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 (but please don't ask in both places).

Ask a question

January 29

Neighbours

Half the time I use wikipedia, the i.p. edit before mine is on a topic I never edit. So I'm wondering, are those my siblings/relatives making those edits or is it my neighbours, or simply people in the same apartment block as me? 92.10.239.240 (talk) 02:26, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, 92.10.239.240. We really have no way of accurately answering that question. We don't know the specific details of your Internet connection, and who else is sharing it with you. The best I can really say is: yes, it could maybe be one of them, perhaps. It could also be complete strangers in a totally different location, if your ISP works that way. If you wish to avoid being associated with other anonymous editing from the same IP address (or group of IP addresses), I suggest that you create an account, it's free and easy to do so. Murph9000 (talk) 02:52, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Amitash Pradhan

Wish to inform that Amitash Pradhan plays the male lead role in the Hollywood movie HeartBeats as an Indian dance choreographer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Venuspradhan (talk • contribs) 06:19, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

That HeartBeats film is still an upcoming film. It is too early for an article on it. —teb728 t c 06:38, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

'Undefined' tags

Are other editors seeing <undefined> in 'small' in the edit tabs (source and visual editor) at the top of articles? Clicking on it just seems to open the tab in the usual way. Also Wiki has required me to log back in 4 times in the last 2 or 3 hours, which is not usual. Eagleash (talk) 12:49, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

@Eagleash: The undefined labels on the edit tabs has been discussed at WP:VPT#"Undefined" on edit links. I.e. it's a known issue, and the people that can do something about it probably know and are hopefully doing something about it. I don't know what would be causing your login session to expire. I'm managing to stay logged in without any issue. Make sure you are ticking the "keep me logged in" box (assuming you are not on a public or shared computer). Also, if you are on the move, with a constantly changing IP address, that could be resulting in your session being invalidated for security purposes. Beyond that, if it persists, try deleting all wikipedia.org and wikimedia.org cookies, as sometimes a bad / stuck cookie can cause odd problems with web logins. Murph9000 (talk) 13:06, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. There was a tip at the VPT page which said change language via the tool bar on the left and change back again. Did that & it seems to have worked. If I spend more than a few minutes on other pages and then click 'watchlist' it tells me I'm logged out. Usually goes about 24 hours before logging out...& that's if I don't click the 'keep me logged in button'. Eagleash (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Is it not best to have paragraphs written by known experts to be highlighted in some way?

When reading an article in Wikipedia about some subject, say on history, it would be nice to know which paragraphs were written entirely by a professional historian on the subject, in comparison to other paragraphs that may only have been written by enthusiasts.

I find it a bit uncomfortable reading some text that sounds interesting, but may contain subtle biases. Some wikipedia contributors might have some axe to grind and could try to paint certain topics in the way they want things to be seen, rather than how they truly are. If a professional in the subject is prepared to have their name tied to a paragraph or more in Wikipedia, I think that would give greater comfort to the readers that the information presented is of top quality.

I would really like to be able to know who wrote a particular paragraph in each Wikipedia article, if the contributor is happy to attach their name at the end of the block of text they write.

What is the general thinking right now on this?

Thanks

Al — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.201.232.212 (talk) 13:03, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Paragraphs at Wikipedia are not expected to be written directly by experts. However, they are expected to be cited to recognized experts. See WP:CITE. What is important is not who presses the keys to make the words appear, but rather who did the prior works being read and used as research for the person who is pressing the keys to make the words appear. --Jayron32 13:06, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Also, paragraphs are not fixed. Any text can be edited by others and many users have often contributed to the same paragraph. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:20, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I think you should be a bit more sceptical about historians. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 13:25, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks I agree with that. What I was wondering about I guess is what happens over something contentious. Like in a history of a battle for instance. A majority of contributors to an article may feel a battle was justified, whereas a small minority may feel it was not. You might get a situation where the majority constantly tries to dehumanize or bad mouth any of the minority contributors who are just trying to express their views. The majority might try to drown out the expression of the minority by flooding the page with lots of propaganda or belittling information. If an authoritative professional voluntarily attached their name to some blocks of text, would it help to put an end to a dispute like this? Thanks again, Al — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.201.232.212 (talk) 19:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Again, this is something that's not designed into the system, unless we're quoting directly. But you would still have Professor X pushing his/her latest point of view as described in their latest book, and ignoring those with whom they have an academic dispute. What we do is not let Professor X write the paragraph. We say how Professor X says this thing, and Professor Y says this other thing. A competition of interests can reach surprisingly reasonable results, eventually. Our job here is not really to evaluate the truth, but to describe what is thought to be known. Have a read of WP:TRUTH. I've been here a while now, and frankly seriously doubt that 'authorities' could do a better job. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 14:19, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Ideally, the opinions of contributors never ever figure in a Wikipedia article. Of course, this is an unattainable ideal. But if you ever find an article presenting an opinion - or any evalutive language - on anything whatever in Wikipedia's voice (as opposed to reporting that a cited relible source expresses that opinion), you are entitled to remove it. More subtle is the case where contributors disagree about which reliable sources to cite, or even which sources are reliable. --ColinFine (talk) 17:33, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Something that might be close to what you are looking for is a tool to pinpoint who first added certain text to an article. There is such a tool called Wikiblame. Let's say you wanted to know who added the phrase, "disrupted, disputed elections were still on-going in July," to the article on Hammerton Killick. You would visit WikiBlame and put that you want it to search the English version of the Wikipedia article Hammerton Killick for the phrase in question, and it spits out results which you can use in conjunction with the article history to learn that I inserted that phrase with this edit on February 17, 2015. It may not tell you if I'm an expert or not, though some people will put that sort of information on their user page, but hopefully it'll be of some help to you. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 21:23, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I agree with what I think @Zzuuzz: was hinting at, that if one imagines that the writings of "professional historians" do not include " subtle biases." . . ....well how about unsubtle biases? Carptrash (talk) 22:17, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Just as more food for thought: there are many, many subject matters for which there are no "experts". Wikipedia has articles about anything and everything. Is there an "expert" out there on the subject of the TV show The Brady Bunch? Is there an "expert" on the subject of the murder of JonBenét Ramsey? You get the idea. Many topics -- perhaps most -- do not have recognized so-called "experts". Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:51, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the fine comments here. Considering all of this, I think that when we have such a powerful thing such as Wikipedia, we must not underestimate its power to influence the general public for the better or the worse. If some bad thing starts occurring in the world, say mobs of people slaughtering certain groups because leaders of their community began scaremongering. Readers will look up articles on the topic in Wikipedia and may find an unresolved mood in the tone of some or all of the articles. There may be some supporting the killings and others condemning. A reader may look to the article as part of his/her information gathering on which side to take.

I would expect that Wikipedia would always be doing its upmost to bring readers as quickly as possible to a full explanation of the matter in the most convincing way possible so that people stop being led by the scaremongers. The problem is how do you get through sane ideas to a mob? Maybe that is nearly impossible, but at least the goal of trying to resolve the dispute in the fastest time possible is worthwhile.

I am not sure what the best way to get through to people is, but generally it seems to me that people tend to stop what they are doing and listen when a widely respected leader, or group of leaders on the subject tries to speak to them. Which is why I brought up the point about having recognized experts comments highlighted in some way, in comparison to anonymous edits. In theory, experts' comments would be more influential on the general public.

When I want to be as sure as I can be about something, I like to find out what the people closest to the topic and most expert on it have to say first. I also give equal weight to the comments of those under fire in some way. When volatile opinions are flying all over the place it is easy to get swept into one camp or the other. That is why if Wikipedia highlighted in a special coloured box or coloured text the comments from known experts, readers could browse to the most heavy weight points first and then read the anonymous edits in black and white text later if they wanted. Maybe Wikipedia's design system cannot implement this, and if so does that mean it is a weakness? Does it mean we are at the mercy of anonymous editors who can flood an article with carefully crafted quotations from leaders of various communities with dubious motives? I know not to believe everything I read, but I would like to feel that what I read at Wikipedia is of the highest quality, and not subject to manipulation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.201.232.212 (talk) 19:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. From time to time there are proposals regarding "experts" and article content - the most recent can be seen here Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 124#RfC on Wikipedia:Reform of Wikipedia. For the reason that these fail please reread my first sentence. MarnetteD|Talk 01:47, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

WHAT THE CRAP?

Why aren't my squiggles squiggling?!?! To be more precise the four tilde thing isn't working as of today... it's freaking me out!!! --Monochrome_Monitor 13:04, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

It worked for you just now. --Jayron32 13:04, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Oh great, now it's working. But it wasn't working on page for some reason --Monochrome_Monitor 13:05, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

There might be an open tag somewhere, like a nowiki tag or something similar, preventing the correct implementation of wikimarkup, on that talk page. --Jayron32 13:08, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It's not working on that page because there is an unterminated <ref> tag. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:10, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Hurriya

The word Hurriya is from Hurriat. Hurriat means freedom, Hurriya means freedom fighter (not freedom) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.184.131.30 (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, 76.184.131.30. A very quick search for "Hurriya Arabic" in Google seemed to suggest that it means freedom or liberty. Can you provide a pointer to any reliable source for us to verify the meaning? I'm not saying that you are wrong, only that I am unable to verify that you are correct. Is it possible that there are regional variations in the meaning? If there's an inaccuracy there, or more information needed to properly describe it, we are certainly interested in making the necessary changes. Thanks. Murph9000 (talk) 15:05, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Lappin Foundation

Dear moderators, the page Robert I. Lappin Charitable Foundation should be titled as 'Lappin Foundation' (not Robert I. Lappin Charitable Foundation), as the name of the Foundation that this article is about changed in March of 2013 to Lappin Foundation. Could you please rename this article. Thank you in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lappinfoundation (talk • contribs) 19:56, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

 Done The article has been moved to Lappin Foundation. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:14, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Here is the problem.

Resolved

 – Carptrash (talk) 22:54, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I am involved in Wikipedia:Meetup/Santa Fe/ArtAndFeminism 2016. I would like to be able to start satellite articles there, like I can at my own User:Carptrash/Whomever, but am not sure how to do this. Would it be Wikipedia:Meetup/Santa Fe/ArtAndFeminism 2016/Whomever? or what? Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:54, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Einar. Yes, you should be able to create subpages. Your example is exactly what is needed, just add "/Whatever" on the end of your existing page. I'm not entirely certain what you mean by "satellite articles", so I'm just saying that from the point of view of technical creation of subpages. The consensus to support what you want to do is up to you, and I advise against adding a huge number of subpages without more detailed discussion (since I don't know precisely what you are proposing). If it is just a few subpages which are "on topic", and suitable for project space, then you should be fine to just BOLDLY add them. Murph9000 (talk) 22:34, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi Carptrash. When you say "articles", are you talking about starting encyclopedia article drafts related to that project's topic area that are intended to become part of the article mainspace eventually? Or are you talking about some type of project page, such as instructions for the meetup or something like that? If you're talking about actual "articles" (a word we usually reserve only for encyclopedia articles), then they should not be at any name like you described. Rather, they should be started in the draft namespace, and then you might list them at the project for improvement or whatever. But if they are intended as project pages, then the name scheme you described would be common and appropriate. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:36, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Thank you @Murph9000: and Fuhghettaboutit. The goal, at least my goal at this point, is to prepare for the March 5 project date by starting some articles but not really polishing them until March 5, and then, hopefully, publishing a bunch of articles on that day. Sorry about the unclairity of my terms, I now believe that "subpages" and "drafts" are the terms I am looking for. That is to say, articles in sort of a holding pattern until all the folks who want to contribute to the project get an opportunity to work on them without having to learn everything about creating articles. I think that I am set for now, but I know where to go if I need further help. Carptrash (talk) 22:52, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Referencing errors on M. C. Richards

Reference help requested. How do I delete and empty reference? Thanks, Chamlinkrout (talk) 22:38, 29 January 2016 (UTC)Caprice

@Chamlinkrout: Looks like you got it worked out. Dismas|^(talk) 22:47, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

January 30

Changing the photo for Eddie Van Halen

Hi,

I would like to update the photo of Eddie Van Halen to a more recent, better looking photo of him at the smithsonian institute in 2015.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanhalenfan123 (talk • contribs) 03:33, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

@Vanhalenfan123: That needs to be discussed on article's talk page. Do you own the rights to the image you would like to use ? or is it freely licensed ? Mlpearc (open channel) 03:41, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Connect with http instead of https?

Is there a way to connect to the Wikipedia web page with http instead of https? I ask because earlier today when I tried to use https, the connection failed. I tried http instead and it connected, but redirected me to https, which then produced an error. And of course, I could not report the error, because I couldn't get to the help desk or WP:VPT or anything. It's working now, but hoping there is a fallback plan for next time there's a problem. RudolfRed (talk) 04:13, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: WMF decided to go HTTPS only, and I believe the transition was completed a while ago. It certainly looks, from a very quick check, like HTTP access is no longer available, even for anonymous (not logged in) access. HTTP Strict Transport Security is now enabled, and means that recent browsers should actually refuse to even attempt to connect via HTTP (automatically rewriting URLs into HTTPS before connecting), after the first successful connection via HTTPS. The HTTP servers on port 80 seem to do nothing other than serve redirects over to HTTPS now. Murph9000 (talk) 05:54, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

References

Thanks for the reply and the info. RudolfRed (talk) 19:40, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Bob Power

Reference help requested. I'm not sure how to determine which errors have been made. Could you point me towards an article to help me understand how to read the page on which I am to make the edit to?

- Chris Thanks, Chriscjamison (talk) 05:48, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

The error message on the version to which you refer said: "Text " Biography" ignored (help)", and the word help was in blue to indicate that it was a wikilink, in this case to Help:CS1 errors#Text "????" ignored which explains how to solve it. The problem was solved by another editor a few months later in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:01, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Logo upload

Hi,

I am trying to edit a page for a school project.

The page is 'Sula Vineyards' and I am currently struggling with understanding how to upload images as well as the logo in the infobox.

I also made the mistake of uploading the previous images thorugh Wiki Commons.

Could anyone guide me through this or upload the logo for me in the infobox?

Thanks in advance!

Finivino1000 (talk) 06:09, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

See WP:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_441#Inserting a logo into the Infobox. - David Biddulph (talk) 06:20, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

And see also the answers to your previous questions at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_442#Uploading logos and images to wikipedia and Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions#Image and logo uploading. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:55, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I see that you have recently uploaded File:Sula vineyards sun.jpg and declared that you are the copyright holder. In view of previous copyright problems on that article, you might need to explain how the copyright belongs to you, rather than to the photographer www.kedarbhat.com. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:59, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Introduction

Header added by ColinFine (talk) 10:22, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I am new to wikipedia. I started my user page, and wished to introduce myself at the Tea House. I wrote a short message, uploaded a picture. However: I cannot find my message or name in the guest book to check if I was successful. How should I proceed? Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wagfermwp (talk • contribs) 10:12, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Wagfermwp. Your introduction is at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Guests/Left_column#Wagfermwp. You can always find your contributions by picking "Contributions" at the top right hand corner of any page. Please use a section header (between == and ==) when you create a new section on this or a talk page; and please sign it with ~~~~ (four tildes). --ColinFine (talk) 10:26, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Laird

Ref number 19 on this page is a youtube ref. I don't think it has been done correctly. Please fix up.101.182.136.195 (talk) 11:04, 30 January 2016 (UTC) Thanks

Have you read WP:YOUTUBE and convinced yourself that it isn't a breach of the BBC's copyright? --David Biddulph (talk) 12:04, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Mimsa International Airport

Mimsa International Airport (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Found this while patrolling new pages. It could just be careless editing or similar, combined with a very stubby article, but I can't convince myself that it actually exists. It is using Miami's IATA code (MIA), and I'm just not finding it convincingly when searching Google, or looking at the Airports Authority of India site. The official URL takes you to an airport with a quite different name. I'm getting a distinct whiff of hoax about it, either that or an unbuilt project that would fail WP:CRYSTAL. I can't entirely decide though, so throwing it out there for others to look at. Murph9000 (talk) 13:41, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

We already have an article for Sri Guru Ram Dass Jee International Airport at the same co-ordinates, so I suggest that we either delete the Mimsa article or redirect to the Sri Guru one. Dbfirs 13:52, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

That article has no sources. I've nominated it for Articles for Deletion. If anyone wants to propose redirection, that is a valid comment at AFD. If anyone wants to replace it with brilliant accurate well-sourced propose in seven days, that is encouraged but unlikely. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:55, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I can't find any evidence that the airport is commonly called Mimsa, so I support the deletion. There can't be two different airports at the same co-ordinates, so there's no point in anyone researching for a better article. Also, the second airport in the small village of Dhuri (Rajomajra Airport) was deleted as a hoax last October. The village has a grain market and a train station, but two airports? Dbfirs 14:03, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

The photo is actually of Shenzhen Bao'an International Airport and seemingly a copyvio. The article seems a sufficiently clear hoax that I would suggest speedy deletion as such. _└ ^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 14:38, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Resolved

 – Thanks. I just needed some additional eyes and opinions to confirm it for me. Murph9000 (talk) 14:07, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

General Requests Lab?

I am familiar with the Wikipedia:Graphics Lab, and I have used it on numerous occasions with much delight. Is there another such offering, but for more general requests? For example, I am slowly working on updating the Petzl page and I would like to add Petzl's logo to the company infobox, but I am not yet entirely comfortable with my knowledge of Wikipedia's policies regarding logos and other non-free content. This question is directed more towards finding a Graphics Lab alternative as opposed to determining whether or not it would be acceptable to upload Petzl's logo. Evan.oltmanns (talk) 14:51, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

It looks like you've figured this out, Evan.oltmanns. Dismas|^(talk) 16:15, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

The logo happened to be already uploaded and was being used on another language page. If it hadn't been, however, where would the best place have been to ask someone to do it for me (again, because I am unfamiliar with the policies)? Evan.oltmanns (talk) 17:07, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

@Evan.oltmanns: I see. Well, to get back to your question, in general it depends on the situation. Here at the Help Desk, people answer lots of questions about copyright, uploading images, inserting tables, etc. For your Petzl issue, you could have started by looking at Wikipedia:Copyright assistance. About three quarters of the way down the page, it has a link to Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Just so you know, I didn't have that answer before starting to reply. Most often, I find things but just going to the search box, typing "Wikipedia:", and then following it with a keyword. This time, I typed "Wikipedia:Copyright" and it suggested about a half dozen possible things. Copyright Assistance was one of them. It's best to keep the keyword broad at first, such as Images or Tables. Check the suggested results, and then start poking around.

Nobody here has every help page and guideline memorized. We just have our ways of finding what we need most of the time. And some of us keep a list of guidelines that have come in helpful on our user pages. See, for instance, the bottom of my own user page. Dismas|^(talk) 17:38, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

WP is a namespace alias for Wikipedia so WP:or wp: makes the same search of the Wikipedia namespace as Wikipedia:. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:39, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Undoing move of Hospitaller colonization of the Americas to Territorial possessions of the Knights Hospitaller

Another user moved the article Hospitaller colonization of the Americas to Territorial possessions of the Knights Hospitaller and converted it from a Good Article to a list, without discussion. On User:Chicbyaccident's page, they and I agreed to split the current page: restore Hospitaller colonization of the Americas to its earlier state as a GA, and keep the list content at Territorial possessions of the Knights Hospitaller. But it has been a long time since I messed around with page moves and I don't know how to proceed without losing the talk page content and page history. Fishal (talk) 19:49, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

January 31

"List of Copywriter" addition

For your page "List of Copywriters" (List of copywriters), you should add Jason Byers. Articles have been written about him, such as: http://upstart.bizjournals.com/careers/job-of-the-week/2007/07/31/Movie-Tagline-Writers.html?page=all — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kahajose (talk • contribs) 01:48, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

But there hasn't been a Wikipedia article written about him, which is the usual prerequisite for addition to such a list. If you feel up to it, and the articles you mention include substantial independent coverage of him, and you have no direct connection to him, maybe you could write one? Rojomoke (talk) 05:57, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Fix

On this page (Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Lead Actor in a Comedy Series), can someone please fix the "Notes" at the bottom of the page? Thanks. I made a minor grammatical edit, and it resulted in all these red error messages. And I can't figure out how to fix the problem. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:06, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

 Fixed, the problem was the same footnote being repeated many times, which works fine until the text is no longer precisely identical across all of them. I've moved it around to have a single instance of the footnote text, with many pointers to it, which both fixes it and should make it less likely to break again. Murph9000 (talk) 04:26, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. That was bizarre and I was not able to see what the problem was. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:44, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Laird

Please fix up ref 20 on this page. Your help as usual has been fantastic. 101.182.136.195 (talk) 09:09, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Done - the blue link in such error messages links to additional information. In this case "MONTH DD YYYY" without comma is not supported as date format. You can find a list of allowed date formats in the linked Help:CS1_errors#bad_date table. GermanJoe (talk) 09:20, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

As an aside, as this article is about Scotland, the manual of style says that the British date format (Day Month Year) should be used, rather than the American date format (Month Day Year). Joseph2302 (talk) 10:05, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Article is not being published

Hi,

the above page provides details and biography of the IAS Officer Israel Jebasigh. And every time I save this article it is not published and even on moving it to wikipedia it gets moved back. Please point out the issue and help me resolve.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Kjagan2 (talk • contribs)

• The draft hasn't been published because it hasn't been reviewed yet. Publishing means moving it to the article namespace, not the Wikipedia one.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:33, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

The draft is now at Draft:R A Israel Jebasingh (IAS) where it is waiting for AFC review. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:44, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Draft has been reviewed. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:47, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

How to translate infobox?

I need to translate Template:Infobox publisher labels to my language. How I can do it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vykintazo (talk • contribs)

@Vykintazo: First of all in case you don't know, you create the translation not on English Wikipedia but in the Šablonas: namespace of Lithuanian Wikipedia. You create the translation using the common lt:Šablonas:Infolentelė template which is already on Lithuanian Wikipedia. For documentation you will create a documentation subpage and reference it through the documentation template on Lithuanian Wikipedia. —teb728 t c 20:32, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

And the documentation template is lt:Šablonas:Dokumentacija —teb728 t c 20:35, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Teddybears (TV series)

Hello, can you please check out the above article as a prod has been removed and then put back, both actions were in larger edits. I haven't edited the page at all.Atlantic306 (talk) 19:49, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

@Atlantic306: I've re-removed the PROD, as it shouldn't be reinstated. That being said, I doubt the article is notable. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:56, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

ThanksAtlantic306 (talk) 20:03, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Looking for a Bot to list imageless articles in a given category

Is there a bot that lists all the pages in a given WikiProject or Category that don't have an image?

I've been looking at tools.wmflabs.org and I can see that there are several bots that do more complicated tasks (such as not just finding imageless pages, but suggesting images for them either because they're on associated pages or because of GeoIP tagging) - but nothing that provides a list of imageless pages by category or project.

It seems an obvious and simple user case to me. ("I'm in a museum of X. Should I take any pics for Wikipedia?".) So I'm inclined to assume that such a bot exists somewhere, and I've missed it. Have I? Ian McDonald (talk) 20:38, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

@Drianmcdonald: Ian, this does not even necessarily require WP:BOTAPPROVAL, unless it is run as a fully automated process. WP:ASSISTED would allow the use of offline software which downloaded the source of all pages in a category, analysed them to find the pages without an image, then uploaded the results of the analysis under supervision. The approval is needed for bots that make unsupervised changes (i.e. edits or uploading results without any human interaction). Just downloading and analysing pages, as long as you are not creating an unreasonable server load, is pretty much something anyone is permitted to do. If doing it for large numbers of pages on a regular basis, it might still be reasonable to seek approval, of course. The best solution, however, would probably be an approved automated bot which adds a hidden category of "Category:WikiProject xxx pages without images", or similar. Using a hidden maintenance category for it allows the status to be immediately updated by someone adding an image to the page. Although not a direct answer to your question, I'm throwing this out there to note that basically there's very little stopping someone from doing this. Murph9000 (talk) 21:00, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

@Drianmcdonald: do you have some specific category in mind? I probably could help get at least partial results. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 21:12, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Should raster graphic be maintained when a vector graphic exists?

Is there a policy regarding what should be done with a raster graphic when it is no longer used on any page because a vector graphic had been made to replace it? Is the raster graphic saved for posterity and for future use even when the vector graphic is the superior option? Evan.oltmanns (talk) 23:47, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

February 1

Laird

Ref number 16 on the above page is all wrong. Please help. Thanks Srbernadette (talk) 04:50, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done You misspelled February Eagleash (talk) 04:56, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Eagleash for your help. should the link "Debretts" in the section "Traditional and current forms of address" have an apostrophe -the page itself has an apostrophe. Please alter if you see fit. ThanksSrbernadette (talk) 05:06, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done Yes, I believe so. Eagleash (talk) 05:11, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

One more queery - sorry!- should the quote ref. 17 be rephrased - as it is not correct English: "wives are often remain styled "Lady"." This is not the correct quote I'm sure, as it does not make sense.

It is ungrammatical, but without the original any changes to it are guesswork. However I have changed it to read more correctly - as we still have the title of the source which appears accurate. Eagleash (talk) 05:58, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Creating a wiki page for a celebrity

the following person is a celebrity and i want to create a page for him being hi PR representative but unfortunately wiki is not allowing the strong references are his website www.saanandverma.com also you can check the star and crew for the same of the mentioned https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhabi_Ji_Ghar_Par_Hai!

Firstly, regardless of his "celebrity status", he should meet GNG criteria to have a Wikipedia article. Secondly, even if he does, you shouldn't create an article about him if you are his PR representative, as this will most certainly trigger a conflict of interest. -- ChamithN (talk) 05:41, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Please understand, Niteshkeswani, that a Wikipedia article (especially one on a living person) should be based nearly 100% on what people unconnected with the subject have published about the subject in reliable places. What he says, what his website says, and what you want to say about him (as his PR representative) are almost irrelevant; and if such independent reliable sources about him don't exist, then it is impossible for anybody to write an acceptable article on him at present (in Wikipedia jargon, we say that he is not notable). You are discouraged from writing about him; but if you decide to go ahead, you must declare if you are paid to represent him, and you are strongly encouraged to use the articles for creation process to prepare a draft and have it submitted. My personal advice would be to do a substantial amount of work on other articles first, both to get experience of editing, and to demonstrate that you are here to help us improve the encyclopaedia and not just to publicise one person; and when you do come to write about him, to forget everything you know about him, and write only from the independent sources say. --ColinFine (talk) 11:36, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Editing road infobox problem

In Pennsylvania Route 481, in the Major Intersections section, I changed

"location=Centerville" to "location=Centerville, Washington County" to clear up the disambiguation of "Centerville".

The problem is that it would be better to not display "Washington County". In normal text, I would used "Centerville, Washington County, Pennsylvania|Centerville". But this infobox somehow appends the state automatically and apparently normal piping can't be used.Mb66w (talk) 05:38, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

 Fixed, you needed |ctdab=Washington, which is pretty much something you can only figure out by delving deep into the templates. Murph9000 (talk) 05:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Please end an "Edit War"

Uechi-ryū (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

The individual “Mark Brelsford” keeps insisting on listing himself as a “Major Organization” of the style on this page.

However, he has no list of schools, no affiliation with an association—the individuals he claims he is under do not list him as a member nor consider him an associate.

Edits made suggested he link to the webpage for his organization which should include a listing of his schools under his organization, or list the officers of his organization. That would solve the issue. He refuses to do this.

Instead he tries to send abusive and threatening messages. In the abusive messages he makes lofty legal claims and claims to membership schools all over the United States, yet cannot name one. Searches finds none. Zero. He is listed on none of the actual "major organization" pages though he was removed from a few years ago, including the organization of the individuals he claimed association with as noted previously.

To avoid an “Edit War” it would be simple for a representative of Wikipedia to decide if this person has enough evidence--or any evidence--he may link to establish himself as “a major organization” or not. Or, perhaps it will be decided to allow single individuals to declare themselves as such and the list may be expanded to include any and all teachers and participants who wish to see their names on Wikipedia.

His further abusive messages will be ignored. Communication with such individuals serves no purpose.98.227.140.14 (talk) 06:05, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

@98.227.140.14: Please take a look at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. It explains how a content dispute should be handled. The process starts out informally, by calmly raising your concerns on the article's talk page, and attempting to directly resolve the dispute between the involved editors, but without formal intervention. So, as a first step, please clearly and concisely explain your concerns about the article on its talk page, detailing precisely what you believe needs to change, and what you believe the changes should be. Ideally, please support your changes with references to reliable sources. Both you and OkinawanUechiMan (talk · contribs) need to stop reverting each others edits, and take it to the talk page. It does not matter which of you is in the right, and which of you is in the wrong, you both need to calmly talk about the content (on the article's talk page), as a first step. If the dispute can't be resolved through informal talk, the process has more formal options. Murph9000 (talk) 06:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

@OkinawanUechiMan: N.B. I note that you have already had a warning for possibly making legal threats in relation to this. It is extremely important that you take that warning seriously, and show a good faith effort to have a civil discussion with 98.227.140.14, and take great care to avoid anything which could be interpreted as a threat. The Wikipedia:No legal threats policy is taken very seriously. It is generally not appropriate to resolve Wikipedia content disputes through external communication, so please do not ask people to email you in these circumstances. You must use the article talk pages, so that the discussion around the content is transparent and visible for all editors to review. Additionally, some of the things you have said made it sound like you may have a conflict of interest with the article's subject. Please read the CoI policy carefully. In general, if you have a significant CoI, you should not be directly making significant edits to the article, but posting any changes as requests on the article's talk page. The edits should be made by a neutral and independent editor. Murph9000 (talk) 06:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I have pinged WikiProject Martial arts about this content dispute, in the hope of getting an experienced editor with good subject knowledge to take a look at what has been going on. I do not personally have much detailed knowledge of martial arts, so am not the right person to assess the content and the changes. Murph9000 (talk) 07:08, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Submit

Please how can I submit my article for review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JiasaGH (talk • contribs) 11:53, 1 February 2016‎ (UTC)

In this edit you erroneously removed the feedback from your previous submission, although it said "<!-- Do not remove this line! -->". That edit removed the button for you to resubmit; I've reinstated the feedback for you, so that you can resubmit when it is ready. It is certainly not ready yet, as you have not taken notice of the feedback (particularly about referencing), so please read it. You also need to read the WP:Manual of Style about formatting. You had wrongly moved the draft to Wikipedia:JIA Sports Academy, but I have moved it back to Draft:JIA Sports Academy where it belongs. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:06, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

combine page

there have two similar article Environmental hormones、Xenohormone ,can anyone help merging two page?--36.225.98.184 (talk) 12:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)