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.
• 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.

Ask a question

July 20

Afd verdicts discrepancy

A bunch of World Series of Poker winners were nominated by User:Handpolk on July 8. Five(?) were deleted by User:Postdlf and two procedurally closed by User:Kraxler because Handpolk was found to be a sock puppet. That seems rather inconsistent. Where's the proper forum to raise this issue? Clarityfiend (talk) 01:45, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

The correct forum would be WP:DRV if you disagree with something that was deleted, merged or redirected. My procedural closures say that renomination can be made. But, what is the "issue"? Kraxler (talk) 02:20, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I believe he's asking why five articles nominated by Handpolk were deleted if two from the same batch were procedurally declined because Handpolk is was a sock. Rwessel (talk) 03:29, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I have not looked into these, but perhaps the deletions were carried out and stuck because a significant number of good faith users voted to delete. We don't negate the opinions of multiple good-faith editors because the coincidentally share the same opinion with someone who happens to be abusing Wikipedia rules. --Jayron32 04:44, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

You name User:Handpolk as the sockpuppet responsible. In at least one case (where the vote was "keep"), the nominator was User:DegenFarang – another sockpuppet, probably of the same person. Maproom (talk) 09:17, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

The DegenFarang AfD was in 2013, And yes, that's the same user, DegenFarang is the sockmaster, according to the SPI. I suppose that the AfDs were closed as delete either before Handpolk was blocked, or because the closer was not aware of the sockpuppetry. Closing AfDs one usually doesn't check out all the users who voted, that would take a lot of time. But the regulars should know what's going on. As soon as I got aware of the sockpuppetry I cleaned up, per WP:SOCKSTRIKE. DegenFarang/Handpolk seems to be heavily biased against poker players, more than half of his nominations were kept or speedily kept. Anyway, take any AfD closure you disagree with to WP:DRV. Kraxler (talk) 13:42, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Gallery syntax

Can someone explain to me why on Earth I can't seem to get the images in the packed-hover gallery at Dance to scale to the size defined in the height parameter? Much obliged for any forthcoming help. Snow ^{let's rap} 05:36, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Snow Rise: I think you left off the s in heights. —teb728 t c 05:59, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh for crying out loud - haha. Many thanks, TEB728. :) Snow ^{let's rap} 06:03, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

About written name

YOU ARE WRONGLY WRITTEN THE NAME OF GAUHATI UNIVERSITY IN ASSAMESE LANGUAGE ..PLEASE CORRECT IT.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.219.57.254 (talk) 07:23, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. If you have found a problem with an article, you are more than welcome to fix it yourself. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 07:24, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Convenience link: Gauhati University --Dismas|^(talk) 07:26, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Is গৌহাটি বিশ্ববিদ্যালয correct translation? Supdiop (Talk🔹Contribs) 07:32, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

You have not stated what is wrong with what we have, what it should be, or provided a reliable source for what you are asking it to be changed to.
However The official University Website uses গুৱাহাটী বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় which is what we already have in the infobox.
Please note I have removed the name from the lead as per WP:INDICSCRIPT - "Article lead should not contain regional or Indic language script" - Arjayay (talk) 11:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I want to apply for this school

Dear volunteers,I'm an international student and I want to study in this school next spring.But I'm not sure if you can enroll me to become the one of the school.And if I can do it,what things should I prepare?I'm looking forward to hearing from you.Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.202.190.94 (talk) 08:14, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6.8 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:21, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Reference

Hey, I am a new user on Wikipedia. I just created my account MPOMonkeyTT3 and I created a page about a song called "To our yes". I added reference tags so the page wasnt dletd but I couldn't input info into the references. How can I do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MpoMonkeyTT3 (talk • contribs) 11:50, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, MpoMonkeyTT3. Welcome to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a huge, complicated beast, with many policies and ways of doing things, that take a while to learn. My suggestion would be that you spend some time getting to know it, and making small edits before you plunge in to creating a new page. Some pages that will be helpful for you to read are WP:42, your first article and referencing for beginners.

The answer to your specific question is that you have not inserted references at all (which should go between <ref> and </ref>): what you have done is to insert wikilinks (between [[ and ]]), which are only used for linking to other Wikipedia articles (and may never be used as references, because Wikipedia, paradoxically, is not a reliable source). What should go between the <ref> and </ref> is as much information as will be helpful to a reader who wants to find that source: title, where it was published, author and date if known, and a URL if the source is available online (it doesn't have to be). There are templates available to make it easy to lay these out (you don't have to use them, but I always do)

So the Guinness reference could look something like

<ref>{{cite web
| url=http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/longest-officially-released-song
| publisher = [[Guinness World Records]]
| title =Longest officially released song
| accessdate = 20 July 2015
}} </ref>

which would appear (in an automatically numbered footnote) as

"Longest officially released song". Guinness World Records. Retrieved 20 July 2015.

In my view, that Guinness record may be enough confer Notability on the song, even though such a factor isn't specifically mentioned in the guideline. Better to find one or two places where people unconnected with the band or the label have written about it at some length and had their writing published in reliable places such as major newspapers; because if the Guiness reference is the only independent published source about it, then there is almost nothing that you can write in the article. (Wikipedia articles should be based entirely on reliable published information). --ColinFine (talk) 12:19, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

How to remove a wiki feed on Facebook?

Hi, I work for a non profit organization that has its own Facebook page that I manage. One of our members just found this page https://www.facebook.com/pages/Temple-Emanu-El-Beth-Sholom/127143167434528?fref=ts&rf=116288185084945 full of inappropriate posts (at least from our organization point of view) that I already reported as spam. Nevertheless, I want to know how we can prevent this to happen again. I understand that the page is originated by Wikipedia content. Thank you,

Barbara Templemontreal (talk) 12:55, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Templemontreal: I'm sorry, you will have to deal with this through the administrators at Facebook. The only content from Wikipedia on that Facebook page is the two sentences in the "About" box at the left, beginning "Temple Emanu-El-Beth Sholom, Westmount is a Reform synagogue... -- John of Reading (talk) 13:27, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I am puzzled by your request. Wikipedia has this article about a synagogue in Quebec, which appears to me entirely appropriate and respectful. Facebook has the article page which you cite, apparently about the same synagogue, but adorned with pictures of a skimpily-dressed young woman. I can see why you might complain to Facebook, but I don't see that Wikipedia is in any way responsible. Maproom (talk) 13:29, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Proper use of "he" in sports broadcasting

WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO GET THE PROPER USAGE OF "HE" IN SPORTS ANNOUNCING? — Preceding unsigned comment added by R. TRIVETTE (talk • contribs) 13:36, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

R. TRIVETTE first, please do not shout. Next, what are you talking about, does this question have anything to do with a Wikipedia article? If it does can you specify what article does not use the word "he" properly? -- GB fan 13:51, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Related to Caitlyn Jenner at a guess.--ukexpat (talk) 13:59, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Tartrazine

Header added by ColinFine (talk) 15:01, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I tried to add an information to the page "Tartrazine" here at Wikipedia. First my information was deleted because the user stated the source was not reliable. Then I went and looked for a reliable source, namely a book about cosmetics. I find this information useful for consumers because "Tartrazine" is said to be linked to causing cancer.

Now, what would be the next step for me to get this information published? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunpoint (talk • contribs) 14:55, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Sunpoint. The next step is for you and Jytdog and probably Alexbrn to discuss the issue on the article's talk page, and try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree, dispute resolution explains what to do next. Note that the goal is to reach consensus on making the article as good as it can be: this may or may not include the information which you want included. --ColinFine (talk) 15:12, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello Colin, thank you very much for your response. Do I just type on the talk page? Do I add the information that was deleted? Is there anything else I need to conside when doing this? Sunpoint (talk) 15:28, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I have posted this on the TALK page now. What next? Do I need to "invite" the other users or an administrator? Thank you for your help, and I am sorry for the rookie questions. Sunpoint (talk) 15:37, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Leave a message on the talk pages of the other users asking them to participate in the discussion. You don't need an admin for this.--ukexpat (talk) 15:42, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Because you have been editing for a few years but have some very basic questions, I have posted a welcome message to your talk page that is normally given to new editors and contains links to many policies and guidelines. Reading some of them might be helpful to you. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:53, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Sunpoint: claims about X causing cancer fall into medical claims and require not merely a "source" like a book but a specific medical appropriate source as described at WP:MEDRES . -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:54, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Interview for my dissertation

hello, My name is yilmaz. I am doing master at University of Sussex in the field of media and cultural studies and I am writing dissertation about Wikipedia as a commons but I need to have interviews with at least three (3) Wikipedians. I put an interview form down here, which consists of twelve questions. The interview is crucial to analyse the main logic of Wikipedia and digital commons. I hope you will help me for this. This is link for the online interview <redacted link> Best Regards Yilmaz — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yilmazaliskan (talk • contribs) 18:50, 20 July 2015‎

Please read Wikipedia:Research recruitment and Wikipedia:Ethically researching Wikipedia. You need the consensus of the Wikipedia community to conduct on-Wikipedia research using interviews etc. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:16, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

How can an essay and proposed Wikipedia policy, guideline, or process say that consensus is needed for this to happen? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.178.180.6 (talk • contribs) 19:21, 20 July 2015‎

Compliance with policy is a requirement under our terms of use - though obtaining prior informed consent is a general requirement for such academic research, as I would hope any institution teaching a master's degree would make clear. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:40, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

but there isn't any policy. There is an informational page and a proposal of a future Wikipedia policy, guideline, or process. Wikipedia:Ethically researching Wikipedia is an informational page that says "Where required, they may also need to obtain permission to carry out research of Wikipedia editors from appropriate bodies at their research institutions." It does not say they need community consensus. Wikipedia:Research recruitment is a proposal, there isn't community consensus that this is binding. So again how can either of those two say they must do something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.178.180.6 (talk • contribs) 19:49, 20 July 2015‎

Can you clarify whether you are Yilmaz or not (and log in if you are) - I'm not going to engage in an abstract argument here, this is a help desk. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:51, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

When you post here, you should sign your posts with four tildes ~~~~. Also, if you are Yilmaz, please stop editing logged out and log in before editing. If you can't take Wikipedia guidelines and policies on how to edit seriously enough to follow those guidelines, we may have difficulty taking you seriously. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:55, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I am not Yilmaz. I believe you are giving bad advice at the help desk. There is no current policy that says he needs to get consensus from the community before doing interviews. You should not be telling people there are requirements when there are none. If you can't take me seriously because I don't do some stupid little signature thing, so be it. here are your 4 stupid little tildes 155.178.180.6 (talk) 20:00, 20 July 2015 (UTC) p.s. corrected a spelling error, wouldn't want you to not take me seriously because I made a spelling mistake. Here are you 4 stupid little tildes again. 155.178.180.6 (talk) 20:06, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Pointing out to a Master's student that prior consent is generally required for academic research in the social sciences is hardly 'bad advice' - and it remains so regardless of the precise status of the guiding material I linked. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:24, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

But pointing out that those pages say he must have community consensus is bad advice and then compounding it by saying that the TOS require following policy when there isn't any policy requiring community consensus is bad advice. If you had said that prior consent is generally required we wouldn't be having this conversation. Robert McClenon, here are your 4 stupid little tildes so you can take me seriously. 155.178.180.6 (talk) 20:28, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

You appear to be under the misapprehension that Wikipedia is a court of law. It isn't and such policies and guidelines as we have are there to ensure that Wikipedia resources are put to their intended purpose - creating and maintaining an encyclopaedia. We don't need explicit rules about every other possible use such resources might be put to - people using Wikipedia for other purposes (including conducting research without permission) risk having their editing privileges withdrawn. That is how this place works. And since that is how it works, we have in the past blocked people for engaging in research (or what they claimed to be research) without permission. Regardless of whether a page that states that it "describes a communal consensus" is actually policy, it is a fair reflection of the reality - and I was advising Yilmaz of the reality. Which is undoubtedly better advice than your Wikilawyering. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:39, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Yilmaz: If you ever make another, approved, attempt at asking people these 12 questions, I suggest that you first rewrite questions 10 and 12 so that they make sense. 10 is a syntactically valid sentence, but I can't guess what it means; 12 is not even a valid sentence. Maproom (talk) 20:16, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Research recruitment is not a policy or a guideline, indeed it looks to me like a failed proposal that should be marked as historical. It has no consensus and hence no force. Moreover, even if it were a guideline, it says: "if you want enough Wikipedians to respond that you are posting invites on mailing lists and/or enough talkpages that you might be considered to be spamming people then you need to go through this process first." I don't see posting on a single help page as qualifying as "spamming" or "mass mailing". Accordingly I am going to restore the redacted link, and at least consider taking the interview myself. DES ^(talk) 21:14, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Please do not do that - as I have said, we have blocked contributors in the past over such issues (see [1][2]) and it would clearly be better to allow Yilmaz to decide how to proceed having been made aware of the facts. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:20, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I did it, and you reverted. I won't edit war over it, but I think your reversion is wrong, and I am considering raising the matter at ANI. As for your threat to block over posting a single link to a survey, the case you link to above involved someone who apparently advertised a survey to the personal talk pages roughly 30 different users, which is a far cry from a single post on a public page that no one has to read or respond to. I would like to see where in the blocking policy such a block would be authorized -- at the moment it seems to me like an out-of-process block which, if performed, ought to be undone promptly. I did take the survey, and of course anyone interested can find the link in the history. As to the question of research needing informed consent, of course it does -- individual consent. But choosing to follow a clearly marked link to a survey is a way of giving such consent. Nor was anything in the survey objectionable or intrusive, in my view. DES ^(talk) 21:43, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I have not made a 'threat to block' - I pointed out that a block regarding conducting research without permission had occurred in the past. And I would note that you seem not to be aware of the full background to this. It isn't a simple matter of a single post here - Yilmaz has been posting to individual talk pages, soliciting a response. And I repeat - it would seem appropriate to wait until Yilmaz responds before proceeding further. Why the rush to escalate things? AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:54, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

It seems that he pre-selected three candidates and posted to their talk pages, although without the link to the survey. Two of them are two of Wikipedia's best conflict mediators. That isn't the same as what the previous editor was blocked for, but it isn't just this posting. Can someone who is uninvolved please collapse this section? I hope that this section, including a good-faith editor wanting to conduct a poorly worded survey and an irascible unregistered editor, doesn't have to go to ANI. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:02, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Why revision was undone

How can I find out why Gob Lofa undid my revision?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Octopus1066 (talk • contribs) 20:30, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

The place to ask that question is Talk: 1947–48 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine. However, his edit summary said "NPOV", so he thought that your edit presented a non-neutral view of a controversial topic. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:39, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Should this new used be reported?

user:99.53.112.186 started editing 3 days ago. His first edits where congratulating other new users. But those new users did not exist before his congratulations.( e.g. [3]). Then he congratulated them twice, undid himself and so on.

He edited Maddison Elliott and undid other user, with no explanation. The deleted text was immediately restored by a regular user.

Should I report this new user? if so, in which notice board? thanks Ykantor (talk) 20:37, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I have been trying to assume good faith, and failed. He is up to something dishonest, though I can't guess what his motives could be. I don't know where he should be reported. Maproom (talk) 20:49, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, scratch that. It may be good faith, on the part of a script trying to act the part of an editor at about this level of competence. Maproom (talk) 21:31, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@99.53.112.186:, I will appreciate it if you explain your edits? Ykantor (talk) 16:53, 21 July 2015 (UTC) Ykantor (talk) 06:08, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

According to the third paragraph in Wikipedia:Notifications, you can't ping an IP user. ―Mandruss ☎ 07:55, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

TalkBack message will notify them if they are still using the same IP. Supdiop (Talk🔹Contribs) 08:15, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I am trying to act in good faith and prevent vandalism. Would it help if I gave a summary for each of my edits? I only undo edits if I think it's against Wikipedia policy. I am not up to anything bad. I'm trying to help out. Should I change the way I help out? I'll admit hat the two edits you have listed above were bad calls by me. I apologize for that. But I promise that I want to help out. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 17:16, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

If you undo or revert another editor, you should indicate in the edit summary why you undid or reverted the edit. If it was vandalism, the edit summary can be "revert vandalism" or something like that. If you think it was vandalism but are not sure, you can use a less harsh edit summary, like "revert questionable edit" or "revert unsourced addition" or whatever. Another way that you can help out would be to register an account. This will give you various privileges, as well as protecting against having your IP address change from time to time. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:29, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

I see that you have not been using edit summaries. The use of edit summaries is strongly encouraged. You can help out by using edit summaries. One editor was recently blocked for, among other things, never using edit summaries. (They have been unblocked after agreeing to follow guidelines.) Robert McClenon (talk) 17:32, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

When you see this, please tell me what I need to change. Please don't report me, I am not here to cause any harm. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 17:39, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Is there a revision that will qualify our submitted article to be published?

I recently submitted an article at the request of a business client to Wikipedia for publishing and it was deleted as a "Blatant misuse of Wikipedia as a web host" - can you tell me if there is a way to revise the page to make it acceptable. the address of the page is User:Grantlawllc Thanks for any assistance you can offer. Tom Langner — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:249:E00:8B07:FA1E:DFFF:FEE7:7F65 (talk) 21:06, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

It seems not. You were permanently banned from editing Wikipedia, within three minutes of posting your question. Maproom (talk) 21:11, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Incidentally, if you are editing Wikipedia 'at the request of a business client', you are required to explicitly declare the fact under the Wikimedia Terms of Use: [4]. You should also be aware of our conflict of interest policy. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:16, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Embedding youtube videos in WP articles

Hi. Is it actually possible to embed a youtube video into an article, rather than including it as an external link? If so, I have a related question (other than 'how do I do this?'). I have in mind this Pathe News clip from Youtube which certainly appears to have been uploaded by the original copyright holder but does this mean it would be useable here on a WP license? I suspect not but I have looked all around to find out and cannot find the answer. Many thanks in advance Meetthefeebles (talk) 21:35, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Unless the material has been uploaded to Youtube on a Creative Commons license (which is an option there [5]), I don't think it can be used here. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:42, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Hmmmm...I thought that might be the situation. If a video is licensed with a CCL, can it be added? I mean to say, is it technically possible? (like adding images, perhaps?) Meetthefeebles (talk) 22:03, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

(e/c) Hey Meetthefeebles. Videos cannot be "embedded" here in the normal sense of playing directly from their source, but video's can technically be taken and uploaded in finicky ways (i.e., using only Ogg Theora or WebM) and then can be made to play in articles. See Wikipedia:Videos and Wikipedia:Creation and usage of media files#Video. But to the best of my understanding, that video is licensed under the standard YouTube license, meaning in turn it retains its original copyright, which means in turn it is fully copyrighted and will not be out of copyright until at least 2021, and very probably significantly longer ("70 years after the last to die of: principal director, author of screenplay, author of dialogue, or composer of music specifically created for and used in the film"; see List of countries' copyright lengths]) – so the 2021 year is pegged to the earliest it could potentially enter the public domain – if everyone died in a bizarre gardening accident the same year of publication. While we do allow use of non-free content under fair use if certain strict requirements are met, I do not see any way the video could be uploaded under it. "Minimal use" would require only a screenshot or at most very short segment, and "contextual significance" would require that use to be only in an article about or commenting directly on the newsreel itself. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:27, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I figured when I couldn't find instructions on how to embed that this meant it couldn't be done. I'll have to make do with a screenshot I think. Thanks for a comprehensive answer Meetthefeebles (talk) 08:21, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Reference problems

I'm trying to edit my first article in a personal sandbox (User:Wpulley/sandbox). I'm using the drop-down template for a source that you fill out after clicking on "cite" then "template." I've filled out the access date two different ways, both 13 May 2015 and May 13, 2015. However, when I click "Save page," I get the following error message in red print where the access date should appear: "Check date values in: |date= (help);"

A second problem: I'm citing an article within a book. But I only see one box for "title." As this point, I've put both the article (in quotes) followed by the book in the title box. However, the "Save page" then causes both to show up in italics. Typically, the article title would show up in quote but not in italics like the book. Any idea on how to make it happen this way using the template? Thanks,

Wpulley (talk) 22:04, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Wpulley: The first problem isn't in accessdate but in |date= as the message says. Change date=Marcy 27, 2015 to say March. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:26, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

There is actually also a problem with accessdate. It's only used for online content to give a date when a url had the specified content, so it isn't displayed by {{Cite book}} when no url is given. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:30, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Talk page archives indexing

On the page Talk:World War II, I placed the code for archive indexing, as explained at User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn. I defined multiple "mask" parameters, as explained at the said page ("you can specify multiple mask parameters"...). But, for some reason, Legobot only indexes posts at [[Talk:World War II, but is not indexing archives (Talk:World War II/Archive Index). I don't know why or how to fix this. I posted a question at User talk:Legobot a month ago, but nobody answered. Maybe you can help me? Vanjagenije (talk) 22:23, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Vanjagenije: After reviewing the bot source code, especially lines 160+, I have removed the numeric suffixes from the opt-in template. If this works, I'll update the bot documentation page. Unfortunately this adds the page to Category:Pages using duplicate arguments in template calls. For most templates, having multiple parameters with the same name is an error, but this one is parsed by specially-written bot code. -- John of Reading (talk) 05:02, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

@John of Reading: Thank you. I received an error message ("duplicate arguments") when tried to do so. The bot runs every few days, so I'll review if it's OK in few days. Vanjagenije (talk) 07:03, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Kingdom of Europa (East Europe)

The article I prepared on my Kingdom of Europa was apparently erased summarily by Wikipedia without notifying me of the intention and allowing me to edit.

Yet there is another article Kingdom of Europa which was apparently discriminatorily accepted. What makes this unknown kingdom more notable than mine?

--Hmkingroman (talk) 23:12, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Hmkingroman: What is that other article? Give us the title. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:15, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Hmkingroman: Please read WP:OR and try to conceptualize the fact that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia (and one that merely collects and collates what other reliable sources have already published ). -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:16, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no article on any 'Kingdom of Europa', and nor is it likely to ever have one since it appears to be an entirely fictitious entity. Are you perhaps referring to another Wiki [6]? If so, we have no connection with it, and no control over its content. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:19, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

The deleted draft was a mess, sourced to the article's creator and promoting a claim of his to be a king, thus purely self-promotional. Doug Weller (talk) 09:46, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

The OP is a long-time intermittent editor whose recent edits appear to be posting patent nonsense that he is a king (and his user name is that claim). Can an administrator warn him that those claims may be treated as vandalism and can be blocked? The OP should read the boomerang essay and realize that posting to a public forum, such as this one, that his patent nonsense is being deleted, is not useful. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:57, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Already been done: [7] AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:01, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

July 21

Referencing errors on Hip dysplasia (canine)

Reference help requested. I am having trouble correctly referencing this section. References are included, but not in the correct format. Please help... Thanks, 165.228.93.153 (talk) 00:23, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

The pmid= parameter mut have a strictly numeric value, the identifying number from the PubMed database. I have removed the invalid pmid. DES ^(talk) 00:35, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

What happened to my page?

I can't find my wikipedia page that I recently created for the John C. Wells Planetarium, and so I checked the deletion log and couldn't locate it. I put the title in correctly and even went through the history searching: still nothing. I then saw that it could have been redirected to another existing title, which I believe is the new section under the James Madison University Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Madison_University#John_C._Wells_Planetarium. The information that was put under this section was sparse and poorly written, barely using any of the content from my original page. I edited what I could, however I don't believe our content was appropriately utilized or showcased. Is it possible to contend this redirection, or to track down my original page? Katie at John C. Wells Planetarium (talk) 02:45, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

• Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John C. Wells Planetarium. That discussion was opened on 29 June, as the notification on your talk page says. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 02:49, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Please pay particular attention to the comments about you writing such things as "our telescopes". Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which is unaffiliated with your planetarium and should keep a neutral point of view when we have an article about anything. We are not here to support or advertise the planetarium. Dismas|^(talk) 03:24, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

@Katie at John C. Wells Planetarium: You can find the old revisions by clicking John C. Wells Planetarium, click "Redirected from John C. Wells Planetarium" at top of the page and then click the "View history" tab. You could also reach the page history by clicking "Contributions" at top of any page to see all your edits and then click the "hist" link at an edit to the page, or a time stamp to go directly to a revision. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:01, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Imtiaz Dharker

imtiaz Mobarik or Darker attended hutchesons Girls Grammar school in Glasgow from 1961 to 1968 from the age of 11. I was in her class at school and she is not 61. Please phone the school in Glasgow to check — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.171.39 (talk) 05:55, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

You may well be correct, but Wikipedia reports only what is published elsewhere. It is not unusual for parents of pupils born outside the UK to mis-represent their children's true age, but I think you would have known if she was four years younger than her classmates. I'll put a "citation needed" on the birth date. Perhaps someone can discover the truth published elsewhere? Dbfirs 06:15, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

unproductive contribs

• Sanjay namdev (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Can somebody check & fix the Wikipedia:Department directory, this guy has mucked it around adding his email/facebook crapola. tks 92.24.99.161 (talk) 10:02, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

I've reverted his edits and given him a warning. It looks as if he's been uploading self-promotional material, so an admin may need to take action. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:16, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Nominated the uploaded files for deletion too, thanks for pointing this out. GermanJoe (talk) 12:54, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Wild animal photos

I have some animal photos (a fly and a bird) which I took during my last trip to the beach. Are they of interest to Wikipedia or Wikimedia?Lbertolotti (talk) 13:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Probably. Please upload them to Commons so that they are available to all the Wikimedia projects. Please also be as specific as you can identifying the subject and the location where photo was taken.--ukexpat (talk) 15:20, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

@Lbertolotti if you are uncertain about the species the Science Reference Desk can help to identify them. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:20, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Inciter article rejected

Hi, my article was rejected today. It says it's been copied from web page www.inciter1.com. The whole biography stands on that website because i wrote it. How can we manage to set wikipedia article about inciter?

Thank you in advance.

All the best, Igor Cecelja — Preceding unsigned comment added by Igorcecelja (talk • contribs) 13:59, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Please see Donating copyrighted materials for information on reusing content on Wikipedia that you have previously published elsewhere. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:34, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The message on your user talk page from November 2013 included a link to Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources. Looking at your sandbox draft, one thing I notice is that the draft has no references, so please read WP:1st and WP:Referencing for beginners. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:35, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) Hello, Igorcecelja. There are several separate issues here. The first one is copyright: with very limited exceptions, all material in Wikipedia is required to be freely usable by anybody for any purpose, so we require that material be either in the public domain, or explicitly released under a suitable Creative Commons licence. If you hold the copyright to the text on that webpage, (which you may or may not do), then you have the right to license it suitably - but you must do so explicitly either on that webpage or by following the procedure in donating copyright materials.

Secondly, it is very unlikely that material from a band's website will be appropriate for inclusion in a Wikipedia article anyway. Wikipedia articles are required to be written in a neutral point of view, based on (mostly independent) published source. Phrases like "With strong will and determination to produce a full-length album", which I see on the inciter website, are completely inappropriate for any Wikipedia article.

Thirdly, judging by your name, you probably have a conflict of interest in writing about this band at all. You are discouraged from doing so, because you may well find it difficult to write in a suitably neutral way.

Fourthly, Wikipedia will not accept any article on the band unless it meets our criteria for notability - basically, that several people who have no connection with the band at all have thought it worth writing at length about it, and had their writing published in reliable sources such as major newspapers. --ColinFine (talk) 14:38, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Created new article ...where is it?

2 weeks ago, I created an article on a brand. When I created the article, I had not yet created an account. So now, I can't go back and see if it's been rejected or if it's in the process of going live on the site. I searched for it and it's not on the site. How can I check on this now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caterina.merenda (talk • contribs) 14:02, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

@Caterina.merenda: Which brand? Maybe you can find it at [8]. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:08, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

How to publish new article?

I have created this article (Draft:Ismail_Marjan) but cannot publish it, can help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oahid (talk • contribs) 14:23, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

I've added a submission template to your draft, but before you submit it please read the links on your user talk page, particularly WP:1st. You also need to look at WP:Referencing for beginners. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:29, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

I see that you submitted the draft without reading the links provided, so (not surprisingly) the submission has today been declined. Before submitting it again, please read WP:Referencing for beginners. . - David Biddulph (talk) 10:27, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Larry Tearry

Larry Teary of Wake Forest University was the first black center to play in the NFL..Detroit Lions 1977...your facts are wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:37DA:C3C0:5862:BB51:4096:E59F (talk) 20:01, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

If the facts that you say are incorrect are in an article, post your comment with a reliable source on the article talk page. I can't guess what article you are referring to since Larry Teary doesn't have an article (but is a valid red link if he indeed played in the NFL) and this is your only edit from this address. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:07, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Most likely Larry Tearry (fixed in header). But we still need 1) a reliable source 2) where exactly in Wikipedia is the current info wrong? GermanJoe (talk) 20:10, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

The OP is saying that he played in 1977. The article is saying that he was in the 1978 draft. Please provide a reliable source at Talk: Larry Tearry. Also, if you have a reliable source saying that he was the first black NFL center, please provide it on the talk page and that can be added. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:09, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

The article already has four links to pages saying 1978. All other sources I can find also say 1978, for example the Detroit Lions official website at http://www.detroitlions.com/team/history/draft-history/draft-history-1970-1979.html and two other pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:32, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

my page is being deleted

why is it being deleted. Is it because the club has an amateur status?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hbafc (talk • contribs) 21:33, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

It is being deleted because it fails to provide evidence from published third-party reliable sources that it meets our notability guidelines. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:40, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Also, because it's an amateur football team, which generally aren't notable enough under Wikipedia's notability guideline for football. Have they played in the FA Cup? If so, then they might be notable enough for an article. If not, then they fail WP:GNG and WP:NFOOTY. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:46, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

• I've deleted the article as a copyright violation of these sites: [9], [10], [11], [12], [13]. I have also blocked the user as {{uw-spamublock}}. --ceradon (talk • contribs) 01:21, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

July 22

Redirect into a category?

Hello. I wanted to put the entry -gate into Category:English suffixes. However, -gate redirects to List of scandals with "-gate" suffix, and putting the full title of the article into that category wouldn't make sense. Is there a way to just have -gate show up in the category listing? Thank you.    → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 03:50, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

@Michael J: Yes, see Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects. I think this example fits the section WP:INCOMPATIBLE, and the section WP:REDCAT shows how to make the edit. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:01, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Basically, you go to -gate and put the category *there* on the redirect page, not where it redirects to.Naraht (talk) 11:46, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

I did it. Thank you.    → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 03:23, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Article removed because of copyright after donating it to Wikipedia

I have send the requested email, where I confirm that I´m the holder of the copyright and donate it to Wikipedia on 07/14/2015 and also got a automated replay that confirms the receiving. But for reasons I don´t understand the article was labeled with a peedy deletion nomination and got removed. What have I missed? Can the article be restored if things sort out as a failture?— Preceding unsigned comment added by DFDWIS (talk • contribs)

pretend that instead of "deleted because of unambiguous copyright violation" the notice said "deleted as unambiguous advertising" because the end results will be the same. That is inappropriate material for an encyclopedia article. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 06:06, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the learning here is that even if the copyright issue is dealt with, material copied from the subject's website is almost never appropriate in tone for an encyclopedia. --ukexpat (talk) 15:04, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Videos

I want to. Seach for wideos and download i dont know how — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adriano gabriel (talk • contribs) 11:12, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

you can watch on Youtube why download? Supdiop (Talk🔹Contribs) 13:28, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Placeholding or vandalism?

Idly looking up the article McGibbon (an ancestral form of my mother's surname), I find that all but one of the entries are followed by the word "nonce" in the place where in the article MacGibbon, for example, disambiguating descriptions appear.

I presume that this is being used in the 3rd sense given in the article nonce until someone gets round to adding further information, but given the offensive (in the UK) 2nd meaning in that article, could not something else be used? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 13:00, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Looking at the article history, that aspect is obviously the result of this vandalism by an IP in May; I've reverted it. Thanks for pointing it out. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:09, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Vandalism to articles that are not watch-listed can go unnoticed for a long time. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:57, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Service is my only joy :-) . {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 13:56, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Talk template for expert

What is the talk page template for linking to a wikipedia user who is an expert on the subject?MACassist (talk) 14:16, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

That's {{Expert-subject}}.--ukexpat (talk) 15:02, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

The question asks for a talk page template. Until recently there was {{Maintained}}, but it was deleted after this discussion. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:04, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

{{Expert-talk}}.--ukexpat (talk) 15:55, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

The maintained template wasn't used to identify an expert on the subject. It was used to identify an editor who had ownership of an article. At least, that was the opinion of some in the deletion discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:34, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Such a template would effectively allow a single editor to "hijack" the role of one or more WikiProjects. Subject experts are found at relevant WikiProjects. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:28, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Need help for disambiguation

I created a page Deepak Sharma a few minutes back. When I clicked on "What links here". I find many links. What I understand is, there was a page with this name which was deleted after AFDs. This is a different Deepak Sharma. I dont know how to sort thos out. Plz help Sulabhvarshney (talk) 17:43, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

It doesn't appear that the Deepak Sharma you are writing about is notable either. I would suggest taking this draft back to your sandbox and working on it. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:51, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Spamming alert for online government documents archive site

I work at the State Library of Kansas as state government documents librarian. We have an online digital library of Kansas state agency publications at: http://cdm16884.contentdm.oclc.org

I've been adding the above link to the KGI Online Library for various agency articles on Wikipedia as an External Link within Kansas state agency pages this morning offering people a chance to see publications issued by the agencies in these Wikipedia articles.

Two examples:

Kansas Department of Administration Kansas Department of Administration External links

Kansas Department of Administration official website

Kansas Department of Administration publications online at the KGI Online Library (scroll down to agency)

Kansas Department of Agriculture Kansas Department of Agriculture External links

Kansas Department of Agriculture official website

Kansas Department of Agriculture publications online at the KGI Online Library (scroll down to agency)

I got an automatic message just now from Wikipedia asking me if I was spamming and, new to Wikipedia editing, wanted to make sure that I wouldn't be banned and/or have our online collection of digitized Kansas government publications banned from Wikipedia.

Is this sort of linking a good resource for Kansas government agency articles in Wikipedia?

Thanks

Bill Sowers Kansas Government Documents Librarian State Library of Kansas — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kansasgovdocs (talk • contribs)

Hello, @Kansasgovdocs: The external links may or may not be appropriate depending upon the article and the contents at the external link. The guidelines for external links are found at: WP:EL. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:42, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

And there is a related noticeboard at: WP:ELN.--ukexpat (talk) 19:59, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

The way all the links you have inserted say "(scroll down to agency)" increases the impression of spam. If you are going to add links, you could at least add links that go directly to the relevant place. Maproom (talk) 10:29, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

July 23

Referencing errors on Jason Tait

Reference help requested. How can I fix my cite error on Jason Tait? Thanks, 97.88.207.211 (talk) 01:22, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

You didn't actually use the reference anywhere. I assumed you meant it on the endorsement statement you added, so I fixed that. OTOH, I'm not sure that item should stay. Rwessel (talk) 01:28, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Guideline for ensuring an article has only one major subject?

I know there is a guideline that an article should be about a single subject (e.g., an article about Jersey should not be about the garment and the islands) but I cannot find the guideline. Can someone please point me to the guideline? I'm having a problem with Hypocenter.-Arch dude (talk) 02:49, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

@Arch dude: Wikipedia:Disambiguation? ―Mandruss ☎ 03:00, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

WP:CONSPLIT is not a guideline but relevant to your case. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:08, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Regarding the specific example, WP:NOT#DICTIONARY seems to apply, since there are two different concepts involved: "articles rarely, if ever, contain more than one distinct definition or usage of the article's title". AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:10, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Arch dude, back when I first started editing Wikipedia, some ten years ago, if two short articles had the same name (particularly two different people with the same name) it was not uncommon for there to be in effect two articles on one page, separated by a horizontal line. This practice has long since ceased, but I seem to recall that some guideline page still mentioned it as a possibility long after it was pretty much obsolete. I don't recall any formal guideline now that prohibits this.

After looking a bit i found Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout#Horizontal rule which says: "Horizontal rules—a series of hyphens (----) resulting in a straight line—are deprecated; that is, they are no longer used in articles. Rules were once employed to separate multiple meanings of a single article's name, but this task is now accomplished through disambiguation pages." I think that is sufficient. DES ^(talk) 03:12, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Editing the Femarelle (DT56A) article

Femarelle (DT56a) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hello, My name is Corin, for COI issuse i am asking for your help with the Femarelle (DT56a) article. On its Wiki page there is not enough information,only harmful, incorrect, sabotage-like information. I have tried several times to upload new, scientific, up to date data with a lot of references but it was deleted over and over again. (you can see it in the View history Tab). In addition, i have tried using the "talk" page, that didn't help and only made thing worst. I am NOT trying to sell or promote this product through Wikipedia,but the information that is in place now is very bad and incorrect, all i want a short informative summary of this subject. Wikipedia is a tool for knowledge, not a place for harmful actions against competing products.

Please help me make the Femarelle page informative with no promotional nature or harmful information.

Thank you --Corin at Secure (talk) 08:04, 23 July 2015 (UTC)corin at secure

Corin, Talk:Femarelle (DT56a) is the place to discuss the article, and the other editors are giving you good responses there. I realize you don't like the responses, but they are right. —teb728 t c 10:23, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Have you read WP:MEDRS, as twice recommended to you on the article's talk page? Maproom (talk) 10:23, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

NB I have moved the article to Femarelle over the old redirect - the stuff in parentheses isn't required as a disambiguator as there is no other "Femarelle" article.--ukexpat (talk) 14:03, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

What if the edit summary of an article translation has not been appropriate?

Wikipedia:Translation#How_to_translate explains how to execute translations from another language correctly. This includes attribution in the edit summary and placing the respective template on the article talk page. If however the creator of a translated article has not abided by the first rule, thus not attributed the foreign-language article as source - is there anything that could & should be done about it? --KnightMove (talk) 09:53, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

You can't do anything about the bad edit summary but you can make sure the relevant template ({{Translated page}}) is on the talk page, and in this case I would definitely make sure to include the version and insertversion parameters. If the translation was recent and there have been no edits to the article since, you could consider making a dummy edit and leaving a summary providing attribution (e.g. "Previous revision ([[Special:Diff/xxxxxx]]) translated content from [X Wikipedia]'s article [[name]]; see its history for attribution"). — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 10:06, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

correction requested

Earth's internal heat budget — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.46.66.93 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

What correction? Supdiop (Talk🔹Contribs) 11:28, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

creating an account,i have given the required data .but could not get registered why?

TO WHOMSOEVER,I VOLUNTEERED MYSELF .EVEN AFTER THE REQUIRED DETAILS GIVEN I AM NOT ABLE TO CREAT AN ACCOUNT .WHY? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gramianrajendran (talk • contribs)

You are already signed into your account: Gramianrajendran. Supdiop (Talk🔹Contribs) 12:03, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Your post here shows you have the account User:Gramianrajendran. Special:Log/Gramianrajendran shows the account creation. Why do you think there is a problem? This is just a wild guess but if your concern is the message when you click your user name then it only means your account hasn't created a user page for the account. Doing this is optional. If you want to do it then just write something in the box at User:Gramianrajendran and save the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:04, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Wiki infobox image upload

Hello, I was wondering how to upload an image into the infobox adding fish.png worked, but I dont know how to get the file name for my files or where I have tot o first upload to use this function — Preceding unsigned comment added by DayneStone (talk • contribs) 13:37, 23 July 2015‎ (UTC)

Images with free licenses should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Images that qualify as fair use (see Wikipedia:Image use policy) can be uploaded by autoconfirmed users to Wikipedia at Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 14:01, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

But note two things: Wikipedia's non-free use criteria are more stringent than "fair use" and most images would not meet them.--ukexpat (talk) 14:08, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Note also that an image for the infobox is not the most urgent thing that needs dealing with on The Herald West Wales. The article currently meets a number of the criteria for speedy deletion. I have provided you with a number of links on your user talk page. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:19, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Lost interwikis in Chicago Fire (TV series)

Due to this edit the interwiki links mysteriously got lost. I don't know why yet... AussieLegend didn't do anything than just reverting the last two edits. Also on wikidata, everything seems correct. Any ideas how to fix it? Chaddy (talk) 15:42, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

I see the same interlanguage links before and after that edit:

Chinese Dutch French German Italian Japanese Korean Norwegian Polish Portuguese Russian Slovak Spanish Swedish Ukrainian

Try to bypass your cache. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:50, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

After this edit, they are back now. Seems really to be just a cache problem. Chaddy (talk) 16:41, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Center for Healthcare Innovation

I realize that my page has been marked for speedy deletion due to copyright issues but I am in the process of e mailing all parties involved. What code can I put on the page/my user page so I can obtain the 7 day grace period needed to confirm material usage on my page? BTW the link to the page is in the subject of this message. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CHI Site Wiki (talk • contribs) 16:09, 23 July 2015‎ (UTC)

@CHI Site Wiki: We do not have any "grace period" for copyright violations. Note that even with an appropriate release of copyright for use by anyone anywhere, the content is mostly completely inappropriate for an encyclopedia and would not be maintained as displayed anyway.

As a side note, it is not "your page" - it is an encyclopedia article, apparently about a subject wherein you have a conflict of interest -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:24, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

I see that the page was deleted yesterday for the same reasons, but was recreated today. Generating the page again when you knew that it was a breach of Wikipedia's policies could be regarded as disruptive editing. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

I've put a causeblock on this one, and added a warning against disruptive editing (i.e., removing speedy deletion warnings on articles they (re-)created themselves) as behavior that could get them reblocked if they get unblocked for a name change. --Orange Mike | Talk 23:57, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, CHI Site Wiki. The article is marked for speedy deletion not only for copyright but also because "in its current form it serves only to promote or publicise an entity, person, product, or idea, and would require a fundamental rewrite in order to become encyclopedic." This is to be expected, because if the copy comes from the Center's own website it is very proper that it should be promotional: if it were suitable for a Wikipedia article it would not be doing its job on the Center's site. (This is why it is rarely worth taking the trouble to get the copyright holder to release text under a licence suitable for Wikipedia: it may be worth it for images, but not usually for text).

My advice to you would be to let it get deleted, read Your first article, and also read Conflict of interest, to understand why you are discouraged from writing this article at all, but tells you what you need to do if you are going to; and then if you decide to go ahead, create an draft using the Article wizard. You probably need to change your username as well: User names must not suggest that they are used to edit on behalf or an organisation. --ColinFine (talk) 16:31, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Quotation marks

I found an article where a few of the "text", 'text' quotation marks had been replaced by curly “text”, ‘text’ marks, against the recommendation at the manual of style. I found that when I clicked ctrl-F in my browser (Chrome, running on Windows 7) and searched for “, it found all of “ ” ", which made it harder for me to find the ones that needed replacing. Is there a way (using the facilities of Wikipedia, or of some browser) to force it to search for exactly the character I specify, rather than just characters resembling it? Maproom (talk) 16:59, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes, if you use Wikipedia's native search and replace facility it differentiates between curly ("smart") quotes and straight. Click on advanced in the edit bar above the editing screen. The icon to invoke it is . More specifically in:

You can see it all the way to the right of the screenshot. However, I do have some memory of an issue in the past where someone's browser or computer was automatically switching curly for straight when they copied and pasted, i.e., when they copied the curly quotes from the article and attempted to paste it into this search and replace function, their browser had already "fixed" it to straight, so the search and replace didn't work. Anyway, see if this works. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:27, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

In IE11 you can copy paste the 66 quotation marks into the "search for" box of Wikipedia's "search and replace" and use replace all to replace them with straight quotes, and then repeat for the 99 quotation marks - Arjayay (talk) 17:34, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

How to edit a page

Hi have a question on how to edit a page... I have access to the page and would like to add more information to the page. Is there a simple way to put all the info in and have wikipedia insert the coding tools such as the parentheses to allow the page to link to another page?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:5B0A:E300:2D0F:A9FA:87D5:61C (talk • contribs)

You edit article pages just as you edited this page. See WP:REFB for information on how to place citations to reliably published sources that verify the content you wish to add. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:04, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

ignored ??

I looked up how to fix the "ignored" error in the citation, it says "remove the extraneous text" and add equal sign.. but how do I know what part of the text is supposedly extraneous?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Moon822 (talk • contribs)

@Moon822: There is probably an extraneous "|" in the citation. The wikicoding thinks that everything after a | is a new parameter and is looking for a valid parameter name to come next. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:43, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

 Fixed Instead of listing just the URL, you needed to add the parameter |url= before adding the URL, see my edit. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:49, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The error message tells you which text is being ignored, and the word "help" in the error message is in blue to tell you that it is a wikilink, in this case to Help:CS1 errors#text ignored. It tells you that it is expecting a parameter name and an equals sign. Presumably in your case you intended "url=". - David Biddulph (talk) 20:55, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

I find the help text difficult to parse: "To resolve this error, remove the extraneous text, add '=', add an appropriate parameter name from the citation template you're using to complete the parameter, or properly encode vertical bars in URLs and titles."

Far into the sentence comes an "or" which hints that you should only do one of the listed things. The poster apparently thought that "remove the extraneous text" was the first mandatory step and more should be done after that, but no text should be removed in this and many other cases. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:14, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Martineau family

What Have I done wrong with reference number One on the "Martineau Family" page Thanks Ted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.168.85.156 (talk • contribs)

 Done Hello Ted, fixed it for you. The reference had an incorrect date format as accessdate. GermanJoe (talk) 23:12, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks - I have done another edit on the Martineau family page (reference number 4) but it may not be correct - used a "st" on the date Please can you have a look at it Thanks Ted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.168.85.156 (talk • contribs)

 Done Fixed that too :). Use "date" to specify the date of publication, and generally all dates should be formatted in the same format. If you edit an existing article, you should follow the already existing date format of other references. Two quick points: Please sign your talkpage messages at the end with 4 tildes (like that: ~~~~. And WP:Referencing for beginners has additional information about Wikipedia's referencing system and is quite helpful for new editors. GermanJoe (talk) 23:38, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

sorry to bother u again Please can you help me do a link on the Martineau family page - opening pargraph section: Where it says ......Birmingham's Unitarian Church.... can we put a link on the word Unitarian to the wikipedia "Unitarianism" page? thanks T125.168.85.156 (talk) 23:41, 23 July 2015 (UTC) (I have tried to sign correctly)

You can create such links with square brackets (please see Help:Link for a detailed description). But "Unitarianism" is already linked a few lines above - in such cases another identical link nearby is usually avoided. GermanJoe (talk) 23:48, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

and you shouldnt link to a term in the middle of a name - the whole name should be linked or none of it: Birmingham Unitarian Church - acceptable; Birmingham Unitarian Church - not acceptable. Birmingham United, a Unitarian church, acceptable.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:55, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

I have been working on a project fir Asrari Nite Band but keep getting turned down I have no affiliation to the band and do not expect to get any comppensation just sharing a neutral collection of articles and history for the purpose that others may benefit from their great art as I have, I can prove I work for a financial institution for over 18 years and have nothing to do with the music industry. are you really sharing notable artists or just the one you seem worthy? it;s a bit prejudise if you ask meAstaridreams (talk) 01:23, 24 July 2015 (UTC) makimg me very sad