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

August 10

TFD notice not displaying

Pigsonthewing has nominated {{Infobox magazine}} at TFD, and because it's fully protected, he had to supply the code on the template's talk page and request an admin to copy it over. I noticed the request and performed it, but to my surprise there's no "This infobox has been nominated at TFD" message on pages that transclude the infobox. I even edited one of them, Scientific American, so that we wouldn't have to wait for the job queue, but it's had no effect. It's not a caching issue, since I can't remember ever viewing the page before (not to mention the fact that I edited it), and Pigsonthewing says that he doesn't see the message either. What's wrong? If you know how to fix it but you're not an admin, drop a note at my talk page with the correct code, and I'll put it into the template. Nyttend (talk) 00:28, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

The page history [1] of the used template explains it. The removal of the message on articles appears to have been made without discussion. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:45, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting. Since that's a critical component of the template, I've restored it, and it appears (although weirdly) in Scientific American. Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 01:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean by weirdly? PrimeHunter (talk) 01:22, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

For me, it is very tiny and would be easy to overlook if I didn't already know it was supposed to be there. RudolfRed (talk) 01:24, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

[ec] It's just in the far right column in that article and at Newsweek — the whole notice is squeezed into the width of the infobox. The page history shows that it was copied from the regular TFD deletion notice, which is the whole width of the page. Compare the merge notice at the top of Newsweek or Scientific American with the TFD deletion notice for {{Infobox Province of China (PRC)}} at the top of Shanxi to see what I mean. Nyttend (talk) 01:27, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Even when not in the last column, the font is much smaller than the rest of the article. Compare to the notice at 920th_Air_Refueling_Squadron, which is a more normal size. RudolfRed (talk) 01:48, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

It's small on purpose. The source of Template:Tfm/dated says font-size: xx-small;. That seems suitable to me. It shouldn't be too distracting on articles. Deletion messages made by Template:Template for discussion/dated have the same text size. The merger message is much shorter than the deletion message so it seems OK to me that the merger message isn't page-wide. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:57, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I am talking about the template merge message. RudolfRed (talk) 01:59, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

[another ec] Size isn't the primary "weird" issue. The problem is its width, which renders it easy to overlook; the deletion notice is much easier to notice than the merger notice. But let's ignore for a moment the issue of whether this is a good thing: I see absolutely no differences between the code for the notices on the two template, except for wording such as "deletion" versus "merging". What causes them to be different? Nyttend (talk) 02:00, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: 920th Air Refueling Squadron has an article merger message, not a template merger. An article merger affects the article much more directly and isn't advertised on a lot of articles like template mergers often are.

@Nyttend: Proposed mergers are less important than deletions so it seems OK to me if mergers are advertised less prominently. However, the reason in the examples we are comparing is that the deletion tag on {{Infobox Province of China (PRC)}} is missing type=sidebar. Template:Template for discussion#Sidebar says an infobox should have it. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:54, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I got a little turned around there. Also, I didn't realize "discussion" template was "deletion". RudolfRed (talk) 04:46, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I've restored the original version. The user who altered it - W. P. Uzer (talk · contribs) - was created less than a month ago, so is probably not aware of procedure. --Redrose64 (talk) 07:46, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what "procedure" I am supposed to be unaware of, but I still think it's detrimental to Wikipedia to have these notices popping up on articles. Readers are not interested in such behind-the-scenes technical matters, and will just be distracted by these notices or waste time trying to work out what they mean and why they're important. And if the notices are too small to be distracting, then they're also too small to be noticed, so serve no purpose. I can understand (just) that you might want to make a noise about the fact that a template is proposed for deletion, since that might make quite a big difference to the appearance of the final page, but merging?? Who cares? It might make no difference at all (or only minor cosmetic differences) to the appearance of the article. Are we also going to advertise every proposed edit to a template in this way, since any template edit can have just as great a potential effect on the articles as a template merge can. Honestly, I think the people who spend their time dealing with this sort of thing have a greatly exaggerated sense of how much it matters. (Yes, I agree it's beneficial to keep the number of different templates down to a sensible minimum, but you don't need to wave a flag around to tell the whole world it's happening.) W. P. Uzer (talk) 12:13, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

The procedure is that you shouldn't make a wide-ranging change like this without consensus; or if you do, and somebody reverts you, you should then discuss it rather than revert again.

It is important for users to be aware of proposed template merges, since these can be controversial; here is one that people certainly did care about enough to reject the proposal. Here is a current TfM proposal which is also controversial; it is the one where Nyttend (talk · contribs), Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs) and myself first became aware that there was a problem with TfM. By showing no message at all in a TfM proposal, you're keeping people in the dark, and since there is no link to the discussion, you may be denying people the right to comment on merge proposals. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:37, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

There's no such procedure. Anyone can make whatever changes they like to an unprotected template. — Lfdder (talk) 14:02, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

There's no such procedure as WP:CON? Or maybe you mean WP:BRD? Or WP:TFM? --Redrose64 (talk) 14:29, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

"The procedure is that you shouldn't make a wide-ranging change like this without consensus" You don't need to seek consensus before making a change. — Lfdder (talk) 14:45, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Umm, it's substantially different for basic procedural notices such as this. Imagine if I edited {{afd}} so that it wasn't easily visible — it would be absurd, because I would be hiding the deletion discussion from everyone and getting rid of the basic purpose of the template. I'd definitely need consensus first! It's the same here. Nyttend (talk) 14:59, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

When I proposed renaming an article recently (using the procedure at RM) no notice came up on the article. Surely a change of title is a far more significant change than a technical change regarding which template is used to achieve a substantially identical effect? Yet we don't tell everyone reading the article when such a significant change is proposed. Why should we do it with the insignificant one? People who are really interested in template merges, or in the particular templates themselves, will find out about the discussion anyway through other routes. Was there even any consensus to start with, to make these template merge notices come up on articles? W. P. Uzer (talk) 16:21, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

No, this is a much more significant change — your edits removed the majority of the template, which is meant primarily for the purpose of providing a link to the discussion! Moreover, when an article's up for moving, only one page will be affected, but a change to a template affects many pages. If you're keeping track of an article but don't keep track of TFD, you may have substantial input into a merger discussion. Nyttend (talk) 17:57, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

You may have substantial input into all sorts of discussion, some of which might even be important (yet we don't advertise most of them within the article). Most likely, though, you're one of the millions of people who want to read up on a subject without being distracted by peculiar and incomprehensible bits of text on your screen, not one of the dozen or so who might have the technical expertise to assess whether it's more efficient to achieve a set of effects using one template or several. You all seem to forget that 99.99%+ of people reading these messages have no idea, and shouldn't need to have any idea, what a "template" is and what it means to "merge" them. Where was it properly decided that this particular class of discussion needs to be advertised on potentially thousands of pages? If it was never decided so, then my edit restored the status quo simply. The template still provides a link to the discussion (from the template pages themselves, I mean the templates that this template is placed on), which to me seems exactly the right amount of publicity such discussions deserve (in case of particularly contentious discussions, further notification can be done manually). W. P. Uzer (talk) 06:21, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

By the way, is it possible to move this discussion to the template talk page itself (where I did already start a discussion thread on the subject)? W. P. Uzer (talk) 16:29, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

If it's moved anywhere (which I support, since this thread will be archived to Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2013 August 10 on 13 August) it should be to WT:TFD since it's an integral part of that process group. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:41, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Or maybe one of the village pumps? TFD is likely to be pre-populated with people who think that template organization issues are Very Important. W. P. Uzer (talk) 06:28, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

list of reliable sources in Chinese media?

Hi everyone. I'm a longtime user moving to an editing role. I will focus on China and have been looking without success for a list of Wikipedia-consensus reliable sources in Chinese media. China is replete with media outlets but some are more respectable than others. I'd rather not start working on existing articles until I understand who (generally) is and isn't ok to cite... Thank you for any help you can provide. DrewHeath (talk) 04:19, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't think there's a predefined list. Look for sources that meet the guidelines at WP:RS and if there is a specific one you have questions about, you can ask at WP:RSN. Also, you don't need to use Chinese sources for articles on China. You can use sources from anywhere in the world, so if you are more confortable with english language sources, just use those. RudolfRed (talk) 04:38, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

There is no such thing as "this is a reliable source - for ever and ever amen". The reliability of a source can only be determined within the context of each specific citation. Every source contains errors or biases, even paragons of "The Truth©®™" such as the New York Times are sometimes not reliable. There are however inherently unreliable sources - such as "your brother's girlfriend's sister's ex-husband's cousin's best friend's aunt Jemima". Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:07, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Ok, it seems over time I drew the wrong impression from reading talk pages. I have often seen various news outlets dismissed as unreliable (i.e. Pravda.ru, Daily Mail) and assumed the inverse was true - there were lists out there somewhere of standard media resources. Thank you both for clarifying. I'll tread lightly. DrewHeath (talk) 10:40, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

If you are unsure about a particular source or if you would like suggestions of media to look through, you can try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject China. If your Chinese is up to it, you might also try asking at zh:Wikipedia:互助客栈/求助 as well, though the Chinese Wikipedia's interpretation of what makes a source "reliable" may be different than that of the English Wikipedia. – Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 23:29, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I initially visited WPChina but found that they do not broach the topic of reliable sources. Asking on ZH.WP is a good idea. Thank you for the welcome. :-) DrewHeath (talk) 23:50, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

A question

I am block no chatting no comeent and no like please help me — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.127.81.200 (talk) 05:48, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

What's that? If I should assume that this is about Facebook, well, we can't help you here. This is the Wikipedia help desk, where you can ask questions about how to use Wikipedia. You may want to contact Facebook (if this is a technical problem; the question is very vague) for support. Cheers, Insulam Simia (talk) 06:34, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Moving Article

I have just finished writing an article in my sandbox and would like to publish. However, my sandbox seems to have become an article on its own accord. Not sure where it all went a bit pear shaped. Do I now just MOVE it? I want to call it St Clare John Byrne. Any advice on the way forward? Ted

Sidpickle (talk) 07:26, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you can move it to the title you want. Best, Insulam Simia (talk) 07:38, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, moving is what you want to do. You can read more about it at WP:MOVE. Dismas|^(talk) 09:58, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Sharing a back link with Wikipedia

Have a website which I would like to link back-to-back with Wikipedia, how can I do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.89.42.2 (talk) 08:08, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't quite understand your question. You are free to put links to Wikipedia from anywhere; in fact you are free to reuse content from Wikipedia anywhere, as long as you comply with WP:REUSE. However external links from Wikipedia to other sites are subject to many restrictions, explained at WP:EL. --ColinFine (talk) 09:49, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not offer reciprocal links if that's what you mean. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:48, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Location of Oakleigh Grammar

Please note on the Map Section there is a photo of our Principal but the name of the School is incorrect.

Please delete Oakleigh Greek Orthodox College and replace with Oakleigh Grammar

Many thanks

The article Oakleigh Grammar doesn't have a map or a photo, so you will need to tell us exactly where you saw this. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:03, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

It looks as though the OP is referring to the "Knowledge Graph" box that appears to the right of the results in a Google search for "Oakleigh Grammar". This is something that Wikipedia has no control over; but there is a "Feedback / More info" link below that box, and if the OP clicks on it, then clicks on "Wrong?" preceding the school's name, Google may eventually emend it. Deor (talk) 12:04, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Right. Here is our standard response:

Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:59, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Key files

You have a project server that has key files that must be accessed from people in multiple sites throughout the country. These files must be accessible 24/7 while keeping performance as high as possible. What solution would you provide?

This is the Help Desk for Wikipedia. We answer questions about how to edit Wikipedia here. Your question seems better suited to the Computing Reference Desk. Dismas|^(talk) 10:02, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like somebody's asking us to do his homework. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:44, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Edits Required

How many edits require to upload Second live article on the wikipedia ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shavaiz Shams (talk • contribs) 10:27, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

There are no restrictions so the reason for your question is unclear but after looking at your contributions I suspect your problem is that your move from User:Shavaiz Shams/sandbox to Carolyn A. Brent (advocate) left a redirect. I have blanked the redirect so you can edit your sandbox again. See Help:Redirect#Creating and editing redirects for how you can do it yourself. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Change Username

I would like to make a small change to my username but cannot find where I can edit my information. Can you provide me with instructions on how to complete that task? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krazytrane (talk • contribs) 12:48, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Changing username. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:56, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Deleted pages

My father's biography was on Wikipedia and now it seems to have disappeared. Is there a way of finding out if, how and why it was deleted? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.148.60.63 (talk) 14:31, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

There might be, if you tell us his name. --Redrose64 (talk) 14:54, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

fund raising

are you currently running a fund raising campaign - a request for donations has come up on one page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.160.196.163 (talk) 15:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Foundation has been doing some testing of its upcoming fundraiser (what messages seem to work, which seem not to). So yes, readers like you have occasionally seen a request for a donation. But it's not consistent across pages, and certainly not seen by most readers, hence your confusion. The regular fundraising period will continue to be near year-end. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 18:01, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Fundraising should have a link to somewhere at https://donate.wikimedia.org. If you are taken to another page then please post the address. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:06, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

The fundraising team is trying to spread out the announcements rather than having all of them at the end of the calendar year. See meta:Fundraising 2013. In the last batch (which may not be running any longer?), only 5% of readers were supposed to see them, and no user is supposed to see it more than once. If you have seen multiple requests, please click through to that link on Meta and tell them that you are seeing multiple requests. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 04:40, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

wrong data reported in wikipedia by one particular site

Hi team, This is to bring to your notice about the reference in wiki articles. consider this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chennai_Express here in the collection for the india: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chennai_Express#India_2 the data reported here has written: The film went on to collect INR29.25 crore (US$4.9 million) on its first day, thus making it the second highest opening day of all time behind Ek Tha Tiger. The above data is totally false & wrong & as it is talking about highest earning ever in india so i consider this as my duty to bring right info to you. please see the references below, in all the below links it clearly mentions that Chennai express has highest 1st day collection in India: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/box-office/Chennai-Express-beats-Ek-Tha-Tiger-on-day-one-earns-Rs-33-crore/articleshow/21741131.cms? (the foremost & biggest news site in India) http://www.dnaindia.com/entertainment/1872682/report-chennai-express-mints-rs33-12-crore-on-opening-day ( a very reputed site from india) http://www.hindustantimes.com/Entertainment/Bollywood/Shah-Rukh-Khan-starrer-Chennai-Express-mints-Rs-33-crore-on-opening-day/Article1-1106072.aspx (from hindustan times- one of the reputed newspaper from india) http://ibnlive.in.com/news/chennai-express-earns-rs-3312-cr-on-its-first-day/413196-8-66.html (a very big media group from india)

I am pointing this out because with boxofficeindia.com data someone is trying to forge the data. As wiki is based on people collaboration so it is very important for me to bring this issue out of wrong journalism and using wiki to play with the real data. Hope you will change the link (or you can give me authority to do the same) & make people aware of the fraud being done by giving wrong data to our esteemed user community.

P.S: i have no association with any one, i am here to raise my voice against the wrong data :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Movierdb (talk • contribs) 16:00, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

The best place to raise this issue is on the talk page of the article. Maproom (talk) 16:42, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

tyrone hayes

the article on "tyrone hayes" is posted by a paid industry hack (AcademicReviewer) who is posting fallacious information. the majority of the article makes claims to me (hayes) being a paid expert witness etc. these statements are simply not based in fact. i request that this contributor NOT be allowed to post false information regarding me and my occupation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thereisonlyonetyrone (talk • contribs) 17:17, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, we do not block users who have different views of things, we use reliable sources. Mlpearc (powwow) 17:21, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

If you have issues with the content of the article, please post to Talk:Tyrone Hayes. If that does not work, you have WP:DRN to request dispute resolution or WP:BLPN for issues about biographies of living persons. As Mlpearc said, we do not block editors based on differing views, unless they persistently violate Wikipedia policy. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:16, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Cleanup help needed

Could someone give me a hand? I'm on an iPad and trying to fix several edits that Porn69porn69 (talk · contribs) has made by adding the Commons Category template to articles for which the subject has no such category on Commons. It will take me longer than I have time for to fix them all on this simple tablet. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 20:12, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Done. I left one in as there actually was a Commons category (with more than just the picture in it).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:10, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! Dismas|^(talk) 21:33, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Friday pageview stats

According to the dump pages the data is out there for yesterday's page views. Why isn't the pageview statistic page updating?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 22:03, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Per [2] you should contact Henrik. Or, try WP:VPT. RudolfRed (talk) 22:49, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Natalina_Maggio -- seeking approval

Hello,

I submitted this Article below for NATALINA_MAGGIO over a month ago, and it has yet to be approved... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Natalina_Maggio

I'm a fellow artist, and I used the same rules for her as I did for my own (Below), and mine was approved immediately... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Reherman

Have I done something incorrectly?

Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter...

Lee Reherman website-- www.LeeReherman.com

Hawkreherman (talk) 23:30, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

When you removed the decline notice from the top of your page, you also removed your ability to resubmit the page. I'll replace the decline notice for you, which is supposed to remain as a notice to reviewers that the page had issues in the past. To resubmit, just click the blue "resubmit" button in the decline notice. Also, Lee Reherman never went through the Articles for Creation process, so in a sense, it was never reviewed. That page was created before the AfC process became the norm. Howicus (talk) 23:51, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

And I have tagged it for five of the reasons why it would not have passed that process. --ColinFine (talk) 15:00, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Nice work! This raises a question, and since the conflict of interest noticeboard seems to be in some sort of estivation, this seems to be as good a place to ask it as any. In a case like Lee Reherman, where there has been a long history of overt COI editing, is it an appropriate response to revert to the last version before that editing began, as would be one normal way of dealing with a case of, say, copyright violation? I'm neither suggesting that that is a good version of the article nor specifically recommending restoring it, just asking if that is one of the possible appropriate responses as an alternative to, say, WP:PROD. Any thoughts? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: COI isn't an absolute ban on editing, so it's problematical to simply revert COI-influenced edits. If, on the other hand, the information added is (for example) (a) highly promotional and (b) unsourced, then a good case could be made for removing it - but the best practice would be to post the removed information on the article talk page (with a note saying what you've done, of course), so that other editors (including those with COI issues) can comment. Ideally that will lead to a productive discussion, with the COI-problem editor bringing sources and suggested text to the talk page, and no longer posting inappropriately to the article page. By contrast, if you just revert a bunch of edits, you're limited to the edit summary for explaining what you did, and anything valuable in what you deleted has to be found via a diff, rather than looking at the talk page. So there's minimal chance of the the editor with COI issues actually learning much from the situation (as in, "All my additions just disappeared; I could try again, or just quit editing"). -- John Broughton (♫♫) 04:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

August 11

Trouble creating an account

I did not list an e-mail address at first. However I did create a password and wrote it down. When I tried to log in, the system would not accept my password. Since I did not enter an e-mail address when creating the new account, because they said it was optional, I have been block from entering any account. I tried to create a new account with an e-maill address and different username and I was not able to get through.76.76.182.99 (talk) 00:50, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

What is the error you are getting? It's possible that someone else already has the name you want. RudolfRed (talk) 01:49, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

font size

This is a very elementary question. I apologize. I'm just wanting to know how to increase the size of the font on all Wikipedia pages on my own computer. I've tried going to preferences, then appearance, and have changed to the first of the four options. It helps a little. But I would really like it larger. Getting old you know. Thanks so much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richieattal (talk • contribs) 01:00, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

You'll need to change the size in your browser. For some it will be command and the + key. If that doens't work, ask at WP:RDC and include what OS and browser you're using. RudolfRed (talk) 01:49, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

CTRL and + would be more likely, since Command is a Mac key.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Adding articles on a book I have written

Hello I'm new to Wikipedia. I wish to add a book and short story reference, but it seems I'm not allowed to do this, because I am closely linked to the articles. Is there any way around this. I'm sure if Dan Brown's book is on wiki, why can't my book be listed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlrchapman (talk • contribs) 06:11, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Dan Brown probably didn't write the article on his books. See WP:COI. If you or your books are notable, then you should request an article at WP:RA and not write it yourself. RudolfRed (talk) 06:19, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Also, one of the article's is up for deletion not due to COI but because it was copied from another web page and that's potentially copyright infringement. See the note left on your talk page.RudolfRed (talk) 06:46, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

It seems likely that Dan Brown's books sell more copies than yours. This makes them more notable, in Wikipedia's sense, and therefore more likely to warrant an article. The quality of the writing is irrelevant. Maproom (talk) 19:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Why can't your book be "listed"? Because Wikipedia isn't a listings site, it's an encyclopaedia containing articles on notable subjects. The notability criteria for books are here. If your book fulfils these criteria, it qualifies for an article and you can ask for one to be written. If it doesn't fulfil them yet, you will need to wait until it does. - Karenjc 21:46, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Editing

How to insert anarticle / photo / and create a page. I do not know how to start even ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 11:10, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

See Learn more about editing for information on editing articles and adding media.  drewmunn  talk  11:34, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

parabola.

The St. Louis arch is a catenary, not a parabola. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.73.145 (talk) 13:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

The article Gateway Arch says exactly this. Which article are you talking about? --ColinFine (talk) 15:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

My technical mistake about a new page review

Hi. I've erroneously marked as patrolled a new page, Kefalochori railway station. It's about a Greek station and the author is now creating articles about all the stations on the Thessaloniki-Florina line. The problem is that all this articles have the same coordinates referring to a place between Larisa and Katerini, far from the area in which the line is located. Another problem is that the lead section is the same for all this stations and refers to their opening in 2008. The problem is that, as for this picture of Veroia (or Veria) station, the station seems to be older (and I have a picture of this station on my PC taken in 2002). So, the reference of all stations opening is unclear and may IMHO refer to a re-opening, better than an opening, in 2008.

To end: I can't consider Kefalochori railway station as marked as patrolled by now. I apologize for having mistakenly clicked [mark this page as patrolled] and my question is: is possible to revert my marked as patrolled click? Article status is the same of all other stations on this line and, before to mark them, all of them need to be checked. I would avoid the check for Kefalochori were skipped because of my erroneous click. Thanks for help. --Dэя-Бøяg 15:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it can be done, sorry. However, I'll flag that page for deletion, as it doesn't seem to meet the notability criteria. If you think this is true of the other pages the user is creating, feel free to flag them for deletion also.  drewmunn  talk  16:57, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest :-) Anyway, I've added a comment on the AFD page related to Kefalochori station. I've not voted for deletion because my doubt is general (related to all the minor station articles of the line, created today). Also other articles have the same (wrong) coordinates and this opening data that IMHO is a reopening. Anyway, thanks again. --Dэя-Бøяg 19:23, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

@DerBorg: You most definitely should post your concerns about the accuracy of the information in the article (as expressed above) to Talk:Kefalochori railway station and to the talk pages of all the other articles about stations on the line. That way, even if the article creator ignores the problems, they are visible to other editors. Comments about incorrect information, if in an AfD, are likely never to be seen again once the AfD closes; that's not where editors typically look. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 04:15, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

How do you use the same webpage as a source more than once?

I know how to use books more than once but how do you use a webpage more than once in the same article?--Smashton Pumpkin (talk) 16:48, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Exactly the same way as you would do books, or any other reference. Give the reference a name, and simply call the reference later by typing <ref name="referencenamehere"></ref> where you want the reference to appear.  drewmunn  talk  16:56, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand. In the reflist do you put it there or where? I am aware of putting the link once by just a simple but how do you make it so I use that again... can you help me just on the Footnotes section I don't really follow it in all honesty, thanks.--Smashton Pumpkin (talk) 17:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

See Help:Referencing for beginners and WP:REFNAME. --  Gadget850 ^talk 18:32, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

I updated your markup to use a dummy ref. --  Gadget850 ^talk 18:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

You learn something new every day; I thought Drew's code was an error, but I tested it and it works fine. The usual markup is <ref name="referencenamehere"/>, which is a little shorter. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:59, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Don't use the code <ref name="referencenamehere"></ref> when the reference is reused. It's unstable and will confuse others. Use <ref name="referencenamehere"/>. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:36, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Wrong Information Provided

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chennai_Express#Box_office

this page shows that the movie Chennai Express collected 29 crores which is wrong it collected 33.12 crores and is the higgest opening day grosser in India — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.203.236.22 (talk) 17:33, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

This matter is already under discussion (several times) at Talk:Chennai Express; please don't start even more threads. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:33, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

A HotCat-like tool for stub sorting?

I love using WP:HOTCAT, just typing a keyword and finding fitting categories. But I hate having to search around for the best stub template. Is there any sort of tool for stub sorting similar to that?-- Brainy J ~✿~ (talk) 19:10, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

There are lots of pages with information about stub sorting - see WP:EIW#Stub. If none of the other entries are what you're looking for, you could enquire at the WikiProject. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 04:09, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Broadchurch

The entry on this TV show which is only becoming available presently (8/2013) reveals who committed the murder. I think this is entirely inappropriate. I was reading it for general information and instead suddenly had the suspense of the show destroyed in the worst kind of spoiler I can imagine. Please remove this information from the entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:9:2A80:D5:E95B:A88:8A30:82D9 (talk) 19:34, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored. It exists to provide accurate, and preferably verifiable, information. Respecting the enjoyment of viewers of shows is not among its objectives. Maproom (talk) 19:51, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Please see also WP:SPOILER. Also; I know who did it, not because I read the article, but because I watched the TV series (some weeks ago). --Redrose64 (talk) 19:55, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

wiki icon

I wish to add a wiki icon To this phone for quick access174.237.40.90 (talk) 19:47, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

For an Android phone, that is easy, you just download a free Wikipedia app. I would guess that the same is true for other kinds of phone. Maproom (talk) 19:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

And depending on your phone, you can add a link to the app on your home screen. - Purplewowies (talk) 22:04, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Mundgod Information And helfline

https://www.facebook.com/MundgodSpandana — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbraghumb (talk • contribs) 20:56, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

We have nothing to do with Facebook. This page is for asking questions about using Wikipedia. What is your question? RudolfRed (talk) 21:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

ADD TO WIKI

Hello,

I would like to inquire about how to add an article to Wikipedia. My great uncle is an US Marine Veteran of WWII, who served in campaigns that include Iwo Jima, Emirau Island, St. Matthias, and the Mariana Islands. As he turns 90 at the end of August, I would like to do a factual article on his service to our country and have it posted. Is this something that you could please assist me with.

Thank you in advance for your time and effort - I look forward to your response.

KailuaCrunch (talk) 23:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Although your great uncle sounds like a noble man, you don't make a convincing argument as to why he is notable enough for an article. Was he written about in multiple publications which would be considered reliable sources? Please take a look at those links to see if an article about him belongs here. Dismas|^(talk) 00:20, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

August 12

New article with same title as existing article

Hi, I want to write an article on Nicholas Royle a Professor at the University of Sussex and author of a novel, Quilt. He's written 11 books (including co-authoring an influential textbook) and published dozens of articles. He is different than the Nicholas Royle who already has a page on wikipedia (also a university teacher and novelist). I have recently edited the Nicholas Royle page to have the correct birth place and date (as it used to have the birthdate and place of the Nicholas Royle for whom a page is needed). In any case, the Nicholas Royles are very used to getting mistaken for one another-- even the Library of Congress has mixed them up. But it is important their work is kept separate so I would like to create a page for Nicholas Royle but am not sure how to start it if it has the same title as another article and who will take care of making sure the pages are disambiguated. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Florencewhimbrel (talk • contribs) 04:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

There are several acceptable solutions, see [3] for some examples. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:13, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Total Customer Value Management, Neutrality of the article is disputed

Hi! Dear Sir/ Madam,

I am finding following issues with my “Total Customer Value Management” page on wiki with username Narenderwp

Please let me know where I need to correct to get issues resolved.

The neutrality of this article's introduction is disputed. Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved. (July 2013)

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. This article may require copy editing for Tone. (July 2012)

This article may be confusing or unclear to readers. (March 2012)

This article may contain an excessive amount of intricate detail that may only interest a specific audience. (March 2012)

URL of the Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_Customer_Value_Management

Regard, Narender Kumar — Preceding unsigned comment added by Narenderwp (talk • contribs) 04:40, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Dear Narenderwp: Of all of the things that are listed as problems with the article, the most serious is that the references do not establish that this is a notable concept. The article should have references to several articles written by journalists or other authors not connected with Gautam Mahajan to show that the concept is well known. The references provided are an article that is about Mr. Mahajan but not about the topic, a document written by Mr. Mahajan, and an article that doesn't say on the web page who wrote it. If this is not addressed, the article could be deleted at any time. —Anne Delong (talk) 05:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Common diseases and their treatment

Hello fellow editors! The above article is in Articles for creation space, although it has never been submitted. It seems to me that this isn't and likely could never be an article, and may be dangerous if people see it and decide to take it as medical advice. Is there some policy that covers this? —Anne Delong (talk) 04:41, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm not aware of a policy that specifically deals with this. There is WP:Medical, but that is more about giving individualized advice. Regardless of whether there is a policy that demands its immediate deletion, I've nominated it for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Common diseases and their treatment as I agree it should not be sitting around with unsourced medical information. Monty₈₄₅ 04:51, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. —Anne Delong (talk) 05:08, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

This box thing

On my userpage, I have added a template of some of the articles I have created. But the template is arranged horizontally, and I want it to display vertically, as it does on User:Ombudsman, where I copied and pasted the template from. Can someone tell me how to get it to do that? Jinkinson (talk) 14:28, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

If you go back to the table you copied from, you'll see that there is a

|-

to give a new row in a table. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:36, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Yeah thanks, but it turns out while you were posting that I figured it out by myself. Thanks anyway Jinkinson (talk) 14:44, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Glad you fathomed it out. I think you're still missing them for the first rows after your sub-headings. You seem to have extra column separators instead of row separators. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:50, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

--24.165.125.224 (talk) 14:59, 12 August 2013 (UTC) Bold text

Renaming URL in reference section when sourcing it

If you was to use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help_desk for a source how would you make it be in the 'Reference' section not as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help_desk but just as "Help Desk" but when you click it then it will take you to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help_desk, thank you.--Smashton Pumpkin (talk) 16:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Like this [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help_desk| Help desk] (shows up as Help desk). Why would you want to use the Help desk as a source? Or was that just an example? Howicus (talk) 16:29, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia "articles" should not be used as references per WP:CIRCULAR. That said, in general you'd format it thusly: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help_desk Help Desk] would display "Help Desk". Though since it is an internal link you could instead just use [[Help_desk|Help Desk]] to achieve the same effect. Ideally you should use a space instead of the underscore as well. More info is available at Help:Link. DonIago (talk) 16:32, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I was just using that as an example, sorry for the confusion. To make it more clear I went onto Google and typed in 'news' and the first link is http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-23662640 so if I wanted to make that "Erika Kacicova" in the reference box how do you do it and is there a bit of information on this, I'm not sure what it is called as its not shortening a URL, can you help me please thanks.--Smashton Pumpkin (talk) 17:30, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I would use the full article title, so [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-23662640 Missing Erika Kacicova 'believed to be alive'] → Missing Erika Kacicova 'believed to be alive' --Redrose64 (talk) 18:29, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

If you use Template:Cite web, there are fields for url, title, publication date, access date, etc. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. There's also automated tools such as this one that can take a URL and generate the appropriate code automagically. DonIago (talk) 18:52, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

See more at Help:Link. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:53, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I'm getting a tad little bit confused now because on the Cite web page it is telling me to do a lot of {{ instead of just , which is the best way to do it? I am confused between Template:Cite web, Citing_sources#Links and ID numbers, and Embedded citations - is it not just easier to put the ref bits and in the middle you put [ then the link and then a space then whatever you want it to go as then ]--Smashton Pumpkin (talk) 19:57, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

The marks like are created by <ref></ref>. Between the <ref> and the </ref> you put the information about the reference. In its simplest form, this would be the bare URL

<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-23662640</ref>

but clearly you want to give that a meaningful title. The next simplest method is to use the square brackets that I mentioned earlier

<ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-23662640 Missing Erika Kacicova 'believed to be alive']</ref>

The techniques advised by others - using {{cite web}} or similar - add more flexibility but at the expense of being more difficult to understand. In this case you would use

<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-23662640 |title=Missing Erika Kacicova 'believed to be alive'}}</ref>

Use whichever one you feel most comfortable with. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Unable to edit title

Hi,

I am unable to edit the title of the page. Could you please edit the title? The title should be Vundavalli Arun Kumar.

URL -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vundavalli_Aruna_Kumar

17:00, 12 August 2013 (UTC)~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kartheekchem (talk • contribs)

Can you provide a source to verify the spelling? It has been spelled the same way for years, and is spelled that way on other wikipedia pages as well. I checked all the links on the article page, and could not find a spelling either way. Monty₈₄₅ 17:13, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion separated from its article

Dear editors: This article: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Kaonohiokala Bray is really material that relates to the article David Kaonohiokala Bray which used to be on this page but was cut and pasted into mainspace. Should this discussion be moved to the article's talk page, and, if so, how would that be done? —Anne Delong (talk) 17:48, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

It wasn't cut and pasted, it was moved from Wikipedia:Articles for creation/David Kaonohiokala Bray, & the history shows that, and thus traces back to those talk page comments. The original draft article should, of course, have been at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David Kaonohiokala Bray instead of at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/David Kaonohiokala Bray. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Biddulph (talk • contribs) 18:05, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Well, it's not a current Afc submission, so what should be done with it? Items in Afc which haven't been edited in 6 months are being deleted. —Anne Delong (talk) 04:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi

hi — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.102.196 (talk) 19:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi. Do you have a question? PrimeHunter (talk) 19:27, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

war office

i need email address of naval secretary to gain my father srvice records — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.144.106.108 (talk) 19:35, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

This page is for questions about editing Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. CTF83! 19:59, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Since the IP resolves to the UK, [4] may be of help. Dru of Id (talk) 20:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

donate

I saw a donation option on one page, and now I can't find it. I want to donate. How do I find it again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.1.72.4 (talk) 20:10, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

On the left side of the page, under the globe, there is a link to "Donate to Wikipedia". RudolfRed (talk) 20:44, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello! Try this web site. —Anne Delong (talk) 20:47, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Copyright question

Dear editors: The awards section of this article: Delhi in a Day is taken directly from this web site: [[5]]. Each line has an attribution. Since this is a list of the awards, in order, it's hard to say how much different it could be made. Is this a copyright violation? If so, perhaps the list should be removed, and just a sentence saying that the film has won multiple awards with a reference to the web site would be more appropriate. —Anne Delong (talk) 20:40, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Facts can't be copyrighted. However, it totally fails to qualify as a WP:RELIABLESOURCE. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:58, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

References in french only

Dear Wikipedia,

What if most of my reliable secondary sources are all in French? Please help, I am trying to create an article on artist Diana Lui in English Wikipedia who already exists in the French Wikipédia.

Thanks for your advice,

itcheemonkeeItcheemonkee (talk) 22:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Sources don't have to be in English. See WP:NONENG. Jc3s5h (talk) 22:19, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

There are more than enough people who can read French and verify your sources here, so don't worry about it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:55, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

wrong mayor on this page...

Hello, concerning this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelbach,_Haut-Rhin

The mayor of Michelbach is Gilbert Steiner (not André Centlivre).

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.246.62.1 (talk) 22:43, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I have updated it [6] but you could have done it yourself by clicking the "Edit source" tab. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:04, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

August 13

Want to upload a picture to add to page. Standard account Can you upload for me?

Want to upload a picture to add to page. Standard account Can you upload for me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbaechtel (talk • contribs) 00:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Any assistance available? Dbaechtel (talk) 00:48, 13 August 2013 (UTC)Dbaechtel

Only confirmed users can upload files. You will be a confirmed user after you've had your account for four days and made at least 10 edits. See WP:AUTOCONFIRM for more on this. Once you're confirmed, you can go to WP:UPLOAD to upload the file. For more help with images in general, see WP:IMAGES. Dismas|^(talk) 02:39, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Can't change title!

Hi,

I created a page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Riqiv23

but the TITLE is "User:Riqiv23"

I didn't realize "saving" the page in my personal sandbox would make it appear online!

It appears I don't have enough "edits" to move the page myself.

From: "User:Riqiv23" > "Richie Vitale"

Can I somehow change the TITLE to: Richie Vitale

That is preferred . . . otherwise if should be deleted.

Thank you! Riqiv23 (talk) 00:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

IMDB is not a reliable source. Your article is not ready to be moved to the main article space. It could be moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Richie Vitale, where you can work on it more and then submit it for review. Howicus (talk) 00:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

---

OK, I'll work on it, thank you! Riqiv23 (talk) 02:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Citations and Verification disclaimer

Hi!

I'm new to Wikipedia so please forgive me if this question has already posted:

On my biography page there's a disclaimer from 2010 that reads as follows:

! This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (March 2010)

Very recently I added numerous citations for verification -- one for each statement of fact -- so can the disclaimer now be removed? If so it would be much appreciated. Here is the link to the page:

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

Thank you in advance for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdh3777 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

This question has been answered at the Teahouse. Please don't post the same question in several places. RudolfRed (talk) 05:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:DENY

Wikipedia's responsibility to society Whenever a serial killer is arrested , media gives huge coverage to the killer than doctors who treat poor patients for red cross. Whenever a shooter massacres innocent people in USA,he gets more coverage than Nobel prize winning scientists. Wikipedia is popular website. Killing innocent people is nothing great , only because media turns killers,rapists and 1940's mafia into cult figure , there is no need to keep pages dedicated to bad guys. The victims are forgotten and movies are made on the life of serial killers.Why should media decide who should get more coverage.Nobel prize winner for medicine or Monica Lewinsky who had no contribution to humanity. Those who own Wikipedia should honour great people like google doodle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TECHWIZARDEYT (talk • contribs) 03:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC) They say the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Once we start supplanting the judgement of reliable sources about whats important with our own, where do we stop? What other things will we not cover because they are bad, or we disagree with them? How could anyone take our articles seriously if, as a matter of policy, we said we are only going to cover things we want to encourage? Monty845 04:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Spell Check

Spell check is not working when I type text using wiki mark-up or Visual Editor. It works on any other website/software application on my computer but not Wikipedia. I am using Windows Vista. Does anyone know what the problem is and how to fix it?--Dom497 (talk) 03:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

My article deleted from wikipedia

Yesterday i posted article of Biomed Dispose It and it is deleted from wikipedia may i know why and i took permission from biomed for this article and they allow me to write and take content from there website if i want. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paldeep (talk • contribs) 06:39, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Did you go through the process for donating copyrighted materials? There are a number of other useful links in the warnings on your user talk page. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Looking at the deletion criteria for Biomed Dispose It, I see that it was deleted not only for the copyright violation but also for being written in a promotional manner. If you copy material from a subject's own website, it is quite likely that it will be written in a manner which is too promotional for Wikipedia, so (independently of the copyright problem) it is better to write in your own words. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:19, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Paldeep. Please read WP:Your first article. Wikipedia contains neutral articles about notable subjects. The txt of somebody's own website is almost never appropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 10:13, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Mobile page format

Will mobile logged in users be provided links on the sidebar menu to their User and User talk pages and to Notifications.
SBaker43 (talk) 07:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Sources

We created this Wiki for DJ Martin Garrix http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Garrix We added a lot of reliable sources in it, but still get the note about 'adding sources'. How many sources do we need to use to get rid of this note? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MediaNanny020 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 13 August 2013 (UTC) — MediaNanny020 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Who is "we"? (And you didn't create this Wiki, Larry Sanger and Jimbo Wales created this Wiki; what you created was an article in this, the English-language Wikipedia, which is a well-known wiki.) --Orange Mike | Talk 12:35, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

You still get the warning (or rather, the article still shows the warning) because nobody has removed it. If you are confident that you have addressed the problem, you may remove the warning. (From a quick look, I think you have addressed the problem. Many of the sources you have added are not substantial enough to contribute to notability, but they are fine for supporting the particular details about awards; but I think there are enough substantial sources to remove the warning. But to echo OrangeMike's question: your use of 'we' and your username suggests that you might be several people sharing an account (which is forbidden - see WP:ROLE) and/or have a conflict of interest.--ColinFine (talk) 13:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine! Helped me out a lot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MediaNanny020 (talk • contribs) 13:47, 13 August 2013 (UTC) — MediaNanny020 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

"The Media Nanny is a full service media &pr agency specialized in providing extensive and advanced publicity, digital & print marketing and promotion for individual music artists, events, record labels and all other companies inside the music industry." --Orange Mike | Talk 17:29, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Importing a script to my */.js or */.css or whatevs

Hello all. I'm trying to import a script to my profile thingumy whatsit and I'm demmed if I can work out how to do it. It's from User:Ale jrb/Scripts, the "CSDH (CSD Helper)". There are instructions but I'm a bit lost following them. Your help greatly appreciated. Pete aka "What the? This guy is supposedly a sysop and he doesn't even know how to import simple scripts?" aka --Shirt58 (talk) 12:44, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Add the code

importScript('User:Ale_jrb/Scripts/csdhelper.js');  //User:Ale_jrb/Scripts

to Special:MyPage/common.js to load it in all skins. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:54, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Rule Broadcast Systems

Rule Broadcast Systems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The company is just "Rule Boston Camera". Rule Broadcast Systems is extremely outdated. Can this be changed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.79.175.81 (talk) 14:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Frankly, I can see no reason why the company (regardless of how it is named) should meet Wikipedia:Notability (organizations) criteria, and on that basis, the article should probably be deleted. I will however look into this further. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:36, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I've moved the article to the new title. A quick search shows little to indicate that the subject meets our notability criteria though - if this can't be shown, the article will have to go. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:02, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Determining first version equal to the current version.

If there is an article that has had a number of changes and reversions/rollbacks is there an easy way to find the first version which is equal to the given version? I can look back at the history and (fairly) easily see what the first revision was with that *size*, but then I need to check to see if the two are equal. Is there a tool that would do that for me?Naraht (talk) 14:48, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

If you know of two versions that are the same size, why not just use the radio buttons beside those revisions to directly compare them? Maybe I'm misunderstanding something here. Dismas|^(talk) 16:33, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Two reasons, one, I may have made a mistake as to what was the first one at that size and secondly, to automate the concept. I'd love to have a tool that would enable me to say that for Article Blank, there hasn't been any changes other than changes and reverts for a given amount of time (and the number of cycles if possible). It seems useful in determining whether an article should be semi-protected.Naraht (talk) 16:54, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Ref: http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domena_magnetyczna

Hi,

I discovered that the above page referenced one of my inventions, namely my ‘Large Area Domain Viewer’ but I can’t seem to find my reference in the English version. You may wish to add my invention to your English page as it is a very useful device for visualizing larger magnetic domains in Silicon Steels and has become something of an industry standard.

I would point out however that the Polish page has got my name slightly wrong – it refers to me as ‘R.A. Taylor’ when I am in fact R.J. Taylor (reference 17).

Dr Robert J. Taylor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.156.46.186 (talk) 14:49, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

In regards to your points, firstly there is no guarantee that an article in one language will exactly match another, in this case it apparently doesn't. Since you have a conflict of interest, asking here was a good start. I'd suggest writing a note on Talk:Magnetic domain and/or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics. In regards to the entry on the Polish page, I think you can change it yourself, but that needs to be in done in the text that contains the reference (not down in where the references are all shown).

Probably the easiest way to make sure that everything for it is shown correctly is if there is a doi for the article, if you have that, there are "bot"s that will look up everything and that should make sure everything is correct including your middle initial.Naraht (talk) 15:13, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Icon next to username

Hi I am seeing a red numeral 1, next to my username on the top of the page, have not seen it in the past, anyone has any idea what this means or signifies ? Injun Gone Loco (talk) 17:01, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Click on it - it's a notification. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:04, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Clicking is not leading to anything, nor is it going away, tried all that before posting :-) Injun Gone Loco (talk) 17:06, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Probably a bug then. I've seen the notification system do odd things sometimes. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:09, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Notifications for how it's supposed to work. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:19, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Silly Page

The page “John W. Drake” (about me) contains many boring and numerous inaccurate statements, apparently misinformed but not malignant. In any case, a “John W. Drake” page is not needed, I am now retired, and I do not want to replace this entry with one of my own making. How can I delete the entry altogether? 157.98.66.27 (talk) 18:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Your best bet is to go to the talk page of the article and point out the parts that are unsourced or objectionable. For such a short article there is always AfD where you can apply to have the article deleted. It would, however be deleted according to procedure if it is excessively poorly sourced or you lack notability. It would not be deleted on your request because you don't want an article for some reason. Britmax (talk) 18:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of an article

Yesterday I was watching the New pages feed on Wikipedia, and happened to see one that intrigued me. It was named Alen Ghouliance, and was tagged for speedy deletion as an A7: No explanation of significance. I did not agree with this assessment as the article clearly laid out reasons showing significance, so I contested the deletion nomination by clicking the designated button and explaining why I did not agree with the assessment.

I watched the article for a while and noticed that the tag was changed to: G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion, so I removed all content from the article that would lead someone to conclude that the article was promotional. I also added categories to help guide other editors to similar articles, and again contested the proposed speedy deletion.

This morning I was disheartened to see that the article had vanished. How can I find out why it was deleted despite my efforts?

Thanks in advance, XOttawahitech (talk) 18:31, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Click on the red link that you have provided above, and you should get a pink box headed "A page with this title has previously been deleted." In that will be the deletion log entry, which shows who deleted it, when and why. --Redrose64 (talk) 18:41, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Yamaguchi arson and murders

Why can't Kozei Homi be named in the article as the prime suspect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Japanesehelper (talk • contribs) 18:55, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

You would be better off at the talk page of the article. The main reason is usually lack of reliable sources, or BLP concerns. Britmax (talk) 19:09, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Response to racist edits

Although I'm an experienced editor, I have a question about response to vandalism. An IP editor made an antisemitic edit to Thermonuclear weapon, implying that thermonuclear weapons were a Jewish plot (the intent is clear from the edit comment). I reverted it. I'd like to put a warning template on his Talk page so if he continues his bigoted edits he can be blocked, but I'm not quite sure what template I should use. Vandalism doesn't seem specific enough; his intent was not to vandalize per se. In fact his statement was even literally true, it was just the implication that was racist. Defamation doesn't seem to apply, because the subjects of his attack are dead. What should I put on his talk page? --Chetvorno^TALK 19:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

More generally, I'm not clear on how WP regards racist theories and hate speech in articles. There doesn't seem to be any explicit prohibition against these things, so I guess if they don't libel or defame living persons and are sourced, they could be included in WP articles as fringe theories? --Chetvorno^TALK 19:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

That implication is a little too mild to be called "hate speech", in my eyes, but not exactly appropriate. I'd recommend just letting him know how you feel on his talk page, without a tag. Might be enough. If he continues, you might go with the disruptive editing one. But, like you say, the statement is true, so I don't know. Maybe compromise and word the info into the article in a more neutral way. But if he insists on the implication, seems disruptive. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:14, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Actually, looking it over, I can't see how it would be included in this context without being undue weight and POV. We have warnings for those, under "Adding promotions of objects or ideologies (also spam)", if you'd like. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:18, August 13, 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I took your wise advice and just left him a note explaining why his edit was inappropriate. Hopefully it will get through. Thanks again. Cheers, Chetvorno^TALK 20:30, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

How to show which page is which when using a footnote more than once?

For example on the page Themes_in_Nazi_propaganda in the References section:

^ a b Koonz, Claudia (2003). The Nazi Conscience. Harvard University Press. p. 20. ISBN 978-0-674-01172-4.

How do you know if a or b is on page 20 and is it possible to make say one to be one page and one another so you know which reference is which to say which page?

I'm aware of sfn but there is no option to on this as there is no Notes and References separation just References.--Smashton Pumpkin (talk) 20:18, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't really understand the question...it seems to me that if a and b are both pointing to that citation than both should be on page 20. Otherwise there should be a separate citation for a different page number. Hope this helps. DonIago (talk) 20:27, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

You have a few ways to combat this problem. You can simply add the full citation 2 times by changing the REF TAG name parameter name="Koonz2003a ...This is the format used on the page already. There are other ways but they get more complicated. Not a big deal to list the same ref many times ...not harming anyone.

<ref name="Koonz2003a">{{cite book|author=Claudia Koonz|title=The Nazi Conscience|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=jASbCpN1CC8C&pg=PA20|year=2003|publisher=Harvard University Press|isbn=978-0-674-01172-4|page=20}}</ref>

<ref name="Koonz2003b">{{cite book|author=Claudia Koonz|title=The Nazi Conscience|url=http://books.google.com/books?id=jASbCpN1CC8C&pg=PA35|year=2003|publisher=Harvard University Press|isbn=978-0-674-01172-4|page=35}}</ref>

References

You may find the Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books handy on a side note. -- Moxy (talk) 20:35, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Armenian genocide

Hey,

In the article Armenian genocide, and under the tag Turkish nationalism, words like massacre and genocide were used without proper proof. They are such, such strong words that unless the events can be proven with factual and undeniable proof, I find it harassing. Unless you can give me convincing evidence of the Armenian genocide, I want the page removed, or at least edited in a less Euro-centric way that also takes into account the possibility of no genocide. I have been trying to write for that part, and all of my attempts were removed during editing.