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

July 11

New article list?

What is the best way to keep track of new articles? Is there a list somewhere? Today I saw an ad hiring people to write a Wikipedia article for a New York-based health website and I want to see the article they will write, but I don't know the name of the website. All I could find was this but that seems to be voluntary. Thank you. Yamada Taro (talk) 00:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

For a list of articles as they are created, see Special:NewPages, but without the name of the website, I don't know that will help much. Without the title you'd have to scroll through about 1,500 articles from just today, not including the 1,000 or so that have been deleted. By that same token it's not unlikely that, if it was created, it has already come and gone; articles on subject like this are often unsuitable and fodder for the deletion mill, e.g. they often are balatant advertising and/or they fail to assert importance and/or are copyright violations. (Newpages is sometimes alternatively called the "raging firehose of crap".) Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I did not know about this page. Yamada Taro (talk) 02:37, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Actually, my description of monitoring the New Pages was "drinking from the Magic Firehose of Sewage". --Orange Mike | Talk 12:30, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Hmm Maybe it's just GMTA. I first used that back in 2008 (about vandalism so really about recentchanges) but I could have been bastardizing your turn of phrase then. I certainly don't remember today!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:42, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

How to circumvent "This file is bigger than the server is configured to allow."

I am trying to upload an NSA video on polygraphy which uses some excerpts from copyrighted TV shows (Meet the Parents and The Simpsons) and so I am uploading it locally.

But when I have it in an OGV format the upload system says "This file is bigger than the server is configured to allow." - How do I circumvent this so I can upload the file?

Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 03:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean by "uploading it locally"? Where are you uploading it to? Looie496 (talk) 03:45, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

English Wikipedia, as opposed to the Commons. The idea is that I upload the "full" video here, but to upload it to the Commons I would have to cut out or blank the small portions that are copyrighted (works by employees of the federal government on duty are PD). So for fair use purposes I want the full film here. WhisperToMe (talk) 04:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I know nothing about this Whisper, but you might get your answer from mw:Manual talk:$wgMaxUploadSize and meta:Uploading files, both found through a Google search for your quote, among others, that look like they have promising information. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:39, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for finding these! Are these files about configuring a Wiki's maximum size upload? I remember that there was a trick on the Commons to uploading files in parts, to get around the maximum upload size. Not sure if it can be enabled here on EN? WhisperToMe (talk) 04:51, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Don't ask me. If no one comes along who knows more, I'd try Wikipedia:Village pump (technical).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:18, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you :) WhisperToMe (talk) 07:09, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Erroneous message not for me.

I have received a user talk warning which does not apply to me and cannot find a way of reporting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.24.241.115 (talk) 08:15, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

If the message does not apply to you, just ignore it - as it says in the box at the bottom of User talk:92.24.241.115, "Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users". -- John of Reading (talk) 08:24, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

CAPTCHA

I'm trying to go through the Pages with missing references, to make sure they all have references - and every time I save a page, I get asked to add a CAPTCHA. The reason is that I'm adding "new external links", but I'm not, I'm only adding a references tag. It's getting annoying, is there any way to turn that off? I understand why people wouldn't bother to be honest. Flying Buttress (talk) 09:03, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

This ends when you become autoconfirmed... "Although the precise requirements for autoconfirmed status vary according to circumstances, most English Wiki user accounts that are more than four days old and have made at least 10 edits are considered autoconfirmed." It looks like your account is only a day old – the CAPTCHA will end in three days, as you've made your ten edits :) — Richard BB 09:11, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

So I'm going to have to put up with it for 4 days? Flying Buttress (talk) 09:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Post at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Confirmed, and an admin may adjust your account settings early. You are doing good work fixing those references. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:15, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Thankyou! I will do. Flying Buttress (talk) 09:17, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

It does look like it takes some time, there's a request from yesterday evening - but I've put a request up there, I suppose it'll be less than 4 days that way. Thankyou both for your help. Is there anything else you recommend I try to wet my feet, I'm fairly technically minded. Flying Buttress (talk) 09:21, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

There's Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting as well - those can be tricky sometimes. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:42, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Copied material

I have copied material from an external website to a new Wiki page, but I am project coordinator for the Trustees that run the original website - I am copying it for them! How do I lshow that this is OK so the content doesn't get deleted? Spode Works project (talk) 11:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)Spode Works project

See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the correct procedure. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:30, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

You should also look at our user-names policy, as your current name indicates that it is being used on behalf of an organisation, which is not allowed. All edits must be attributed to an individual. Rojomoke (talk) 12:25, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

... and note that Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials says "If you are not the copyright holder of the material you cannot donate rights to Wikipedia". The copyright holder must explicitly grant the appropriate permissions to Wikipedia - you cannot do that for them, even if you assure Wikipedia that you are acting on their behalf. If the material in question is descriptive text it is almost always simpler and quicker to re-write or summarise the material in your own words. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:41, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

... and it is unusual that material from an organisation's own website is written in a neutral enough manner to be appropriate for a Wikipedia article. --ColinFine (talk) 18:14, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Plagiarism in Moody's Investors Service

To anyone it may concern: I noticed recently that a new paragraph in the article Moody's Investors Service is nearly a word-for-word copy of a WSJ report. I have explained the situation in a post on the article's discussion page and even provided what I think is an acceptable replacement. I believe I should not edit this article, because I work for Moody's. I am aware that editing by COI parties is not completely off-limits but I would not wish to provide any opening for criticism of my engagement of this page. Is another editor open to considering this change? Many thanks, Mysidae (talk) 13:18, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done I've implemented a slightly altered version of your suggestion and updated the talk page. Thanks!  drewmunn  talk  14:10, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

SHI International page reads as an advertisement

I just visited the page SHI International, and I noticed that the page reads like an advertisement, with very little information about the company itself. Is there some way that this should be handled? Can someone take care of addressing that? eykanal talk 14:02, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I personally suggest a speedy deletion per G11 (blatant promotion) as it needs a complete rewrite to be fully subjective. If the delete is contested (as previous ones have been), then a full rewrite should happen anyway.  drewmunn  talk  14:15, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

You can't re-nominate for speedy, as it has already been nominated - to quote WP:SPEEDY "If a page has survived its most recent deletion discussion, it should not be speedy deleted except for newly discovered copyright violations" - Arjayay (talk) 14:33, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

That applies to only XfD. Meaning if it survives an XfD, it can't be nominated as a non-notable, etc. However, blatant advertising, when there's no good version to revert to, is always a speediable offense. If it survives XfD, it must not have been promotional enough to speedy. So, this one should qualify for a G11, as it was prevously nominated as A7. ~Charmlet ^-talk- 14:45, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm always willing to learn, (and I'm not arguing for retention of the page), so where do I find the guideline that over-rules what it says in WP:SPEEDY? - Arjayay (talk) 15:04, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey Arjayay. This is just a language parsing issue – speedy deletions are not deletion discussions so when WP:CSD says "If a page has survived its most recent deletion discussion..." it excludes by definition both speedy deletions and PRODs, only meaning deletion processes where there is a discussion (AfD, Mfd, RfD, TfD, CfD, FfD). Also, note that the quote in the lead is a summary of the more detailed criterion in the body which is WP:CSD#G4. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:15, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

P.S. see {{Notg4}}, which I created to flag the issue to newpages patrollers when they tag pages under CSD G4 despite that the page was only previously speedied.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:23, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - perhaps WP:SPEEDY could be reworded to avoid this confusion? or is it just me? - Arjayay (talk) 16:12, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, maybe (and any such change would be proposed at WT:CSD) but I do think it's rather clear. First, the very first sentence of the page is: "The criteria for speedy deletion specify the only cases in which administrators have broad consensus to bypass deletion discussion." Then, at the last section of the lead it is explained that

Besides speedy deletion, there are the following methods of deletion:
 • Wikipedia:Deletion discussions (AfD, Mfd, RfD, TfD, CfD, FfD), the normal method of carrying out deletion.

and sandwiched in between is the language you came here about, which as I explained, is just the lead's summary of G4 which is in the body of the policy. The actual criterion should always be looked at in any case, not what's said in the lead. So maybe it is just you:-)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:52, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

CRTC web page

Hi!

This is just to let you know that the information provided on Wikipedia related to CRTC is not accurate. The Minister responsible for this agency is James Moore and not Christian Paradis. Accordingly, CRTC falls under Canadian Heritage and not Industry Canada.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.61.2 (talk) 15:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Please post this, with a citation to a reliable published source, on the talk page of the appropriate page. --ColinFine (talk) 18:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

 Done.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:37, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Pipe character in citation

How does one encode a pipe character in a citation? Citation #4 in Alice Robie Resnick is messed up because the source includes a pipe character in its title; someone copied it quite properly, but the citation template treats it as a metacharacter. I assume that there's a way to do it with percent-encoding, but I don't know what the right code is. 2001:18E8:2:1020:1DC:B109:F51C:1F42 (talk) 16:03, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

%A6 I think.--ukexpat (talk) 16:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but it doesn't work. Checked percent encoding (didn't think to look there before!), and it links to Help:URL, which gave me the right code. 2001:18E8:2:1020:1DC:B109:F51C:1F42 (talk) 16:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Trying to change a logo

Hi,

I work on the marketing team at adMarketplace. I am trying to update our logo. Every time I try, it tells me I do not have a confirmed account.

How can I update my logo? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pluckett (talk • contribs) 17:59, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Just as a quick note, it's good practise to sign posts on talk pages with 4 tildes (~~~~). As for your request, only confirmed users can upload images to Wikipeda. Users are autoconfirmed after 4 days and 10 edits. However, you would not be able to edit the page in question, as it would constitute a conflict of interest. It would be more beneficial for you to request the change on the article's talk page, and another user will deal with the changes as necessary. I hope this helps.  drewmunn  talk  18:07, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

You can make an upload request at WP:FFU.--ukexpat (talk) 18:26, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

To be strictly accurate, users with a conflict of interest are not banned from editing a page, just strongly discouraged from doing so, as they would find it difficult to maintain a neutral POV. I can see no reason why you shouldn't upload your company's logo. Just make sure you understand and comply with our copyright rules. Rojomoke (talk) 18:45, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

unable to edit another user's talk page

Hello. I'm AmericanLemming, and I've been editing on Wikipedia for a few months. Recently, an editor, Baffle gab1978, reverted my edit, and I, being a newbie editor, wanted to ask him why by posting on his talk page. However, I've tried to do so multiple times on different browsers and have always been unable to do so.

I can edit his actual user page, but it is my understanding that such behavior is generally frowned upon. Anyway, how do I inform him that his talk page is broken and/or find someone who can fix it? I don't expect the Help desk to be able to fix this problem, but I do hope that you would be able to point me in the right direction. Thanks! AmericanLemming (talk) 18:05, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Having checked, there does seem to be an issue with his talk page. The user states that they are on a break from Wikipedia at this time, so they may not respond anyway, but I have left a request for him to contact you on his talk page, and informed him that there is an issue.  drewmunn  talk  18:12, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Scratch that final part, my edits will not save correctly on his talk page. You've mentioned him here, so he'll get a notification next time he logs in, but that's about all that seems possible (outside of emailing, but I wouldn't recommend that as he's on break). Instead, I'll take a look at the edits in question and try to explain myself.  drewmunn  talk  18:16, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I just edited his talk page with no problem, so it's hard to guess what might be going on here. Do you people get any sort of error message when the edits fail to save? Looie496 (talk) 18:38, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I get a message about the server failing to save part of the edit (after managing to compose the message behind the sidebar, which slides right over the content). I tried in both Safari and Chrome; I know they use the same render engine, but they're the only two browsers I have to hand. It may be that the render engine is partially (or wholly) to blame. What browser/OS did you use?  drewmunn  talk  18:43, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I tried Safari and Firefox. AmericanLemming (talk) 18:44, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

So it's not a render engine issue. Did you have java disabled, Looie?  drewmunn  talk  18:49, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Firefox 22, Win 7. I don't understand the bit about the sidebar sliding over the content -- I'm not seeing anything like that, either in FF or in Chrome. I have Java enabled in Firefox at least. What skin are you using? Looie496 (talk) 18:50, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm using Vector, but the issue's been resolved now, thanks to Kww.  drewmunn  talk  19:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid that I'm not very tech-savvy. I know how to use computers, but I don't know they work. Anyway, the article is Villa Regina, and the issue in question is whether an quotation should be formatted as a block quotation or not. The 40-word quote is "Two hours on the way up from Chichinal, we camped on a place a bit far from the river, close to a water reservoir. [...] The ground is plain with ligere landforms. The canyons to the north increase their altitude westbound;" you'll find it in the first paragraph of the body of the article. To find the revert, go to the page history and click "older 50" once. You'll find it easily, as you'll see 49 of my edits and one of his. The relevant MoS guideline is WP:MOSQUOTE. AmericanLemming (talk) 18:56, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure which style I prefer, but if the guidelines are being stuck to by the letter, the quote isn't long enough to require block formatting. Saying that, it's right on the limit, and the wording is vague, so it may be something to start a request for comment about if you think the article would benefit from block formatting.  drewmunn  talk  19:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

How and where do I start a request for comment? AmericanLemming (talk) 19:29, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

It was something in the edit notice for the talk page. I've disabled it and left a note with Bafflegab.—Kww(talk) 18:58, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Cheers!  drewmunn  talk  19:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Tawan W. Davis

Hello,

I asked a question on June 28, 2013 about removing the orphan status and the unreviewed article tag. I followed the suggestions by adding more citations and the article has several other articles that link to it, but nothing has changed. Could you please take a look and provide assistance?

Thank you. Jill kennebrew (talk) 18:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)jill kennebrew

Not being an expert on the subject, I couldn't comment on the matter too much, but I don't see that the subject is particularly notable. Either that, or the article needs some reworking to improve the tone so it doesn't read as a CV. There are also a few spelling, grammatical, and layout issues, but they can be cleaned up with a little work. The main cause of orphaned articles is a lack of notability; if a subject isn't notable enough to be mentioned elsewhere, then it's likely their dedicated article won't get much footfall or linkage.  drewmunn  talk  19:19, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Jill, the templates don't go away on their own, editors have to remove them. While the article isn't entirely an orphan, the only article that links to it is kind of weak: List of Georgetown University alumni. I've removed the orphan tag. I've also removed the citations tag, since there are a few more references now. The notability of the subject is still not well established in the article. (Here's where the harsh-sounding questions begin:) The article says that he's an economist and investor. So what? Why does he get his own Wikipedia page? What makes him so important? Should every teacher/VP get a Wikipedia article? Why does he stand out from every other working person in America? Also, some of the language is full of puffery, in case you were interested in toning it down. "He is recognized as one of America's emerging economic, social and political leaders." This statement is over-the-top: "Newsweek compared Davis to President Bill Clinton, siting him as a 'leader in youth politics'". There's more, but I gotta go! Hope that helps a little. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:39, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I've done some cleanup on the article, including adding a notabilty tag - I too question whether this meets Wikipedia:Notability (people) criteria. I see *zero* cited news articles where Mr. Davis was subject; what appeared to be such an article ( in the Harlem News) turned out to be a word-for-word reprint of a press release. (For the record, I removed the "Newsweek compared" statement - that is simply untrue (it was a columnist in The Daily Beast; and the comparison was about Clinton and Davis both running for student body president, which makes the comparison unimportant); the "recognized as" statement is also now gone (not in any way supported by a citation). -- John Broughton (♫♫) 20:49, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Article is entirely a copy/paste.

Hey, was hoping to get some eyes on this article: Kamarupa of Bhaskar Varman. Short story: it's essentially been copy/pasted from at least one source. I'm not confident that the source material is still under copyright, but portions might be. While I did find a 1966 source that had some verbatim passages, I found those same passages in an 1897 publication. My write up is on the Talk page. I've tagged it as a copy/paste, but was wondering if I should tag it for deletion because I surmise that the entire thing has been lifted. (Also it's a text wall, also it's not written in a neutral tone, also I don't even know where to begin to fix it, also...) Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:43, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

It may be worth listing for speedy deletion under copyvio. This requires that a large portion of the text is plagiarism, and that "there is no non-infringing content on the page worth saving". See Template:Db-g12 for information on tagging in this manner.  drewmunn  talk  21:33, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate the input. The editor who created the article says that the book is in the public domain and I don't disbelieve him, but curious whether the article should be canned for being wholly taken from another source and completely unsuitable as an article. If anybody has a second to lend me their thoughts, I'd be appreciative. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:06, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm not quire sure what you are asking. We have a number of articles which are mostly taken from an old edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica: there is no copyright violation, since it is expired, and the tone and content are prima facie appropriate because the source is an encyclopaedia. If the book is in the public domain, then there is not a copyright issue (though it would be very much preferred if the source were acknowledged) but the tone and content may or may not be appropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 00:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree that the 1897 statements are in the public domain. If there is any 1966 text that was not copied from 1897, it is copyrighted. We do sometimes have paragraphs copied from public domain encyclopedias. If the article is non-neutral or a wall of text, and can't be fixed, there are other ways to deal with it than copyvio, which does not seem to be the issue here. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:27, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey guys, I could very well be in the wrong here, I admit, and I may not be explaining my position clearly. Please ignore the copyright issue and let's assume that the source is free for the plucking. However, the source is not an encyclopedia, firstly. Secondly, though the article creator claims one book in question is "closely paraphrased", I find it odd that paragraph after paragraph, thought by thought, the content of the article is lifted from that text, and becomes, in essence, the ONLY voice of this entire article, which is alleged to be an overview of the Kamarupa region during the reign of Bhaskar Varman, but instead reads as a legend substantiated ONLY by that book. Where is the contrary voice that establishes an objective, or at least a more balanced, view of the subject?

If I created an article about London during the time of Sherlock Holmes, and rather than research the subject, I just copy/pasted one of his early public domain stories from The Strand, would that be acceptable as an article? Granted, I still have lots to learn at Wikipedia, so if my peers think I'm getting needlessly aggressive about this, or blowing things out of proportion, please let me know and I'll withdraw. Something about copying and pasting, almost indiscriminately, the bulk of an entire text on a niche subject, public domain or not, which is unattributed, unlicensed, not reworded, and which is written in an authoritative tone that attempts to explain metaphorical nuances, doesn't seem like a genuine article to me, even if it is not a technical copyright violation. If I'm wrong, tell me, please, and I'll gladly go back to reverting Spongebob vandalism. :) I definitely don't want to agitate anyone over this jive article.

Excerpts:

• "Hangsavega replied, "At this moment he is well, since your majesty so respectfully inquires with a voice bathed in affection and moist with a flow of friendship."
• "The newly formed alliance was disastrous for Sasanka for while Sri Harsha's cousin and general Bhandi probably attacked from the west"
• "Hangsavega then said: 'In former times, your majesty, the holy earth having through union with the Boar become pregnant, gave birth in hell to a son called Naraka. It was he who won this umbrella, the external heart of Varuna.'"
• "The origin of Sasanka is shrouded in mystery. Some scholars suppose that he belonged to the line of the later Guptas of Magadha ... It is however curious that the Aphshad inscription of Adityasena, the grandson of Mahasena Gupta, makes no mention of Sasanka."

None of these claims are properly attributed either to the primary source, or to any independent source.

Thanks for listening, y'all. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 07:14, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Having looking through it again, and read a bit more on the subject, I'd agree that it seems much of it is free to use, but tonally incorrect. A rewrite may do the trick, but it'd be quite a substantial one; a restructure would do the world of good in improving the readability.  drewmunn  talk  09:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for poking around the article. In retrospect I think I was wrong to bring this (especially with this much detail) to the Help Desk. My apologies, guys. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Please recheck my wiki

Logi.pk

I have deleted copy write part from it.

please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samee2cool (talk • contribs) 20:30, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

As I've noted on the talk page, this article does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, so should be deleted with or without copyright issues. Maybe at another time, when it may have become notable enough for inclusion, you could draft a new article. Thanks!  drewmunn  talk  21:38, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

The article has been deleted. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

How do you delete a user page?

An article about a person has been created and approved, but there is a user page,User:Ofeliamccollough, about this individual that is not referenced and comes up in searches. How is this page deleted. The user does not remember log-in or password. EduFact (talk) 20:52, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

I have tagged it for speedy deletion as housekeeping as the article exists in mainspace.--ukexpat (talk) 21:00, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

July 12

download all revisions of an article?

I'd like to download all the revisions of one Wikipedia article. Can anyone recommend a way to do this without running afoul of the rules about scripted access? —rybec 00:12, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

If you're looking for a machine readable format, Special:Export, make sure "all revisions" and not just the most recent one is selected. For a human readable format, I'm not sure if there's a way to download them other than caching them. ~Charmlet ^-talk- 02:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! I had no idea Special:Export existed. It's fine for what I'm trying to do. —rybec 03:32, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Useraccounts for Wikimedia Foundation employees editing as part of their work

I was under the impression that Wikimedia Foundation employees editing as part of their work should have "(WMF)" as part of their useraccount name, as for example "Maggie Dennis (WMF)". But I'm not seeing that consistently, so perhaps I'm imagining things. Is there such a rule/guideline? -- John Broughton (♫♫) 01:29, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Most do, such as User:Philippe (WMF) and User:Mdennis (WMF). Some keep their old names and append (WMF) for a new staff account. As far as I know, anyone who performs actions for the WMF in any capacity does so from a staff account.

However, many still edit with their old accounts, even holding admin or other bits with their volunteer accounts (Philippe and Maggie both). They aren't required to edit only with their staff account, so a lot still edit with both accounts, one for work, one for volunteering. If there's any specific cases, Philippe can probably provide a better answer. ~Charmlet ^-talk- 02:22, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

@John Broughton:, it isn't required but these days is generally encouraged for new staff members to maintain two accounts if they wish to volunteer. If you look at User:Eloquence and User:Sue Gardner, for example, they have for a very long time now been using those accounts for both roles. If you look at Category:Wikimedia Foundation staff, the (WMF) is pretty standard. :) --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 14:49, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

@Mdennis (WMF): Thank you; very helpful. One further question, if I might - is there an expectation that editors will put this category on both their personal and official (WMF) useraccounts, where those useraccounts are different? Or is it optional (or even not the norm at all) to put this category on personal useraccounts of WMF employees? -- John Broughton (♫♫)

@John Broughton:, we do not generally put this category on personal useraccounts, but WMF staff are asked to identify their personal accounts. See, for example, the notice (which I need to update, my job title having changed!) at the top of User:Moonriddengirl, in the "about me" section at User:Ironholds or the announcement at User:Philippe. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 18:56, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Oh, hey, User:Moonriddengirl! The problem with these new accounts is that it can take a while to mentally associate the volunteer username with the employee name. For example, I hadn't realized that Maggie Dennis was the same person I had known previously under that other pseudonym. Just the other day I even came across a WMF employee account that didn't even bother to identify the still active volunteer admin account controlled by the same person. I do think the (WMF) tagging is a good idea, though it isn't necessarily free from confusion. Dragons flight (talk) 19:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

If I had known when I started that we could do what User:Whatamidoing (WMF) did, I might be User:Moonriddengirl (WMF). :D I think it's a really good idea for clarity - I'll see if I can encourage people to visibly link their accounts. --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 01:56, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I guessed that since it worked for Jorm/User:Jorm (WMF)/Brandon Harris, it was at least possible. I think it's difficult to keep multiple names straight, so I assume other people do, too. (I might just be worse than average on this point without knowing it, though.) Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 23:50, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

page curation toolbar doesn't appear

I've been working on wp:npp and with most articles the toolbar appears without a problem but with two of them, .44 Remington Centerfire, and .223 Wylde, the toolbar does not appear. I've tried refreshing and hovering over the area where the toolbar pops up but no luck. What's causing this, and how can it be fixed? Thank you. JanetteDoe (talk) 02:13, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey Janette. The page curation toolbar appears to only be available for articles logged as created within the past 60 days, so both articles have aged out.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:53, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Are you sure? If you look at my last ten or so article space edits, they are all to pages from wp:npp and they were all dated April 2 or 3 which is obviously more than 60 days back, and they all had the toolbar. JanetteDoe (talk) 03:17, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Well, that's determinative that I'm incorrect, and it could be something else entirely, but I believe there was such a date cutoff at one time, so maybe it's still the issue but the cutoff is now longer. From the perspective of yesterday, the two articles were respectively 112- and 109-days old. There's only one article in the feed that is older but it was moved to the mainspace recently, so it wouldn't appear until then as logged. The article immediately after these two in the feed does get the toolbar but it's seven days newer, so if this isn't just a false trail (which it may be), the cutoff would have to be some time after 102 days but less than 109. Maybe you should bring up the issue at Wikipedia talk:Page Curation.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:45, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

View History tab has suddenly vanished

Hello, does anyone know how I can bring back the "View History" tab? It used to always be in it's same place since the switch to Vector, but is now buried in the drop-down arrow menus. In addition, I occasionally have several 'dud' (for lack of a better term) drop-down menu arrows which do nothing when moused over or clicked. I've looked through the archives and found people with the same problem, but they are always told that it must be a custom script they're using, or too small of a screen. In my case, I have no custom scripts and have my browser maximised on a 1920x1080 screen. I really like the look of the Vector skin, and would dread having to bring out the old crusty Monobook, but I really need the history tab. Shirudo talk 09:02, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Have you tried disabling VisualEditor? That's the only thing I can think of if you're using the standard Vector with no customisations. You can do so by going to Preferences>Gadgets and ticking the top box under Editing. I hope this helps!  drewmunn  talk  09:10, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, but I already have had Visual Editor disabled since I was first able to. I hope the history tab wasn't a casualty of that horrible thing. Shirudo talk 10:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I still have the History tab, and I've got it disabled. If you sign out, does it re-appear?  drewmunn  talk  11:41, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

In situations like this a WP:BYPASS and a WP:PURGE sometimes help.--ukexpat (talk) 13:55, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Does it look anything like User:Haza-w/Drop-down menus? ~HueSatLum 20:03, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I tried logging out, and it does re-appear until I log back in; I tried the bypass and purge but they did nothing; yes, it does look similar to that screenshot (history being relegated to an option in a dropdown menu). Shirudo talk 23:26, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

See if the sixth option under the "Appearance" section of the Gadgets section of your preferences is checked – it says, "Add page and user options to drop-down menus on the toolbar." ~HueSatLum 00:41, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I unchecked that setting and all is fine now; thanks for helping me out. I vaguely recall that box always being checked, though it never did this before. Shirudo talk 01:00, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Adding pictures

I tried to follow instructions to paste a photo of the ne towers at Lavell Edwards Stadioum and managed to paste the link, but it doesn't work See: LaVell Edwards Stadium. How do I make it display the photo? Thx, George — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgel912 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Somehow, you managed to surround the whole paragraph with <nowiki>. I've fixed it for you. Astronaut (talk) 14:54, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Were you using the visual editor or the old editor (edit source)? (The visual editor is new.) RJFJR (talk) 14:59, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

And very buggy.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:56, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

User:George1912 was using VisualEditor, and it added nowiki tags.

George, can you tell me the name of the page where you found the instructions? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 23:56, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Picture tutorial, Help:Cheatsheet, Help:Wiki markup, Help:Visual file markup ... ? -- John of Reading (talk) 10:49, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

But presumably not Wikipedia:VisualEditor/User guide#Editing images and other media files, which is the page that he needed. We need to find all of those pages and get them updated, or at least tagged with a note that the instructions are not useful for people who are using VisualEditor. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 22:44, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

First ever article

What was the first ever article on Wikipedia? Or first ten articles? --Remitrer Adehere (talk) 15:49, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

See link 36 at History of Wikipedia, which is to an announcement on Wikimedia about logs being found from the earliest days in 2001. There you can download a zipped file of the logs. It would take several minutes of my employer's bandwidth, or I'd do it myself. The direct link is http://noc.wikimedia.org/~tstarling/wikipedia-logs-2001-08-17.7z Rojomoke (talk) 15:58, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Question about a logo and how it appears on Facebook

Hello, ok so the logo updated on wikipedia fits neatly and nice. However, on a facebook community page the logo/picture is cropped and displays very ugly. I tried playing around the sizes, squares, pixels, but nothing seems to correct the problem. I know facebook community pages take contents from wikipedia but is there something I don't know here? I really would appreciate any help. Thank you Inspironss (talk) 15:54, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we have no control over what Facebook put up, or how they do it. Also, changing the image on Wikipedia is unlikely to solve the issue, as it seems that Facebook takes it from the upload page; Not the article. Mdann52 (talk) 16:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Maybe Facebook registered the height to width ratio in the past and made display code for that ratio. The current ratio is different. I don't know whether Facebook will eventually detect such a change and update their display code. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:34, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

So there is simply nothing can be done? Even through directly updating the logo upload page? or even contacting facebook? Inspironss (talk) 06:26, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I have no knowledge of how Facebook maintains community pages. Maybe it will automatically be fixed. Wikipedia shouldn't base image decisions on how the images might be used by Facebook but my best guess is that it might make a difference to upload a version with the same height to width ratio as the original. It's also conceivable that they require the same actual height and width. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:40, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

For optimal use, Facebook requires images that are square, with side dimensions of 160px. However, uploading a new version to Wikipedia will not resolve this, as Facebook locally hosts images. You will need to upload a new image to Facebook, not Wikipedia to resolve this issue.  drewmunn  talk  15:17, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Need Disambiguation page for Ballast Point Park

There are two places which are parks in the world called Ballast Point Park. One is Ballast Point Park in Tampa, Florida, USA and the other is Ballast Point Park in Ballast Point (New South Wales). I would like to create a Disambiguation page where the two could be distinguished. Heditor6 (talk) 17:12, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Since there are only two articles we really do not need a disambiguation page. You can use a hatnote on Ballast Point Park directing to Ballast Point (New South Wales). GB fan 18:10, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

words with missing letters for crossword solving ,is this available?18:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)~~

Bold text--Conrad gozzo (talk) 18:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Hey Conrad. You might try asking for help with a crossword puzzle clues at the language section of the reference desk. This page is not for general knowledge questions but for help with using Wikipedia itself. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:54, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

There's one at www.mijnwoordenboek.nl. There are doubtless others. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:33, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Pran died

Pran died on 12 July 2013 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.56.141.157 (talk) 18:58, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

That fact has been added to his article. Rojomoke (talk) 19:09, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Intitle and plurals

I'm trying to use the intitle search function, but I'm getting some false positives, specifically returns of Foos compared to my search term of Foo. No doubt this is a sometimes useful feature to include plurals, but that's not the case here. Is there an easy way for me to exclude the "plural" results? --BDD (talk) 18:59, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Have you tried quotes intitle:"foo"? Rojomoke (talk) 19:08, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Ah, yes. That did the trick. Thanks. --BDD (talk)

Actually, I'm surprised. On 2nd thoughts I realised that anything including "foos" would also include "foo", so exact-match searching with quotes wouldn't work. I was coming back here to suggest you use "-foos" instead. Rojomoke (talk) 19:14, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Lowercase and italicized title

The title of this page, develop (Apple magazine), should have both a lowercase first letter and be italicized. If I use the templates {{lowercase}} and {{italic title}}, I can accomplish one of the effects, depending on which order I put them in, but not both. Any idea how to achieve both a lowercase first letter and an italicized title? Thanks Brycehughes (talk) 20:35, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I've fixed it by using {{DISPLAYTITLE}}. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:31, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Good to learn. Thanks. Brycehughes (talk) 21:36, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

July 13

Strange user right

I hope this is in the right place. If not, please move it.

I was looking at Special:RecentChanges fairly recently, and I noticed a few of those red exclamation marks indicating that certain edits had not been patrolled. Now, this is very strange because I have not been given any rights on English Wikipedia that should allow me to patrol edits. In fact, I have no special rights listed at all. But for some reason, I am now able to patrol pages. Not individual edits, just pages. And, for whatever reason, I cannot patrol pages I have created, and they are not automatically patrolled.

Can anyone explain why I am allowed to do this? I have found nothing in my logs saying someone has given me such-and-such right and I've heard nothing about how registered/autoconfirmed/whatever users are now allowed to patrol new pages. I'm pretty confused.

For what it's worth, I have sometimes used this capability to mark pages as patrolled that I thought were all right. Should I not have done this? I haven't been recognised anywhere as having gained whatever level of trust is necessary to patrol things - I wonder if this was actually an accident, and if it is please remove it, for me at least. I don't want to use a right I'm not really supposed to have. Cathfolant (talk) 23:51, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

I think any user can patrol a page that they haven't created. See Wikipedia:New pages patrol and Wikipedia:New pages patrol/patrolled pages. If you personally create a lot of pages, that have been good, you can apply for Wikipedia:Autopatrolled, so any new pages you created won't need patroled. CTF83! 00:07, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I see. So new page patrolling has been enabled for all users, then. I have created only 2 stub articles and 1 template and I don't really do all that much, so I'd not meet the criteria for autopatrolled but this is why being able to patrol pages is so strange. If it's assumed that a user knows which pages meet the policy, which is implied by letting them patrol pages, why should their own pages not be automatically patrolled? It seems more logical to me that they would have both rights or neither. Cathfolant (talk) 02:30, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

The point of patrolling is to gain a second opinion on the existence of page; what one user may believe the criteria to mean may not actually be correct, or a user may not have read the criteria. Another user, therefore, patrols the page to ensure as a kind of failsafe measure against vandalism. Users can't patrol their own pages, as this would defeat the purpose of the action. Users with autopatrol rights have been deemed by a review to know the criteria for page creation, and not be likely to be the source of vandalism.  drewmunn  talk  07:38, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Disappearing reflist

I can't get references - which are clearly placed within the body of the article, to appear as a reflist. Help! The article at issue is Amy Nauiokas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willi61028 (talk • contribs) 02:26, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

You've named references, but never defined them! --Orange Mike | Talk 02:53, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

When you name a reference using <ref name = Name>citation text</ref>, and want to use it again, the code is:

<ref name = Name />

not (error in red):

<ref name = Name /ref>"

So I fixed it with this edit. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:56, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Correcting edit summaries

I posted an edit summary that I did not mean to. Is there anything I can do? XOttawahitech (talk) 04:10, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

You can make a dummy edit to provide a more useful edit summary. RudolfRed (talk) 04:43, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

After consulting Help, I still can't find out how to eliminate this "Text ignored" notice

Dear volunteers, I am writing an article, currently in my sandbox (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SCHolar44/sandbox) following its (deserved) very heavy trimming by another person.

I was not involved in writing the earlier article and I'm unaware of the text that gave rise to note; however, it is now irrelevant -- as far as I can see -- to the article.

I haven't been able to find a vertical line that has given rise to the note. Nor can I get to the note to initiate the deletion procedure in Help. I'd be grateful for some advice! SCHolar44 (talk) 09:22, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

I've resolved this issue for you; the name of the reference included a reserved character (vertical bar) that broke the reference. To fix this in the future, replace the vertical bar character in reference names with | and a vertical line will be displayed, but not recognised by the Wiki software. I hope this helps.  drewmunn  talk  09:44, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Drew! SCHolar44 (talk) 19:32, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Unnamed section

i want to update a list of movies of indian film actor hiralal/heeralal /; how can i do the same / can i email 12:27, 13 July 2013 (UTC)12:27, 13 July 2013 (UTC)12:27, 13 July 2013 (UTC)~akk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akht 2560 (talk • contribs)

Is this question about a Wikipedia article? If it is, please let us know which article. Maproom (talk) 12:57, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

There are lots of people named Hiralal, including Hiralal Sen; then there's the movie Hero Hiralal: you see our problem here. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:04, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

How do I credit a photo taken by Dante Liberatore that appears in Wikipedia article Frank Sanello

• Add a notice on your website specifying that the content is released under the

CC-BY-SA 3.0 license (or, in the case of an image, any other acceptable free license), and reply to this email saying you have done so and linking to where we can see the notice.

Please credit Dante Liberatore (my friend) as the photographer of the photo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DOGS_BEST_JULY_1_2013.jpg on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Sanello captioned: "Sanello and his dogs, 2013"

Dante Liberatore grants Wikimedia full rights/access/whatever to the photo he took with his cell phone (!) of me and my two dogs.

Thank you very much!

Sincerely,

FrankSanello (talk) 17:26, 13 July 2013 (UTC)FrankSanello

Ask Dante to follow the guidance at WP:IOWN to provide Wikipedia with the licencing. We can't take your word for it. RudolfRed (talk) 17:59, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Creating page: John Bodkin

Section header changed to something more useful by ColinFine (talk) 20:34, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi,

I spent an hour yesterday trying to upload the embedded file below to Wikipedia and gave up in frustration. I also attach a copy of the file without footnotes in case my embedding doesn't work. The procedures are now so complicated that they are beyond my meagre IT skills. For example, I was asked to answer questions that I could not answer because I didn't understand the questions.

For the record, I have uploaded similar type files on Wikipedia, namely, "Sibella Cottle" and "Timothy Brecknock" without any great difficulty.

It would be a shame if people like me were to be excluded from making contributions to a wonderful website that I use all the time.

This is not intended to be a criticism, just a plea for help. If you could upload my attached file, I would be more than happy to edit it as I have had no great difficulty in editing my previous entries.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Paul B McNulty

Extended content

John Bodkin of Belclare, Tuam, Co Galway, Ireland (c.1720 – 1742) John Bodkin (c.1720 – 1742), Esquire. Born the second son of Counsellor-at-law, John Bodkin and Mary Clarke of Carrowbeg House, Belclare, Tuam, County Galway, Ireland. When John Bodkin was found guilty of murdering his older brother, Dominick, in 1739, his response mystified the clergy, the sheriff and the gentlemen of the city. On the gibbet at Gallows Green (now Eyre Square), Galway, he refused to acknowledge his innocence or guilt of the heinous crime of fratricide. Instead, as the noose tightened around his neck, he proclaimed I forgive Mankind implying that he was innocent. Despite his public pronouncement, he was hanged, drawn and quartered in 1742. John Bodkin’s possible innocence is investigated in a historical novel, The Bloody Bodkins, in which John protects the identity of the reputed killer. The novel draws on a description of the incident in Pue’s Occurrences in 1741, later amplified by Oliver J Burke in his 1885 Anecdotes of the Connaught Circuit… (p 86-92) except that Burke referred to the victim as Patrick Bodkin rather than as Dominick Bodkin. Burke may have exercised licence to avoid confusion with John’s uncle, the infamous Dominick “Blind” Bodkin. In fact, Patrick was the younger rather than the older brother of John Bodkin as recorded by Pue’s Occurrences: Yesterday (Friday, 19 Mar 1742) came on at the Assizes held here (Galway), the Trial of John Bodkin, Esq., for the murder of his eldest brother, Dominick Bodkin, Esq., on 3rd May 1739… More recent accounts have followed Burke’s naming of the victim as Patrick Bodkin but Dominick Bodkin is used here following his identification, as the victim, by primary sources. In 1739, the demise of John’s brother was considered as a natural death by Lord Athenry, the local Justice of the Peace. The suggestion that he was murdered only came to light in the aftermath of the Bodkin murders in 1741. In this inheritance-motivated family feud, three members of the Bodkin family, Oliver Bodkin, Oliver’s pregnant wife, Margery, his son, Oliver, a visitor, Marcus Lynch of Galway and from four to seven unnamed servants were murdered. On the gallows in 1741, a member of the Bodkin family convicted of the Bodkin murders, accused John Bodkin of murdering his older brother. On hearing the charge, John Bodkin absconded but was arrested shortly afterwards and charged with fratricide. At the subsequent trial, he was found guilty and executed on Saturday, 20 March 1742 as recorded in Pue’s Occurrences: Last Saturday, John Bodkin Esq. was executed here; he neither confessed or denied the murder of his Brother; he was applied to by the High Sheriff and all the Gentlemen present to declare whether he was guilty or not; but could not be prevailed upon to give any Answer; after he pulled down his Cap and was just about to be thrown off, the Gentlemen and the Clergy begged he would satisfy the Publick of his Guilt or Innocence upon which he put back his Cap and begged they would let him die in Peace, and would make no other answer, but forgave Mankind; upon which he was thrown off and in 3 minutes cut down alive, his Privy Parts cut out, and his Bowels taken from him and his Head severed from his Body. The question remains whether John Bodkin was guilty of murder or a victim of a miscarriage of justice. File:John Bodkin of Belclare 1.doc John Bodkin of Belclare, Tuam, Co Galway, Ireland (c.1720 – 1742)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pmcnulty1 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Paul. I'm afraid I'm confused by what you're asking. As far as I can see, you created Sibella Cottle in the usual way, by editing a new page in the Wikipedia editor, and inserting the text. That is not something I would call "uploading", but perhaps you have a different understanding of the word. What exactly did you try and do, and what happened? (I notice that the text you inserted above appears to reference a file with a 'doc' extension: this is not supported on Wikipedia, and makes me wonder if you think that you can somehow send a MS Word file to Wikipedia and it be an article?

If you are creating new pages, I would strongly recommend that you use the WP:Article Wizard, which will help you through the many difficulties of doing so.

One more point: if the word "upload" is a red herring, and you tried to do something the same way that worked before, it is possible that you are seeing a problem with the new VisualEditor, which has been rolled out in the last few days. --ColinFine (talk) 20:33, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Note: You can edit the old way (that is, not use the new VisualEditor) by clicking the "Edit source" tab, rather than the "Edit" tab. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Frank Sanello

It's me again! Some Wikipedians question the claim in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Sanello that Frank Sanello (ME) required a citation re: Sanello has interviewed many celebrities...etc.

Does Wikipedia allow EXTERNAL LINKS to paid or fee-based search engines like HighBeam? HighBeam has 38 articles for sale :( written by or about me and/or my books/career.

Here is a link to my articles on HighBeam. http://www.highbeam.com/Search?searchTerm=frank%20sanello or

HighBeam articles by and about Frank Sanello article on Wikipedia

Another Wikipedian suggested, rightfully, that the article on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Sanello (ME) should show a range of reviews of my 19+ published books, listed on OpenLibrary.org and of course, Amazon, etc.

The above link to HighBeam contains a very wide range of reviews of my books and articles I wrote.

To avoid conflict with NPOV and "autobiography" guidelines, I will not insert any of these articles in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Sanello.

If another Wiki editor cares to do so, thank you very, very much.

Another kind Wikipedian added a photo of my dogs and me. Thanks, Revent/Ray!

Since someone questioned my resume as an entertainment journalist who has interviewed a lot of actors and other celebrities, I have copyrights to photos of me together with Gregory Peck, Sally Field, Dolly Parton, Ann Jillian, Cliff Robertson, Jon Voight, Lassie (!) (I'm seen in the photo interviewing Lassie's...lawyer!

Should I submit these photos I've scanned into my computer as JPGs to Wikimedia? I can't find the email address to donate photos to Wikipedia.

Sincerely,

FrankSanello (talk) 18:55, 13 July 2013 (UTC)FrankSanello

Wikipedia's policy does not allow editors to count citations in order to conclude (on their own) anything - that is considered original research. So to support the sentence "Sanello has interviewed many celebrities", what is needed is a good source (a newspaper or magazine article, typically) that says, explicitly, something like "Sanello is widely known because of his celebrity interviews". Editors themselves cannot decide what data would adequately support the word "many".

Regarding Highbeam, it's perfectly fine to cite an article that Highbeam has in its database, and to link to a page on Highbeam that has summary information about that article. And yes, it's helpful to have such links in the article, though (of course) even more helpful to link to something more accessible, such as a NY Times review. You could increase the likelihood of these links being added to the article if you were to put the proposed additions on the article talk page, ideally already prepared as footnotes.

Regarding photos, unless you took them yourself, or you hired someone to take the photos (and explicitly own the copyright), you should not upload photos to Wikipedia. If you do own the copyright, we of course would welcome your uploading the pictures to Wikimedia Commons, here. Please also note that to complete the uploading, you have to allow the pictures to be used by anyone, free of charge, even commercially - not just Wikipedia; at most you can require attribution. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:13, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Where do I start on a problematic BLP?

I've encountered a problematic new BLP where criticisms outweigh biographic material, but I think it falls more into "coatrack" than "attack", so I am not considering speedy deletion. The notability of the subject is unclear, but I think it would fail on review. The criticisms are focused on a single activity, which might be notable enough for a BLP1E, but I'm not sure there was enough independent coverage. Everything about it screams trouble, but I'm not sure how much. What is the best method to elicit a fair sampling of opinions (e.g. an RfC on the talk page) when you encounter a BLP that seems less than kosher?Novangelis (talk) 21:45, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Um, WP:BLPN? If you don't think it is 'kosher', it is best to err on the side of caution, and get others familiar with policy to have a look. RfCs etc can come later, when basic compliance issues are sorted out. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:54, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Help searching

I'm trying to find all WP:GAs good articles that have a certain word/phrase in them. I looked at the search in category instructions which say to use incategory: as a search string like this, but it doesn't work for the good article category [1]. Why? Is there another way to do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.147.7 (talk) 01:11, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Help:Searching#Parameters says:

• incategory: – Given as "incategory:category", where category is the pagename of a category page, it lists pages with [[Category:pagename]] in their wikitext.

Category:Good articles is not populated by adding [[Category:Good articles]] to the wikitext but by transcluding the template {{Good article}} which adds the category. I don't know a way to make the search when the category is added by a template. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:37, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

July 14

Infobox Symbols

• I have a question regarding the use of symbols as indicators of the increase or decrease of a value or ranking in an infobox. There is widespread contradictory use of these symbols. For example, on some pages;
• upward is indicated as ({increase}) Green to indicate positive and the symbol acts as an upward pointing arrow. This is to indicate an increased monetary value or a higher ranking on a list.
• downward is indicated as ({decrease}) Red to indicate negative and the symbol acts as a downward pointing arrow. This is to indicate a decreased monetary value or a lower ranking on a list.

To me, this seems to be the appropriate way to use these symbols. I have found them used this way on most articles. Examples: Facebook, IBM, ExxonMobil and Chrysler.

However, other pages are using the symbols as follows;

• upward is indicated as ({DecreasePositive}) Again, green to indicate positive, but the symbol is reversed.
• downward is indicated as ({IncreaseNegative}) Again, red to indicate positive, but the symbol is reversed.

Here it appears that the wider end of the symbol is used to indicate "greater" while the narrow end is used to indicate "lesser", (like an upright version of the mathematical symbols), with the "greater" end indicating an increase in monetary value or a higher ranking on a list, while the "lesser" end indicates a decreased monetary value or a lower ranking on a list. I find this to be a somewhat confusing use for these symbols, (even the templates show the contradictions) and have only found them on fewer articles. Examples: Craigslist, Workopolis, Wikitravel and The Smoking Gun.

Can we determine just what is the proper use of these symbols, then set that as the standard for all WP articles? Thanks, - thewolfchild 04:20, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Ah, but the first four articles are using the symbols to represent dollar amounts, so an increase is a good thing (). The other four articles are using the arrows to represent Alexa rank, where an increase means moving farther from first place, so it's bad (). To change it would only confuse readers, I think. Howicus (talk) 04:31, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• Howicus, if the ranking were changed top use and , do you think there would be many complaints from users who are confused? I hope that's not the case, but as they are being switched that way now, we'll have to keep an eye on that. - thewolfchild 23:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, mostly what Howicus said. Sometimes less is better like moving up from 30th place to 23rd place or scoring lower in a game of gold. So, in those cases lower numbers are better. Lower = down arrow, good thing = green color. Technical 13 (talk) 04:49, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Facebook in the first group of examples uses for Alexa rank. The second group of examples use or for Alexa rank. I agree this is confusing. {{Infobox dot-com company}} and {{Infobox website}} both say to use or . An up-arrow usually signals good and down-arrow bad. In rankings it's nearly always good to have a lower number and people know this. English also says "move up" in the rankings for getting a better rank, and "move down" for getting a worse. I agree or should not be used for rankings. There are other situations where they can be useful. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:50, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• PrimeHunter: "There are other situations where they [ & ] can be useful." Just curious, what are some situations where you think this might be the case? - thewolfchild 23:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

List of motor vehicle deaths in U.S. by year. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:12, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Good example. Thanks, I was wondering that, too! —sroc (talk) 01:42, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

• Yes, that is a good example. Thanks. - thewolfchild 01:47, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I see there is a discussion at Template talk:Infobox website#Alexa rank increase/decrease arrows. I have copied my answer there. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:05, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree that the inconsistent use is confusing and undesirable. I think that rankings should still use {{increase}} to indicate a higher ranking (i.e., a lower number placing) and {{decrease}} to indicate a lower ranking (i.e., a higher number placing). For example, if a website attracts more traffic and goes from 5th to 4th placing in most popular websites (i.e., going up in the ranking), this should be represented by . This is consistent with how the figures of the actual traffic (i.e., number of hits) increasing would be represented. It would be downright weird to have a list that showed figures like this:

Hits	1.5 million hits per day
Ranking	4

—sroc (talk) 15:48, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Since Template:Infobox website expressly advocates the use of {{increase}} and {{decrease}} to indicate change in Alexa rankings, I have updated the articles you mentioned accordingly. —sroc (talk) 15:55, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

You know, I guess that makes more sense, if you think of Alexa ranking like a list, with the number 1 website at the top. Howicus (talk) 21:27, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• Hmm, I didn't even consider reflecting an improvement to a lower number, which is good in number rankings. (Kinda' like golf scores). But, just the same, it can still be confusing. I'm glad we have appeared to have addressed the issue and are going for a single, standardized use for these symbols. Thanks everybody. - thewolfchild 23:33, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thewolfchild: If you find any other examples, I suggest you be bold and change them, and refer to the documentation at Template:Infobox website (or this discussion) to explain why in case anyone objects. —sroc (talk) 01:38, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

• Hey, no problem! Cheers. - thewolfchild 01:47, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

In article image thumbnail

I am trying to add a picture to the article on Crown King, AZ. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_King%2C_Arizona)

My photo is located at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Crown_King_Saloon_at_dusk.jpg

When I add the photo and save, my photo is not visible on the page. instead it just reads the file name as a link. What am I doing wrong here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93boomer (talk • contribs) 08:32, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

What you did wrong was to add the correct code, but between <nowiki> tags, so that your addition was presented as literal text. However the article already has one picture of that rather undistinguished building, does it really need a second one? Maproom (talk) 09:06, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

yes. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93boomer (talk • contribs) 09:09, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

You are editing with the new VisualEditor on the "Edit" link. Most of our documentation is for the source editor on "Edit source". If you try to write wiki source in VisualEditor then invisible <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags are automatically placed around the wiki source to inactivate it. You can either use "Edit source" or try to use VisualEditors own system. It has a media icon at the top to insert images. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:13, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

External links no longer opening in new tab

It would appear that, even though my 'Open external links in new window/tab' gadget is selected, it has stopped doing it. Anyone know why? Ta --Imagine Wizard (talk · contribs · count) Iway amway Imagineway Izardway. 13:41, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

There are currently problems with all gadgets. See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Where is Gadgets ? PrimeHunter (talk) 13:43, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Searching for info on a cafeteria in the old typewriter building in Hartford Ct

Hello,

Born in Hartford back in the 50's my grandfather and grandmother lived around the street from Mark Twain. I have photos of my grandmother skating with Katherine Hepburn. What I can't seem to find is that my grandfather had a cafeteria " Spencer's cafeteria" in the old type write building. My father Michael Arthur Spencer is alive and well in Bolton , Ct and he shares stories. My grandfather fed thousands of people a day during the was and was an employee of a cafeteria before becoming owner. He was generous to a fault and I'm shocked that I can't seem to find any stories of his cafeteria. His WWII draft card lists him as manager at Spencer's cafeteria which shows just how humble he was. My father says that he helped so many during the war and that at the Holidays during the depression thousands were given turkeys and such.

With this knowledge I find that during those time of struggles that there wasn't something written about the cafeteria that served up to 7000 people a day. Please help me in my search.

Look forward to seeing something written about something that was of importance to many.

Sheila Spencer Meyrick — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.49.237.76 (talk) 14:08, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Reformatted the question to improve legibility by removing the spaces at the start of lines. ColinFine (talk) 14:38, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi Sheila. If you're asking for help to research information about the cafeteria, you'd be better off asking at our Reference Desk (probably under Humanities or Miscellaneous). If by "Look forward to seeing something written ..." you're suggesting a new Wikipedia article on the subject, or a mention of it in an existing article, then you or someone else is going to have to find the information in a reliable published source so it can be used to support that new material. If there really hasn't been anything written about Spencer's cafeteria, then it will fail Wikipedia's inclusion policies for notability and verifiability. - Karenjc 15:47, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

The Royal Typewriter Company building in Hartford burned down in July 1992. The Wikipedia article National Register of Historic Places listings in Hartford, Connecticut includes a redlink to Royal Typewriter Company Building, so at some point (presumably) that article will be written, or alternatively, information will be added to the Royal Typewriter Company article. Either would be the right place to put information about the cafeteria within the building. For example, this "We would get there early for a parking place, punched in, and you went up to the cafeteria for a coffee before you start," comes from a story about the fire. But I'm not finding much about the cafeteria, online, and I've not found any news article where the cafeteria is actually named.

If anyone is going to help create the article Royal Typewriter Company Building, perhaps it would be the Hartford Historical Society. I can't think of anyone else having the resources to find historical documents pertaining to the cafeteria (and, more importantly, to the factory, which is clearly notable and deserving of coverage in Wikipedia). -- John Broughton (♫♫) 16:34, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Regarding vandalism

I duly submit here that since sometime, a miscreant by the username AgraNewsObserver has been indulging in cheap mischief by inserting malicious content on the homepage of dayalbagh, a pilgrim place. The sole purpose of the editor is to defame the place He is time and again inserting irrelevant information about an untoward incident on the homepage,which simply shares basic information about the pilgrim place. Whenever I or any other person tries to remove the content by editing the page, the wiki editors revert it back by undoing our edits. Please i request the authorities to take notice and stop this vandalism asap — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anami6ka (talk • contribs) 15:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

This has little to do with vandalism. Instead it is a content dispute, regarding the question as to whether a murder apparently committed on the premises of Dayalbagh should be included. For now, I have removed the section, as it was poorly worded and sourced largely to uploaded scans and other inadmissible sources - a violation of policy. I suggest that rather than edit-warring, those involved in this dispute familiarise themselves with policy (particularly WP:RS and [[WP:BLP) and then work towards coming up with a compromise which accurately reflects the sourcing - assuming that such sourcing justifies inclusion at all. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:44, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

How do I revert to old editing method???

Hiya,

really not liking this new wysiwg editing malarkey, it won't even let me edit half the time.... how do I change my settings so I can go back to the 'wikitext' type of editing??

Sdrawkcab (talk) 16:35, 14 July 2013 (UTC)sdrawkcab

Under preferences->gadgets, there is a box to turn off the visual editor. You can also use the "edit souce" tab to use the normal wikitext interface when editing a page. RudolfRed (talk) 16:53, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks :) Sdrawkcab (talk) 19:11, 14 July 2013 (UTC)sdrawkcab

Alternative Referel sources

I have created a wikipedia page for a site named moviereviewband.com , but it is rejected and asked for to enter an alternative referral source. Could u plz mention the name of such sites .

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Proudion (talk • contribs) 16:39, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

If you read the links in the rejection, you will see it explained that in order for a subject to pass the notability test, the article must show that it has substantial coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. Your draft at present references only itself. The rejection is not asking for "an alternative referral source": it is asking for any reliable source with no connection to moviereviewband.com which discusses the site. You need to find where the site has been covered in major newspapers or magazine, or in websites of reputation equivalent to major newspapers or magazines (not blogs and other user-generated sites). If the site has not yet been discussed in such places, then it is not at present notable, and may not have a Wikipedia article.

Besides the points that Minna Sora no Shita mentioned, the article at present does not read like an encyclopaedia article, and in fact appears to be wholly promotional. This is not permitted in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 19:08, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Problem with Men Without Hats template?

I can't figure out this weird problem. When you go to the page for No Hats Beyond This Point, the album Sideways appears in the template list at the bottom where it should, and then disappears! How do we keep it from disappearing? As far as I can tell it only happens on the page for No Hats Beyond This Point, which suggests there may be some subtle code error on that page . . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doctorx0079 (talk • contribs)

I see the same at No Hats Beyond This Point and Template:Men Without Hats:

Rhythm of Youth (1982) • Folk of the 80s (Part III) (1984) • Pop Goes the World (1987) • The Adventures of Women & Men Without Hate in the 21st Century (1989) • Sideways (1991) • No Hats Beyond This Point (2003) • Love in the Age of War (2012)

The only diference is that No Hats Beyond This Point is bold instead of linked at No Hats Beyond This Point (this is normal for links to the page itself). What exactly do you see? What is your browser and skin? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:46, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I see nothing odd on the page either. --ColinFine (talk) 19:10, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

There is a similar report about another navbox at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Template displaying different results for different people. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:14, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Interesting. When I saw the problem I was using an older version of IE going through a proxy. Using IE 10 without a proxy I don't have a problem. Doctorx0079 (talk) 23:09, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Do you know which IE version? Did you see the year (1991) for Sideways? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:15, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

I think it was IE 7. It was all there and then it vanished. Doctorx0079 (talk) 23:18, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Odd. I can only test with IE9 where "Sideways (1991)" displays normally both with and without compatibility mode.

Michael Berk

Perhaps I'm confused, but the article about me is only a couple of lines long and very incomplete. So I edited an accurate, complete article about me. Unbiased, completely backup up by the information about me and my career on IMDB. But someone keeps taking it down and replacing it with the inaccurate and incomplete article about me. I received the message that someone too close to a subject (or the subject himself) can't edit an article. This makes no sense to me as who better to write about a subject, or a person, that someone who knows the subject and the person intimately.

So if I am prohibited in edited an accurate article about myself, how can I get an accurate article about me on Wikipedia? When you search my name on Google first up is IMDB, then Wikipedia. If people search me - or research me - and they go to Wikipedia and do not get the full story of who I am and what I have accomplished, such as creating the TV series Baywatch, and other movies and TV programs, then my incomplete and/or inaccurate profile on Wikipedia is hurting me. How can I work with Wikipedia to resolve this? Thank you.

Sincerely,

Michael Berk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael Jerome Berk (talk • contribs) 19:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. You should read the advice at WP:COI and WP:AUTO. Editing about your self is very strongly discouraged. You should leave a note on the article's talk page with the changes you want to make and mark it with {{edit request}}, and then a neutral editor can make the changes. RudolfRed (talk) 19:28, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Additionally, IMDB is not considered a reliable source. See WP:RS/IMDB. Dismas|^(talk) 21:50, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Any material you think should be added to the article should be supported by reliable sources. As already mentioned above, IMDb is not usually regarded as reliable for Wikipedia purposes. But books about you, or articles in national newspapers or reputable film industry journals and the like would be likely to be seen as reliable. By the way, the material that was removed appeared to others to be very far from unbiased, and was an excellent illustration of why people are discouraged from writing about themselves here. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:04, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Reza Aslan

Dear Folks:After listening to Reza Aslan on NPR this a.m. I looked him up on your site and I have a couple suggestions. First, he has a new book out," Zealot,the story of Jesus the Man, not the Messiah. Second, in the interview this a.m., he defined himself," not as a Christian,but as a follower of Jesus."His bio, however, states that he is a Shia Muslim.There seems to be a conflict there.

Very Sincerely, Elizabeth Keranen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.134.142.11 (talk) 19:23, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Muslims consider Jesus to have been a prophet, but not the Messiah or the final prophet. There is no conflict there. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:35, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

If you can find a reliable source for it, you are welcome to add the book to the article; alternatively, you can suggest it on the talk page Talk:Reza Aslan. --ColinFine (talk) 21:15, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

poems/songs

Hello

My question is in relation to poems. Although I have tried to type up a poem/song from the 1800s into wikipedia it has been taken down due to copyright. I don't believe there is an issue with copyright on this song otherwise Poems such as Wordsworth's 'daffodils' aka 'I wandered lonely as a cloud' would not be listed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Wandered_Lonely_as_a_Cloud

Kind regards Suzanne — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.255.134.161 (talk) 19:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

What poem are you trying to add? RudolfRed (talk) 20:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Usually the text of poems and songs does not belong in an encyclpaedia, though there are exceptions. It might be preferable to enter it into the sister project Wikisource. --ColinFine (talk) 21:17, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

template expansion caching

Hi, a while ago I edited wyvern to change the IPA pronunciation to the correct one. My edit is still there in the source however the rendered page still shows the incorrect pronunciation. Given that a month has passed I'm beginning to wonder wether the template expansion cache will ever expire. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.19.129.150 (talk) 20:26, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Edits to a page itself are always displayed immediately in that page. You must refer to [2]. I don't know IPA but Template:H:IPA says ai aI ye eye ī all display as aɪ: "long 'i' in 'bide'". This means your edit has no effect on the rendered page. Do you think that is wrong? PrimeHunter (talk) 21:23, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I think you are misunderstanding IPA. The symbol you have copied from M-W (ī) is not IPA, but is use there to represent the sound written in IPA as /aɪ/ (because it is a diphthong consisting of an /a/ sound followed by an /ɪ/). (I may remark that when I looked at the M-W entry you linked to, I thought it was saying to pronounce it "weevern", because that's what ī suggests to me. This is exactly why we use IPA.) --ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Merge Commons/Meta account with a different name

On Wikimedia Commons and other Wikimedia sites, my username is still User:Seahen, but on en.wikipedia I've had my account renamed. How do I get the Seahen unified account merged into the NeonMerlin unified account for purposes of e.g. rendering preferences? NeonMerlin 20:34, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

This edit is to confirm that I control both accounts and want them merged. Seahen (talk) 20:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Follow-Up on Mars

On 29 June, an editor complained that his posts about the exploration of Mars were being censored by another editor. His use of the term "censorship" was incorrect, because there was a content dispute. The topic was taken to a project talk page and the Help Desk item was closed. After some research, it became clear that there were two problems. There were content disputes, and there were user conduct disputes making orderly resolution of the content dispute nearly impossible. I have had to open a Request for Arbitration: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Mars. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:38, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

False edits in Cancer. Collusion? 3RR rule?

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

Please see the following [[3]]

What I wrote in Cancer is:

Mutations rarely have large effects on cancer risk in the general population (<0.3%), and "account for less than 3–10% of annually diagnosed cancers" at a few specific sites. Phytochemicals from dietary plants and spices have been shown to prevent cancer initiation, promotion, and progression by exerting anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidative stress effects, and have been shown to induce apoptosis in cancer cells and suppress tumor growth in vivo.

Replaced by Jmh649 and Zad68 with (which is absolutely not supported by the reference):

Approximately five to ten percent of cancers are entirely hereditary.

Please see their source material [[4]]. The 5 - 10% they falsely cite pertains only to breast cancer, and the review finds essentially the opposite conclusion compared to what Jmh649 and Zad68 write. Genes are actually not very important, according to the source they cite.

How can I make corrections and additions with editors don't read the source they cite, inaccurately use a citation, and seem to use other editors (so very quick to jump into a subject they rarely edit) to possibly circumvent the 3RR rule?32cllou (talk) 00:18, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Don't engage in an edit war. I don't see that any of the exceptions at WP:3RR apply here. Follow the guidace at WP:DR to resolve this dispute. RudolfRed (talk) 00:30, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

32cllou, you seem to be making two different changes in the same edit - which makes discussing the matter difficult. If the existing sources are being misinterpreted, that clearly needs correcting. However, you are also adding new material, relating to phytochemicals, and apparently citing a single primary source for this, which is unlikely to be acceptable per WP:MEDRS policy. I suggest that you familiarise yourself with this policy, and then go back and discuss the two issues separately on the article talk page. It is unsurprising that your edits have been reverted, given that you seem not to understand policy, and have approached the matter in such a confusing way. I see no evidence of 'collusion' or anything else in the way your edits have been reverted, and it is entirely normal that significant edits in such an important article need to be discussed, and consensus reached. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:36, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The source I cite is a review. I have read MEDRS. I started out by deleting the incorrect text. JMH reverted. I went to Talk and presented. I read JMH's citation. I then tried to use correct from his cite, and my review cite on phytochemicals. You do not address the main issues, which are implicitly his violating 3RR, lack of using Talk, forcing less important information into the lead, deleting important review information into the lead, and not using a review to support your text (as required). Jmh's citation is a simplistic cherry pick of the research, and is not a review.32cllou (talk) 02:25, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

I created Rayman School

Hi I am new to this and I had created Rayman School and also wrote a short article (yet to complete more) but when I do a search its states it is not found.

But when I log in to my user Rayman School it can be found.

How can I have my articles shown on wikipedia search?

Thank you Eunice Wong