River) which lies in two seperate countries using different measurements: metric and imperial. I am wondering which to use first using {{convert}} and which to place in brackets: I know the typical convention at MOS:NUM for just one country but this seems to be a special case. Thanks for any help which can be provided. TBrandley 05:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Have a look at what Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Units of measurement says. In brief, metric comes first, unless there's some special circumstances. HiLo48 (talk) 06:29, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Adding protection to a article.

Hi there, I wonder if its possible to add a protection to my article to stop violators or spammers? And if it is how can I do that? Many thanks. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkremer (talk • contribs) 07:08, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

By design, this is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit", so it is rare for pages to be protected merely as a precaution - see this section within the Protection policy. But if a page is being regularly targeted by vandals or spammers, the place to ask for protection would be Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:51, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. It is not "your article", no-one here can own an article. And it needs some work. As it is now, it omits basic biographical details, such as date of birth and nationality, and is too promotional in tone. Maproom (talk) 08:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Our Company page

We really cannot understand why you continually flag our page when it is virtually no different from any of our competitor pages. We have repeatedly tried to rewrite the copy on our page from a neutral POV to satisfy your terribly unfair and overly critical editors, who have no right to flag our page. We are not trying to promote our brand here, only trying to have an informational page about our company and I really think it's grossly unfair to allow individual editors to dictate what other's can do and to have so much power over other people's pages and content.

This is why you will never ever get a donation from us until you change your editing rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 183.89.149.214 (talk) 08:25, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

You haven't given any information to identify your company so I cannot see what page it was and whether or not it is promotional. That being said, it is not your company's page or your company's content. Wikipedia is not a web host, it is an encyclopedia. Ryan Vesey 08:32, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

(ec)There is no article on the English Wikipedia called Our Company. We have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Roger (talk) 08:33, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Deleted Edits

Moved from Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Deleted_Edits

 – Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 09:04, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Why some of the edits are deleted? When I check my edit count on X! it shows 10 deleted edits, It was 4 few days and 7, a couple of days back. Is it possible for me to find out which of my edits have been deleted? I am asking this in order to improve quality of my contributions. --Vigyani (talk) 05:19, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I moved this discussion to here. There's nothing to worry about. Whenever a page is deleted, any edits you made to the page are also deleted. In itself, this says nothing about the quality of your edits: A page may be deleted for any of a number of reasons not related to your edits. Look at the difference between Wikipedia:Deletion, which is about deleting whole pages, and Wikipedia:Revision deletion, which targets specific edits. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 09:04, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I almost got the same idea after going through the archives of this forum. However in this case Department of Science and Technology (India), entries about its creation are deleted although the article remain in place. I had create this article some 6 years back. --Vigyani (talk) 09:25, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

The article which you created was Department of Science & Technology (India) (with an ampersand, rather than the word "and"), and it is now a redirect to Department of Science and Technology (India). You can see your contributions here. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:52, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks --Vigyani (talk) 10:00, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

What causes a page to be flagged as like 'an advertisement'?

Recently the AMQP page on wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Message_Queuing_Protocol - has had a warning attached indicating that 'This article appears to be written like an advertisement.'. I'm trying to understand why that is and how to improve it as I very much want it to be an objective factual description rather than an advertisement. It seems very similar in style to pages for similar protocols.

Any help or advice greatly appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gordonsim (talk • contribs) 09:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Maybe because in the case of this article majority of the references are from OASIS AMQP Technical Committee, which I assume must be the caretaker or some sort of this project. It means that all the material added into the article comes from the subject itself. Hence it may appear to some as advertisement --Vigyani (talk) 09:53, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

There are better tags available for a shortage of secondary sources. Roger (talk) 09:59, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

The tag was placed by an IP without any explanation - see this diff. If you think it is not justified you are welcome to remove it, but please leave an explanation in the edit summary when you do so. Roger (talk) 09:57, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! The OASIS links are the the specification document itself. Much of the text on the page is a short summary of what that document contains, hence the numerous references to help people check for themselves. I will follow the advice in the last response and remove the tag requesting more explanation or a more precise complaint. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gordonsim (talk • contribs) 10:11, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Possible actions against non objective admin

As the title states i wonder if there are any actions one can do? I am wondering because i believe that a person who has been clearly shown as not being objective in editing articles should not be allowed to have admin rights. User Eleassar has been changing the contents of the 2Cellos article even though their official pages state otherwise, as i said before i think it is very dangerous to have such a person hold admin rights so my question is can you take any actions against him?