Wikipedia:Help desk

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

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

Ask a question

April 23

Thomas Frey

Thomas Frey needs to get fried., "Talk:Thomas Frey Articles for deletion This page was nominated for deletion on January 13 2007. The result of the discussion was Delete." It's 2016, it is still there. Administrator, please expedite. GangofOne (talk) 02:16, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

It was recreated in December 2015. If you think it should be deleted, you'll have to nominate it for WP:Afd. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:45, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

weird watchlist notifications

I get mail notices of changes to pages on my watchlist. Lately I've had a small handful of notices of changes to User pages, which are anomalous on their face because they lack the usual diff link; and then I find that the page doesn't exist, or has not been changed in five years! What gives? —Tamfang (talk) 07:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't have email notifications enabled and don't know which actions cause them but it may be user rights changes. Since a recent software change a lot of users are automatically updated to extended confirmed user next time they make an edit. It doesn't produce a diff or page history entry but the top of page histories have a link "View logs for this page" which shows it. User pages (including red links) also have a "logs" link under Tools in the left pane. You didn't give examples so I cannot check whether this is it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:35, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

main page articles

Why are there statistically more articles about australians (and australian military men at that) than any other category ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.134.186.67 (talk) 09:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi 83.134.186.67 The number of articles depends on the notability of subjects, and also what Wikipedia editors choose to write about.

Also, why do you believe there's the most articles on Australian people? I believe there's more articles on American people for the reason I gave in the last sentence- American editors are the most prevalent on English Wikipedia, and lots of people tend to write about their own country more. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:26, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

There probably aren't statistically more, you perhaps just have the perception if it. The summary written here in the FAQ does a good job of explaining the systematic bias Wikipedia suffers from and how to change it. CaptRik (talk) 09:31, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

If you mean today's featured article on Main Page then it's picked from a limited set of featured articles which are articles deemed of high quality. I don't know statistics for Australians but some fields have more editors who make the large work of getting an article to featured status. All editors are volunteers and choose what to work on. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:42, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Inter-wiki amount of Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines

Hi everybody,

I noticed that some of wikipedia's sister projects have far less Policies and guidelines than English wiki. This probably means that community is much more based on ad-hoc consensus rather than predetermined policies. It's also interesting to see which of the policies doesn't have a parallel article on other wikipedia's. For example out of the Pillars of (eng)Wiki, the most common is Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not while surprisingly enough, the least common is Wikipedia:Civility. Even the pillars themselves are not accepted by all wikis, which metaphorically means or doesn't mean that they should collapse?

Anyway i was thinking wikipedia's got to have some kind of measuring tool to compare sister projects by their Policies and guidelines, at least by total sum or even total kb size. Can you direct me to such tool? This can also be a tool that isn't dedicated to this affect, but just compares between sister projects. Are there more advanced ones where one can, for example, count the amount of time the word "Voting" (On each language) comes up?

Much appriciated!

10:46, 23 April 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mateo (talk • contribs)

Communication between Wikipedians

The fact that most interaction among users of Wikipedia is done through Wiki is a given. But it's quite obvious there are other ways of communication between Wikipedians (Mailing lists, Facebook groups, Prehaps even gatherings). Nonetheless I couldn't find an article about it. Could you please dierct me to one?

In a more general note, if those other ways of communication become a major part of Wikipedia, couldn't that undermine the strangth of the community and gepredize the essence of Transparency, which is a core value of Wikimedia foundation?

Thank you,

Mateo (talk) 12:26, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

You could look at Wikipedia:Meetup, and Wikipediocracy. Maproom (talk) 12:35, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for those links. Im more interested in the community's POV on the relation between Wiki-interaction and other ways of communication. Obviously policies can't be determained in meetups or by skype. It's probably froundupon to use a mailing list to gather voters. Or is it? 15:08, 23 April 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mateo (talk • contribs)

The community encourages meetups, and has mixed attitudes to use of other off-wiki communication among editors. It definitely frowns upon canvassing, whether done within Wikipedia or elsewhere. During the Gamergate controversy, Reddit was used by one of the sides to organise its campaigns, including its actions within Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 16:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I checked the whole contraversy page but couldn't find any mention to the use (missuse?) of reddit, regarading wikipedia. What was the community response to this event? Also can you direct me to the written policy about canvassing? Thanks again. Mateo (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

When signing, please sign at the end of your post, no need to add spaces. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 17:50, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Referencing errors on CLLI code

Resolved

Reference help requested. I found a changed URL for reference #4 and changed it, but I don't know what exactly is broken or how to fix it. 75.118.63.45 (talk) 15:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC) Thanks, 75.118.63.45 (talk) 15:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, there has been a subsequent edit to yours which has fixed the problem. You changed the name of the reference which means that the other points in the article where that ref name was used now had no 'base ref.' A bot has rescued it so that one of the later refs now has the full citation; and there are no reference errors now showing. Eagleash (talk) 15:48, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Alec Harris

Dear Sirs, I would like to draw your attention to the Wikipedia article entitled: "Alec Harris- Alexander Frederick Harris (1897-1974) was a Welsh Spiritualist Medium." The article goes on to say that Alec Harris was a fraud. I am most alarmed that an article of this nature has been published on Wikipedia, as claiming that Alec Harris was a fraud is completely untrue. I know that Alec Harris was a genuine medium, and I know this from personal experience as I am his grandson and grew up with the great blessing that his gift gave to many thousands throughout his life. It is a great disservice to his memory and also to those who wish to learn more about this very rare gift that he possessed. I feel that this article should be removed from Wikipedia as it is completely untrue. My grandfather was a quiet and humble man, who never spoke personally about his great gift. I am one of the few left alive now who had the good fortune to witness his great gift, so this should be removed from Wikipedia. Please can you inform me how this can be done. 79.67.57.173 (talk) 15:58, 23 April 2016 (UTC)Anthony Harris

The article reports (with sources) on the results of an investigation by a seemingly reputable publication. It doesn't necessarily draw any conclusions as a result of that investigation. Having said that, the section heading could possibly be changed to something less 'judgemental'. Eagleash (talk) 16:48, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I had a look at the section in question. It was headed "Fraud", however it was actually an account on an investigation by an individual, who concluded that Mr Harris was a fraudulent medium, and it seemed to me that calling the section 'Fraud' did indeed commit wikipedia to accepting the conclusion of the investigation, which despite being carried out by a reputable individual did not defintively prove that Fraud had been committed. Unlike, for example the case of Helen Duncan also referred to in the entry. So I replaced the heading "Fraud" with the more neutral "claims investigated" which is exactly what happened (That the claims investigated incontestable, while the outcome of the investigation contestable.) This does not commit wikipedia to saying Mr Harris was a fraud, nor does it commit wikipedia to saying he was genuine. I was, of course, put on this track by Eagleash's comment above. Daithidebarra (talk) 16:24, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Template redirect

We're wondering how to solve a problem were a renamed template redirect doesn't seem to work properly? Please see: User_talk:Chicbyaccident#template_move. Thanks! Chicbyaccident (talk) 16:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

• Maybe it being a double redirect is part of the issue.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:41, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Now fixed, you might want to go and purge several of the pages that have {{BibleHistory}} in them. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 16:49, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

NVM, unless you just did them, they seem fine. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 16:55, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

How do I make several rows in a Wikitable have a colored background?

How do I make several rows in a Wikitable have a colored background? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:38, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

There must be coloring code in each row, each cell or the whole table. See Help:Table#Color; scope of parameters. Some tables make coloring with a template in each colored row. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:06, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I guess I misread that page. I thought I could do several rows at once. I guess not. So, how do I even do one row? I can't seem to make it work. And those instructions are confusing. Here is my chart: User talk:Joseph A. Spadaro/Sandbox/Page80#Revised. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:39, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Place the coloring code in the line starting with |-, e.g.:

|- style="background-color:yellow;"

PrimeHunter (talk) 23:06, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:10, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:45, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Is there a template that calculates how many years elapsed from a given year until today (the current day)?

Is there a template that calculates how many years elapsed from a given year until today (the current day)? I want "years" only, not "days" or "years and days", etc. So, for example, if my input "field" is, say, 2004, I want the returned value to be "12 years ago" (or such). And, next year, the Wikipedia article would (automatically) say "13 years ago". And so forth. Like a continuous counter, like we currently have for a person's age, etc. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:44, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Template:Age will do this. 24 < --- this will be 16. I feel like there's a cleaner way to do this but can't find it right off. Dismas|^(talk) 16:54, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah! Yes, here you go. 24 years ago {{Years or months ago|2000}}This will render 16 years since the year 2000. Dismas|^(talk) 16:57, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

OK. We are on the right track. But is there a way to "modify" the output so that it only says "16 years", instead of "16 years ago? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I am essentially creating a table that says (in prose), "This record was set in 2000. So, that record has stood for 16 years." So, I would need output that says "16 years" as opposed to "16 years ago". It wouldn't make sense to say: So, that record has stood for 16 years ago. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't see a way but you could reword the sentence to This record was set 24 years ago, in 2000. Though that sounds a bit redundant to me. If you're already saying it was X number of years ago, why bother putting in the year? People can do the math if they like. Dismas|^(talk) 17:08, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

It's not prose. It's in a chart/table. And the heading of the column is "How long did this record stand?", not "How long ago was this record set?" Two very different things. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Just use {{Years ago|2004}}. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 17:18, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

E.g. This record was set in 2004. So, that record has stood for {{Years ago|2004}} years. renders as "This record was set in 2004. So, that record has stood for 20 years." Sam Sailor ^Talk! 17:21, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Great. That seems like what I need. Thanks. In the page for Template:Age ... can someone add some reference (maybe in the "See also" section) to Template:Years ago? It seems like it is relevant there. And I am not able to edit that page. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:24, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

You can edit the documentation page here. Documentation pages are not protected like templates are. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 17:56, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I did so. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:35, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:46, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Deletions since I began reviewing new articles

I started reviewing new articles about four months ago after receiving reviewer privileges on my account, and I am willing to use that ability to help others. But, I have noticed that, when viewing my edit count page, the number of deletions on my account have gone up exponentially in this short amount of time from around forty before December to over 900 now. I assume that whenever someone removes a template or stub classification which I had placed, it registers as a "delete". But, I think that this is unfair to those who of us who do due-diligence trying to help others improve articles. I think that removed templates and stub messages should not be counted as deletes, but rather should be placed in a separate newly-created category called "removed templates". I pride myself on the accuracy of my work, but I feel that doing conscientious and helpful reviews for others is now unfairly putting a blemish on my record. I think that it would be right for someone here to re-classify those removed templates and stub messages to another category rather than "delete" on my account. That would not be an unfair request, and I think that other reviewers would want that too. Garagepunk66 (talk) 17:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

@Garagepunk66: I am assuming you are refering to X!'s tools. I may be wrong, but I think that deleted edits refers to edits on pages that have now been deleted, rather than edits that have been reverted (as the latter is fairly undefined and not particularly useful). —  crh ₂₃  (Talk) 17:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes Garagepunk66, deleted edits means old edits to currently deleted pages, or in rare cases edits which have been revision deleted by an administrator to hide them in the page history of an existing page. Administrators can see a list of your deleted edits similar to the normal list of edits at user contributions. Most of your deleted edits have edit summaries of from "Added tags to the page using Page Curation (...)". Many of the pages were later deleted. Deleted edits are not an indicator of having done anything wrong. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I realize that it doesn't mean anything bad, but one of the hazards of reviewing new articles is that a lot of them end up getting deleted (when we as reviewers were only trying to help people improve the articles to prevent them from getting deleted--or in extreme situations placing a CSD template ourselves at the top of the articles as a last resort when needed). I realize a delete doesn't imply wrong, but still... other editors look at our edit pages and make judgments about us... say if we are "error prone" and in need of correction or "reliable" and to be trusted. Personally, I like to be seen as reliable, and I'd suppose that most good editors do as well, so I hope that Wiki could create a separate category (rather than delete) for when we do review templates. Why have something that causes even the slightest unnecessary embarrassment to reviewers? We want to encourage people to do reviews, don't we? I ask you to be cognizant of this and do something about it. Garagepunk66 (talk) 03:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I would assume that a competent editor, one whose opinion I care about, would know enough about the process of reviewing new articles to both value those who do it and recognise that despite their best efforts it involves in a lot of deleted material. Maproom (talk) 07:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. Most experienced editors know what deleted edits means and will not in any way hold the number against you. And few people will ever look up your number of deleted edits. After 10 years and 40000 edits I have never seen anyone indicate the number of deleted edits by another editor is a problem. I have only seen people ask what their own deleted edits mean. Anyone can accumulate deleted edits for any number of reasons. When a page is deleted we are not going to let the software analyze each edit to it and categorize them in two or more classes of deleted edits. If we did try that and one of the classes was considered "bad" edits with the number held against the editor then the number of false positives would cause real concern. Software is very bad at evaluating the quality of an edit. And I don't see reason to make software to single out review templates among the hundreds of constructive ways to edit a page which happens to be deleted later for some reason. If we did do it then there would probably soon be other groups of editors who requested that their edits are also discovered and categorized. The developers have better things to spend their time on. Maybe more places than now could add information about what deleted edits means. If you tried to look it up and found a page you think should have mentioned it then you can add it. You could also make a suggestion to the developers of Wikipedia:xTools to add an explanation. The tool os currently down and I don't remeber exactly how it looks. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm not saying that software should determine the quality of edits--that would be too complicated--but only that removed templates not be counted as deletes (even if the articles they were placed on were deleted)--they could be classified as a separate category. That would be simple and easy to do--and I would really like that to be done to the point of insisting. So, can you please have the development programmers make that change and, at least for me, remove all of the unnecessary deletes from my record. I have that right. But, I could go to Wikipedia:xTools, but maybe you could say something to them as well. I would appreciate it. Garagepunk66 (talk) 03:50, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

It's highly unlikely the developers would falsify the count of deleted edits for you. It would add significant programming complexity, create inconsistency and confusion (for example when the edits are undeleted or viewed by administrators), and require server resources. I would strongly oppose it so I'm not asking them to do it. Also note our MediaWiki software is used by thousands of different wikis with different templates, practices and so on, and millions of editors. Even if you did all the programming yourself and just asked the developers to add your code, I'm 99.99% certain they would say no. But I will make a post to Wikipedia talk:XTools#Meaning of deleted edits. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:43, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

DAB page or Anthroponymy page?

Hi, is it correct to include entries other than given names or surnames in an Anthroponymy page, like what we see in Huygens or Madelung? It seems to me that in this way we blur the border between DAB pages and Anthroponymy pages, since so many DAB pages containing human names can turn into Anthroponymy pages with some non-human names, and vise versa. Saeidpourbabak (talk) 19:26, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

No. Two options are to split the article in two (which I recommend for Huygens) or reclassify it as a dab page with name categories. In the case of Madelung, the non-name entries are only partial matches in any case, so I'd either delete them entirely or move them to See also. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:13, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi @Clarityfiend: and thanks. To summarize suggested options:

1. split into a DAB and an Anthroponymy page
2. Turn the Anthroponymy page into a DAB page
3. (As for partial matches):

1. Delete
2. Move to See also

I have doubt about two options: 2 and 3.2. Regarding 2, as far as I understand, human names do not really belong to DAB pages, since they are not ambiguous with the DAB page title (they are always partial matches), and we keep them in the DAB pages only if and as long as they are very few and the Anthroponymy page has not yet been created. Therefore I am not sure if this is a good idea to turn an Anthroponymy page into a DAB page with several human names. As for 3.2, I think moving non-name entries to the See also section of a Anthroponymy page would not solve the contradiction of having non-name entries in an Anthroponymy page: they are still there, just in a different section. If it is so, we are left with two extreme solutions: 1 (ideal, solving the problem forever) and 3.1 (sweeping it under the carpet, until next user add those entries here and there). Any thoughts? Saeidpourbabak (talk) 12:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

• A proper anthroponymy page provides referenced information about things like the frequency of use of a name, its etymology and historical usage, and how it relates to other names. A disambiguation page can do none of these, so if such information exists to report, it is more useful to use a format in which it can be reported. Cheers! bd2412 T 01:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Kootenay Formation page

The term Kootenay Formation should be redirected to the Kootenay Group page, and the page Kootenay Formation should probably be deleted. It would then also need to be fixed on the Kootenay disambiguation page. I think this probably requires an admin. Could someone please help? Thanks Georgialh (talk) 20:49, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Just a thought...WP:FMERGE. Eagleash (talk) 21:47, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

That should work. Thanks! Georgialh (talk) 23:32, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref

Mophandl (talk) 21:07, 23 April 2016 (UTC)Don Mopsick

See what I did here. Even while naming references, you must include > before the reference content. For more help on referencing, see Help:Referencing for beginners. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 21:14, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

You got some of them but there were several errors of the 'invoked but not defined' variety where extra quotes had been inserted in the secondary refs ie <ref name=""c_and_s"/>. However the OP has now gone back to the page and undone some of the good work. I got an edit conflict with him so had to abandon what I'd done! Eagleash (talk) 21:22, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

@Mophandi: You need to apply the ref names you have used e.g. 'c_and_s' to an actual citation. Eagleash (talk) 21:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Resolved

Got 'em all at third attempt. Eagleash (talk) 21:46, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Make that fourth time. OP removed the closing > again. Eagleash (talk) 22:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

extended confirmed user ‎

What is an

"extended confirmed user ‎"? Daithidebarra (talk) 22:28, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

See WP:EXTENDEDCONFIRMED. Dismas|^(talk) 22:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

April 24

A draft left in limbo...

Dear editors: This draft has been around for several years now. It has a lot of references but a lot of them are on sports organization websites. I guess it should be either put into mainspace or redirected to The International Centre for Sport Security. I know nothing about sports, and I have no idea which of these websites are appropriate for referencing, Itried asking at WT:WikiProject Sports but there was no reply. Can someone suggest another place I can ask? (Or maybe take a look?) —Anne Delong (talk) 00:45, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

User:Anne Delong - You didn't mention what draft it is that is in limbo, and I don't see any recent posts by you at WP:Wikiproject Sports. What draft are you asking about? (You're an experienced editor. You know that the usual response here to a question like yours is to ask to please identify the article. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:57, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

The only thing I could find was Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nenad Perunicic which has been deleted for over a month. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 01:04, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, that was silly of me...Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The International Sport Security Conference (ISSC) Sorry Robert McClenon and The Voidwalker —Anne Delong (talk) 01:15, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

The only thing wrong with it seems like it could be fixed quite easily, which is that the article only states that The International Sport Security Conference is an annual conference focusing on sport security. It doesn't state what the ISSC has accomplished, or really goes into detail for what it does. However, this material is covered in detail at The International Centre for Sport Security. I would probably create The International Sport Security Conference (as well as International Sport Security Conference) as a redirect and merge the contents of the draft into the ICSS article. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 01:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I was bold and moved The International Centre for Sport Security to International Centre for Sport Security. I think that I will also provide redirects for the American spellings. As for the original, which was the conference article, which is an activity of the center/centre, there are two possibilities. I would suggest that the better one is to merge it into the centre/center. The other is to make it a stand-alone article, but I don't think that is warranted. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks again, Robert McClenon and The Voidwalker; I will do the content merge when I have a block of uninterrupted time in the next few days.—Anne Delong (talk) 14:46, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

The Laverne_Cox needs fixing

I tried adding her birth year. Could someone wikify it? Thanks! 50.68.120.49 (talk) 01:19, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Resolved

It was fixed when the edit was reviewed. (It needed a pipe after the date, before the 'df=yes'). Eagleash (talk) 01:29, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Linda Brava

Earlier today, an editor added this image, along with quite a bit of text, to the Linda Brava article. Given that it's a high res image, I figured that I'd see if it's copyrighted somewhere. Google says that there's a copy at this page but that page has been telling me all day that the site is down for maintenance. I'm not sure where to go with that... Ideas? Dismas|^(talk) 02:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, there's no archive for the page on archive.org, I'll check the google cache. This appears to be the cache, but the images are not loading for me. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 15:57, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@Dismas: Got it! http://media2.lindalampenius.com/2012/11/LindaL051.jpg -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 16:01, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@The Voidwalker: Thanks! I've submitted a copyright violation for the image at Commons. Dismas|^(talk) 16:20, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I've tagged one of the other images added by the uploader, but I can't find the other one. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 16:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I think the editor that added the image to the article has a WP:COI but I'm not sure. Dismas|^(talk) 17:01, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

James Kitson, 1st Baron Airedale

I have added a date into one of the refs. for James Kitson page. Please check Thanks101.189.0.102 (talk) 02:22, 24 April

It looks ok to me. When you put a date in the "date" field of a template, you have to format it right or you get a red error message. But in this case, I think you put a date in a footnote, where any format would work, and in fact you chose a preferred format. Maproom (talk) 09:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Lupton family

Please see if you can add the death date (d.1930) at the end of Arnold Lupton's name - which appears in the intoduction on the Lupton family page Thanks so much - I am not sure if this would be what you do 101.189.0.102 (talk) 02:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand the request. The first mention of Arnold Lupton in the Lupton family article is a link to the article on him, which gives his date of death. Maproom (talk) 09:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I think this is what they are saying: In that article (Lupton family), many people who are named have their relevant dates (birth/death) listed immediately after their name. For whatever reason, Arnold Lupton does not. They are asking to add his relevant dates after the mention of his name in the Lupton family article (not in the Arnold Lupton article). That, I believe, is the request. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:49, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I think you're right – and I believe there is no reason to give his date of death in the article, as it is easily found using the wikilink, which also disambiguates him from any other Arnold Lupton who may be mentioned in the article. Maproom (talk) 06:48, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Indeed, that may be. But I was just clarifying the original request. He/she wanted the death date added into the Lupton family article (not the Arnold Lupton article). As you point out, there may be valid reasons why the date is indeed not included. However, at the end of the day, some people have dates listed with their names; some do not. (For perhaps valid reasons.) So, this is inconsistent. And the original poster makes a good point. Why list the dates for some people, but not for other people? It is my opinion that a blue Wiki-link is not relevant. When one reads an article, it should be read as a free standing (stand-alone) article. The fact that the article can and does link somewhere else (where we can subsequently find the death date) is not really a good reason to leave the death date out of the stand-alone article. I think. I think of it like this. Imagine that, in order to read the article, you get it printed out on paper. In such a case, there is no blue Wiki-link to click. Why should I be able to see the dates for some people, when I read this article, but not for other people? It's a valid question. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:24, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Website name vs. article title in citations

This question may be a little confusing, but I will try to explain as best as I can. I ask this question because I have encountered conflicts when trying to enter citation information, and I have not found an answer on Wikipedia.

Basically, when I enter in the citation information I am not sure what to enter in for the "website=" or "title=" in cases when neither are clear. For example, at this website (http://www7b.biglobe.ne.jp/~hatsune95/English/E_pen_org.htm), the article title appears to be simply "Pen Spinning". However, what would the website name be? I could enter in the website name as "Biglobe", but that isn't the website's name, it is the website host's name. Now, if the website is Google searched by entering in "pen spinning biglobe" into Google's search engine, the second result (It might not be the second result for you. I'm not certain how Google searches work.) displays as "Welcome....Please look at some Animated GIFs... - Biglobe", which does make sense. Going back to the website, one could consider the possibility that the article title is "Welcome....Please look at some Animated GIFs...", but perhaps one shouldn't use Google as a citation helper in this case because Google also displays "Biglobe" as the website title, when that is actually the host being used. One could combine both their own reasoning and the Google search result by saying that the article title is "Welcome....Please look at some Animated GIFs..." and that the website name is "Pen Spinning".

The Template:Cite web page does state that the website name is only suggested and that the article title is required, so I am inclined to believe that any title on the webpage should first be defaulted to being recognized as the article title. I was considering the possibility that the Wikipedia citation protocol for websites in which there is only one page might be different than the standard protocol, but this thought does not actually apply here because that website does link to other pages within the website (I'm talking about those gif links the webpage has). This makes me believe that the article title should in fact be "Welcome....Please look at some Animated GIFs..." and that the website should be "Pen Spinning".

Does Wikipedia have protocol for ambiguous website and title names? What should I do? (Am I greatly overthinking this situation?) Green Caffeine (talk) 03:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

You are perhaps slightly overthinking it, Green Caffeine. The purpose of a citation is twofold. A quick glance of it should give the reader an understanding of attribution so that they can assess how relevant, reliable, or POV that information is (eg. Joe Journalist: "Pen spinning as a modern trend", The New York Times vs. MrConspiracyTheorist "Pen spinners form a secret world government!", Conspiracyblog at Blogspot.com).

The other purpose is that the reader will locate the source if they want to access it. For webpages, supplying additional info besides the URL is important because of link rot. If the webpage is moved, what information is it necessary to provide for the reader so that they can find the new location? Googling "Pen Spinner" is obviously inadequate (40,000 results). "Pen Spinner" and the author helps. Granted, sometimes what the name of the website is is ambiguous (usually the more professional and reliable the website, the clearer publishing practices they have, whereas the opposite often characterizes self-published sources that may not be reliable). When in doubt, just apply common sense. Perhaps title=Pen Spinner and |website=7b.biglobe.ne.jp. (I've seen automated tools insert the domain name if no actual website name can be found). In any case, the |website= parameter is an alias for |work= which in turn refers to a major work (eg. a book, the name of a newspaper, musical album) that includes smaller works (eg. a chapter, an article name, an individual song). That's why whatever you put in |website is automatically italicized). Considering this particular case, if you've read the links in my message, you might agree with me in that the particular website is unusable as a source for being a self-published website and therefor not known for a reputation of accuracy and fact checking. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 08:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Using my common sense seems reasonable. I suppose I should just use my best judgement regarding each case. (By the way I am using this website as a source for part of the history of pen spinning, which is very much ingrained in independent websites before the community started to come together.)

Thanks Green Caffeine (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

can i publish an article with security?

i wants to know that if i am going to publish an article then who can able to modify my article if its Wikipedia team then its Good, and if anyone can able to make changes in it then i wants to publish article with restriction that nobody can able to make changes in it except Wikipedia team.

if there anything which needs to modify and people wants me to change it so definitely i will do it but after searching or discussing on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gagan deep singh1995 (talk • contribs) 07:39, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Bad news all around for you. Anybody would be able to edit your article, there is no "Wikipedia team", and you wouldn't own the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Earlier queries

Please check above 2 questions ago to see my own queeries re 2 separate articles. We would appreciate your help so much thankd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.189.0.102 (talk) 09:05, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@101.189.0.102: Both have been replied to. If you need more advice, just continue in those two threads. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 11:24, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Why was my page deleted??

Hello, While doing a recent search, I noticed my page has been deleted (Al-Zain Al-Sabah) and I can't find it in the log either. Please advise.188.236.32.2 (talk) 09:09, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Al-Zain_Sabah_Al-Naser_Al-Sabah explains why it was deleted. Maproom (talk) 09:21, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

House of Bartoli and Bartoli family

Hello,
this might not be the correct place to raise this. Yesterday I stumbled upon a brand new article (Bartoli family) which was lacking in many respects. I did what I could (in a rather distanced way) to fettle it up a bit an add tags etc. but it's still very poor. However, I notice today that the editor has apparently 'copy and pasted' the entire content into a second article House of Bartoli, so there are now 2 identical articles under different names. I know C&P is entirely the wrong way to go about things but regret I do not know what should be done about it. Can anyone advise please. Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 10:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@Eagleash: Judging from the contents it's the classic beginner's mistake: "Ups, I made the wrong title, I'll copy paste it to another". I'll tag House of Bartoli and we can move the family article. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 11:18, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

@Sam Sailor: Thanks Sam. I've already posted at the Ed's t-page asking them to cease editing until resolved. I'll follow that up now. Funny thing...I considered going to your page to ask before I posted here. :) Thanks. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 11:23, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

:-) Thanks. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 11:25, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Resolved

Some more ferreting about by Sam reveals what appears to be a quite elaborate hoax. Eagleash (talk) 13:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Lupton family

Please fix up ref number 130. I have failed, no doubt because I am tired. Sorry101.189.0.102 (talk) 12:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Resolved

. (Missing curly bracket at the beginning). Eagleash (talk) 12:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Albert Kitson, 2nd Baron Airedale

There should be 2 separate refs. after the word "Yorkshire" in the section "later life". Please help. I have mucked this up. I am sorry101.189.0.102 (talk) 12:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Resolved

You merely left off the final '>' in the closing </ref> tag. Eagleash (talk) 12:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

External tools: Revision history statistics

It does not work. For example, I want to see statistics of Hillary Clinton, I click on Revision history statistics, but nothing happens. I tried it for several other articles and it does not work for them too. Is that external tool disabled? Or any solution? --Zyma (talk) 14:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Works fine for me. Perhaps the server was having problems at the time you tried? --David Biddulph (talk) 16:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

 Works for me

xtools-articleinfo

ID: 5043192

Wikidata ID: Q6294 · 140 Items

Page size: 236,508 Bytes

Total revisions: 13,556

Number of editors: 3,876

Number of minor edits: 3,271 · (24.1%)

Number of IP edits: 1,962 · (14.5%)

Number of bot edits: 181 · (1.3%)

Ø time between edits: 0.4 days

Ø number of edits per user: 3.5

Ø number of edits per month: 76.7

Ø number of edits per year: 920

Edits in the past 24 hours: 0

Edits in the past 7 days: 22

Edits in the past 30 days: 96

Edits in the past 365 days: 1,238

Edits made by the top 10% of editors: 8,358 · (61.7%)

First edit: Aug 1, 2001, 8:21 PM • Koyaanis Qatsi

Latest edit: Apr 23, 2016, 1:22 AM • Wasted Time R

Max. text added: Apr 23, 2016, 1:22 AM • Wasted Time R • +236,508

Max. text deleted: Jun 4, 2008, 4:01 AM • Wasted Time R • -134,728

Links to this page: 0

Redirects: 0

Links from this page: 1,642

External links: 375

Page watchers: 1154

Pageviews (60 days): –

Bugs / Todo: 3

Sam Sailor ^Talk! 16:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

How do I insert a html id into a page?

I want to directly link to a particular section of a wikipedia page from elsewhere. In particular I want my link to reference of numbered list. In html this is normally done by adding a unique (to the page) attribute to a html entity. Thereby allowing my link to reference it, So if the wikipedia link is http://wikipedia.org/blah I can reference that particular part of the page with a link http://wikipedia.org/blah#mid by adding an attribute id="mid" just before the desired section. All I need do is add #mid to the url Ideally one wants to insert the id to an existing html entity or add an entity which has no effect upon browser rendering. So <a id="mid"></a> would be one way to do it in html.

How can I do it with wikipedia page markup language? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.156.110.83 (talk) 15:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Quite simply, you use the regular wikimarkup link eg. [[Foo]], and append the #section name, just like the url eg. [[Foo#Bar]]. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 15:39, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

See WP:ANCHOR. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

General question about using Google Books

In Google Books, there are many cases where a book is under copyright but several pages from the book are shown. If the information needed for a Wikipedia article is in those several pages, what is the policy on using that book as a reference? Leschnei (talk) 15:45, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Whether the book is available online or not, you just cite the book as a reference, which is most easily done using the {{cite book}} template. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

If you can read enough to get the correct context, then you can use the source. If is more iffy to use snippets, but judicious use of searching for sentence fragments can let you see a bit more around the snippet. If you rely on a snippet, it is good to include a quote in the reference. Fences&Windows 20:24, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Is there a way to calculate a value and to also have it sort correctly in a table?

Is there a way to calculate a value and to also have it sort correctly in a table? I originally used the code as follows: {{nts|3}} years. This gave the value as "3" and the "nts" template makes the "3" sort correctly, when sorted with other numbers. However, I wanted the value "3" to be calculated, since it will change every year. Next year, it will be 4; the following year, it will be 5, and so forth. So, I then used the code {{Years ago|2013}} (from one of my above Help Desk questions). This allowed the value (3) to be calculated automatically. But, it would not sort correctly as the value "3". (It sorts like this: 1, 11, 111, 2, 22, 222, 3, 33, 333, 4, 44, 444, etc. It uses the character and not the numerical value.) OK. Then I tried to combine both the "nts" template with the "years ago" template. What I typed was: {{nts|{{Years ago|2013}}}}. This is the odd thing. When I first typed that in, it worked perfectly. The Table sorted correctly. And the value was correctly calculated as "3". Then, the next day, I went to see that article again. And there was a weird error message. The error message basically said something like "that is an invalid value". So, my two questions: (A) Is there a way to make this work, to have the value automatically calculated and to have it sort correctly? And (B) Why did the calculation work one day and not the next? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

The chart is here: User talk:Joseph A. Spadaro/Sandbox/Page80. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

You broke {{Years ago}} in [1], causing extra code with Category:Date mathematics templates to be added to all pages using the template. I have fixed it in [2]. Code inside <noinclude>...</noinclude> is only added to the template itself and not to pages transcluding the template. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Huh? I did not understand one word that you said? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:18, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Check this diff. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 20:23, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

When you added [[Category:Date mathematics templates]] to {{Years ago}}, the same code was also added to all pages using the template. That's how templates work, also for category code. I prevented it by moving [[Category:Date mathematics templates]] inside <noinclude>...</noinclude>. Code inside <noinclude>...</noinclude> is not added to pages using the template. See more at WP:NOINCLUDE. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:23, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. As long as it's fixed, that's good. Thank you. Now, back to my original question. Any takers? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

If there is still a problem after {{Years ago}} was fixed then please clarify it. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I am totally confused. Are you saying that the "Years ago" template does not work because of that error I made with the "Date mathematics templates"? And now that someone has gone in and fixed that "Date mathematics templates" matter, the "Years ago" template should work just fine? And it should do what I want to do? If so, is my syntax correct: {{nts|{{Years ago|2013}}}} (to do what I am trying to do)? I thought that they were two separate issues. And that you were just mentioningt to me the error that I made when I tried to edit that template page. You are saying that that's exactly why my code did not work? Right? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:40, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Let me explain. When you added [[Category:Date mathematics templates]] to {{years ago}}, you added it outside the <noinclude> ... </noinclude> zone. Therefore, anything that transcluded {{years ago}} also included the data for the category with the data for the number. Thus {{nts|{{years ago|2013}}}} was rendered non-functional. PrimeHunter fixed the location of the category, and now {{nts|{{years ago|2013}}}} works fine. In other words, your question is answered. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 00:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah, perfect. Thanks! In the above discussion, I thought we were talking about two completely different things: (A) how to get my Table to work properly; and (B) the fact that I made a good faith error when I edited that page by adding a category. I had no idea that one had to do with the other. In your (collective) replies to me, I thought that you were not addressing issue "A" at all, but you were simply making me aware of issue "B". In other words, you were politely letting me know that I made a good faith error edit, and that you guys went ahead and fixed it. But I did not know/think that my causing a problem (in issue "B") was the very cause of my problem with issue "A". Now I get it. Thanks. But as a side note, what exactly does "transclude" mean in these contexts? I see it all the time (on Wikipedia), and I never have any idea what's being said. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:02, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

So, basically, a template can use as its argument field another template? Right? The (numerical) argument field does not have to be an actual number; it can be a value that is "calculated" through another template. Yes? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:11, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

See WP:TRANS for information on transclusion. In answer to right above, I believe so, yes. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 01:14, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, a parameter value in a template call can be the return value from another template. Some templates like {{nts}} do calculations on their parameter and this fails if the parameter does not evaluate to a pure number. Template:Number table sorting#Limitations says: "If a non-numeric value is given as the first unnamed parameter the results are undefined." Your edit to {{Years ago}} caused {{Years ago|2013}} to return 3 [[Category:Date mathematics templates]] instead of just 3. Therefore {{nts|{{Years ago|2013}}}} became {{nts|3 [[Category:Date mathematics templates]]}}. This failed. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:48, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, got it. Thanks! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:32, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:33, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Is there a way to add a colored background to the "Sequence" Template?

Is there a way to add a colored background to the "Sequence" Template? This one: {{sequence}}. Located here: Template:Sequence. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

The template has no support for that. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. That's too bad. Is there a way to create my own "sequence" box? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:36, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't recommend it with your limited knowledge of tables and templates. What do you want colors for? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Long story short: I wanted to use a "succession box". But it was plain and gray and ugly. So I wondered if color could be added in? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:06, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

If the color doesn't convey information then I suggest sticking with the standard. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:34, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

It does/would convey info. Is this very hard to do? Usually, on a Table, you just add in one command code like "background color = red" or whatever. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

You would have to either code a new template from scratch or add a parameter to {{sequence}} which must then be passed on to the template where the actual row code is placed and color code has to be added. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:29, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, that's beyond me. So, as it presently stands, the "sequence" template does not allow this "feature". Correct? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Correct. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:33, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Editing on mobile

For me, editing pages on mobile, especially when the pages in question are long, is nightmarishly hard. This is because if I want to add something to the bottom I must scroll back down in order to see what I have typed, because all but the first few lines of text on the page I'm editing become invisible once I start typing. This means I have to keep scrolling back down after I type something to see what I typed if it is not in the first few lines of text. Does anyone else have experience w/this problem and/or a suggestion for how I can fix it? (Note: I edit mobile from an iPhone 6.) Everymorning (talk) 21:38, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

My WIKI page is deleted !

Hello,

I am an Orthopedic Surgeon(Retired) in US and trying to create a WIKI page with all my credentials and illustrious career. My first WIKI page is deleted and like to make sure I am able to create and share this info with all my family and friends all over the world.

Can some one please call/e-mail me so that I can discuss and get this moving ASAP. I needed this done quickly

Thanks, Dr. Durairaj Govindasamy (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumperoo963 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Please see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY (it's not permitted highly discouraged here) and WP:COI. Also please do not post phone numbers on Talk pages here on Wikipedia; we will not call you. General Ization ^Talk

Autobiographies are permitted, they are highly discouraged but are permitted. -- GB fan 22:51, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I didn't think it would be helpful to go into all the exceptions to a policy in this response; they are explained at the link I provided, and the editor can click on the link to read them. Given that the editor's autobiographical article has been deleted twice, it would appear that under policy it is not permitted. General Ization ^Talk 22:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Just because it was deleted twice doesn't mean that another attempt might not be successful. It wasn't deleted because it was an autobiography. It was deleted because there was no claim to significance in the article. -- GB fan 23:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I actually do understand the distinction you're making; I'm just not sure that the editor who made the inquiry will. General Ization ^Talk 23:10, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Well I am fairly sure a retired orthopedic surgeon can read. You said flat out that autobiographies are not permitted but linked to a guideline that says they are permitted but highly discouraged. We lose credibility when we tell new editors things that are untrue. We need to tell people the truth. -- GB fan 23:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Or tell them lies which pass the test of publicity. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:44, April 25, 2016 (UTC)

Sharing personal info with friends and family is for one of the list of social networking websites. For a profile here, you must meet the general notability guideline. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:12, April 24, 2016 (UTC)

If you'd like to write the editors who decided your article showed no indication of meeting the guideline, see User talk:RHaworth or User talk:SpacemanSpiff. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:16, April 24, 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (x2) :Hello, unfortunately Wikipedia does not exist as a form of social media or for persons to write an autobiography. Subjects of biographies have to pass Wikipedia's fairly stringent rules on notability and biographical pages are created by editors without connection to the subject, using information obtained from reliable independent sources. See WP:RS for more information. Sorry, we cannot offer more encouragement in this instance. If your career is notable enough a Wiki page may be created in due course. Eagleash (talk) 22:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Jumperoo963, what you submitted wasn't even an article. It was a bunch of points, not a single sentence and no sources. Like I said above, while autobiographies are permitted but highly discouraged. They are discouraged because as the subject, you have a hard time writing a neutral article. You should let others write the article if you are truly notable. -- GB fan 23:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I have a few concerns about the Hillary Clinton nomination page.

I have a few concerns about the Hillary Clinton nomination page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hillary_Clinton_presidential_campaign_endorsements,_2016

First of all the clicking the numbered citation notes does not work. Furthermore, when I look at the citations in edit mode, I find that some of the claimed endorsements do not pass the giggle test. For example, Paula Cole is said to be a Clinton endorser based on this tweet: https://twitter.com/paulacolemusic/status/666328133696684032

How can we bring attention and objectivity to this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Underdog456 (talk • contribs) 22:32, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Underdog456 It would appear that the article is too long, and so the {{reflist}} template isn't working properly- when I try to preview a change to the article, I get the message "Warning: Template include size is too large. Some templates will not be included." I've noted it at the talkpage.

As for objectivity, I'd recommend discussing on the talkpage. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Joseph2302 Thank you. Do you think the issue would be addressed quickly? The editors who are putting in the nonsense examples of endorsements, put them back when they are taken out, and I suspect they are not acting in good faith.

There was an extra set of brackets (}}) that caused the references to not appear. As for checking the endorsements, there are over 1300 footnotes. I don't think any editor is going to take responsibility to check every one. If you find one that is incorrect, feel free to bring it up on the talk page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Or at Talk:Paula Cole. There are already sections about revisionist history and "false duets" there, but a new one couldn't hurt. Been pretty quiet since 2011. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:38, April 25, 2016 (UTC)

My User Page

Hello there,

I am profoundly confused. I created a User Page earlier using the edit feature. Questions:

A) Will my User Page named Pressvue come up in a search using the keyword "Pressvue"? B) Are User Pages visible to the general public? C) I wanted to write an article regarding my site www.pressvue.com. It is a new social media site and i don't have any references. Given my status, would my article be accepted by Wikipedia?

Your response would be most appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pressvue (talk • contribs) 22:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

A) No.

B) For the most part.

C) No, that is not what Wikipedia is for, at all. Do not even try that. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:09, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

And they're blocked. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:43, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

April 25

If I have the hex code for a color, how do I incrementally change the hex code to make the color become a little lighter or darker?

Let's say that you have a color. And, just as an example, let's look at this page: List of colors: N–Z. On that page, the second color down is called "Napier Green" and its hex code is 2A8000.

Let's say that I wanted to get that basic color, but I want it to be just a little bit lighter (or, maybe, darker). I imagine that if I "tweak" some of the values in that code (2A8000), that will do the trick. So, I can tweak that code to make the Napier Green just a tiny bit lighter. Then, if I tweak the code again, I can make the color incrementally just a little bit more light. And so on. (And, in the opposite direction, I imagine it works for making the shade incrementally darker.)

So, is my basic premise correct? Or am I "off" in my thinking?

If I am correct, what would the "tweaking" entail? Would I just add one to the code of 2A8000? And then add one again? And then keep adding one to get it lighter and lighter? So, I would try 2A8001, then 2A8002, then 2A8003, and so forth?

Or is this totally wrong? If I am wrong, how would I tweak the basic code to get incrementally lighter (or darker) shades of Napier Green (or of any color)? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:23, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

The hex code is an RGB (Red-Green-Blue) triplet. If you just add 1, you're increasing the blue component only, and changing the basic colour. To lighten it, you need to change all three components: 2B8101, 2C8202.... Rojomoke (talk) 02:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

This is all over my head. So let me see if I understand. In the hex code (2A8000), the first two digits (2A) are the code for "the amount of red"; the second two digits (80) are the code for "the amount of green"; and the third two digits (00) are the code for "the amount of blue"? So, I have to simultaneously add one to the "2A" (to add a little more red); and add one to the "80" (to add a little more green); and add one to the "00" (to add a little more blue). Is that correct? Also, does "adding" make the shade darker or lighter? And does subtracting make the shade darker or lighter? Which is which? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:03, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

@Joseph A. Spadaro: Increasing all three numbers will lighten the colour - #FFFFFF is white; decreasing will darken it - #000000 is black. There's more information in the Web colors article. -- John of Reading (talk) 05:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Doesn't hexadecimal go up to the letter "G"? Why does it stop at "F" for color codes written in hex? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 07:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Decimal notation uses ten digits: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9. Hexadecimal uses sixteen: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A B C D E F. Maproom (talk) 07:30, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

A-ha! Yes. I forgot to "count" the zero. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 13:05, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

@Joseph A. Spadaro: I suppose you would have to translate your color from the RGB space (which describes a color by the Red, Green and Blue components) to HSV space (which uses Hue, Saturation and Value, i.e. brightness); then increment or decrement the Value a bit; and finally translate the result back to RGB. For more details, see sections:

• List of color spaces and their uses
  • #RGB
  • #Hue and saturation

Also:

• HSL and HSV
  • #General approach (and following sections) for converting RGB to HSV,
  • #Converting to RGB for converting backwards.

CiaPan (talk) 14:38, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:37, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Could someone please wikify three articles?

1. In the Laverne_Cox and her brother's M_Lamar article a reference saying their birth date is May 29th 1984. Could this article be used a reference: http://orange-is-the-new-black.wikia.com/wiki/Laverne_Cox 2. In the article about John_Roberts_(actor) it needs a reference saying he is of Italian descent. Would this article work: http://bobs-burgers.wikia.com/wiki/John_Roberts 3. Again in the article about Lori_Tan_Chinn needs a reference saying she is of Asian descent. Would this reference do: http://www.vulture.com/2015/07/asian-immigrants-tv-respect.html Thanks! 50.68.120.49 (talk) 03:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

1. wikia sites are not usually accepted as references, per WP:USERGENERATED.

2 ditto

3: this one is fine, through I haven't read through it to verify it has a statement to support the claim. It seems to be fine as a source (newspaper/magazine like article) from a reasonably reliable website (Vulture.com). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:12, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

How to find a list of my edits with a particular edit summary?

I want to see the list of edits I made with a particular edit summary (when I used the keyword "prod" to see which of my prods survived and may need an AfD follow up). The tool I used before is broken (User_talk:Scottywong#Broken_tool.3F). What's the replacement? If you reply here, please WP:ECHO me; thanks. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:07, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I believe [3] will do what you want, but it appears broken at the moment. Rwessel (talk) 08:39, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus
The "Edit summary search" linked at the bottom of my "User contributions" page works for me - it does take some time to find the last 500 uses of my chosen edit summary (136 seconds on the test I have just run) but does then enable me to search for the previous 500, and the 500 before that, etc. - Arjayay (talk) 08:55, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

how to change the article

Note: I have removed the copy and paste of the article as that is not allowed due to the rules of our content license.

@Pawanhindu: This article is semi-protected, so new or unregistered users are not able to edit it. For now, please request your edit on Talk:Kumhar.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:18, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

The Browser (website)

Dear Wikipedia Help Desk,

The Browser's URL is blacklisted on Wikipedia. (I cannot include the URL here, because blacklisting, but it is "The Browser" as one word, followed by dot com).

We are a recommendations website, so most of the links on our pages redirect to other sites; and I am guessing that this may be why we are blacklisted.

I have consulted the advice given at Wikipedia:Spam blacklist

But this page warns:

• Requests from site owners or anyone with a conflict of interest Wikipedia:Conflict of interest will be declined*

Can you give me any advice on how to get the blacklisting lifted?

With best wishes

Robert

-- Robert Cottrell, Editor, The Browser — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertpierscottrell (talk • contribs) 08:47, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Looking over the site in question, I could see it's use for outside reading and even how it could be useful for editors. However, I'm not exactly seeing the use of linking The Browser on Wikipedia. It just links to other sites that we would link to instead. Yes, it could be useful for editors who cover a variety of topics to have quick access to a variety of new sources, but if those links are going to disappear behind your pay wall after a certain amount of time, then we might as well just link to the original piece (even if that is behind its own paywall).

The only purpose I'm seeing in allowing The Browser to be linked would be to promote your site, and that's not what we're here for. You are quite welcome to help out with anything else on the site, but I strongly recommend that you do not continue to try to get The Browser off of the spam blacklist. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Attempted fraud via Wikipedia site

HI there

I just wanted to flag a fraud attempt via the Wikipedia site. I was on the following page (link below), and when I clicked "list of registered financial intitutions" I was redirected to an apparent "Microsoft Edge" site which offered me a free IPhone 6 in exchange for a small delivery free. Of course the site requests my credit card details to enable the delivery of my phone. I have screen shots if you want them. Suggest you remove the link and/or check the rest of the page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitec_Bank

Many thanks Jackie Eberle (South Africa) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.0.94.134 (talk) 08:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

It appears the site the source was hosted on failed to renew their domain, or was bought out, or possibly was added as WP:REFSPAM to begin with. In any case, I have removed the link. Ian.thomson (talk) 08:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, Ian, you beat me to it. I've had the same sort of thing happen to a domain name that I relinquished. Strangely, that link is no longer redirecting to the fake site for me. It now just goes to http://quickdomainfwd.com. Are the fraudsters so quick to notice that their fraud has been uncovered? Dbfirs 09:02, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

It still redirects for me. It has put me (through 2 auto-refreshes, I believe) to a site something like
http://QQQ.microsoft.com-XXXXX.online/YYYYYY
Possibly redirection works depending on you geographic area or possibly it is just random – I have seen this page before, from another machine in another network location. And now, when I tried it for 4 times, I landed in 4 different locations. The second and third one were some job-seeking sites, the fourth one is a 'buy this domain' for finforum.co.za. --CiaPan (talk) 09:36, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

It may be a combination of location and how your browser is set up. I just got the for sale page, but my security is kinda paranoid. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:48, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Following the link multiple times sent me to different sites, so it looks like there is at least a degree of randomness. —  crh ₂₃  (Talk) 09:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Ah, yes, it's redirecting again once now for me in each browser, then always goes back to the "for sale" page. Probably just paid advertising, some of which is fraud. The domain name registration has changed significantly seventeen times over the last six years, and is currently registered to someone called Tanja Ferraro in Ireland, Luxembourg or Germany (who knows?) and this person is associated with 2,368 other domains, many on the French and Italian TLDs. The first redirect lives on the servers at parkingcrew.net (just in case anyone is interested). Dbfirs 12:47, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

FWIW; the original page content to which the material was sourced is here. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 23:55, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Changing MyDriver to myDriver

Hi, I was wondering if you could help me change the name of the wikipedia page of my company. Currently it is 'MyDriver' when it should in fact be 'myDriver'. I would be able to move the page myself but I am not currently able to move pages on my account. The link to the article is here: MyDriver. Thanks, Sam Lindsay — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesDrove12 (talk • contribs) 10:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

@JamesDrove12: It is not possible to start a page name with a lower case letter. myDriver already has the code {{DISPLAYTITLE:myDriver}} to display the heading as "myDriver" at top of the page. This is all that is possible. {{lowercase title}} is another way to do it. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:18, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

New Section

I am trying to design/create awards for user talk pages (Wikipedia:Wiki Loves Nigeria/Writing Contest/Commendations). However, they appear next to each other instead of each one in its own chapter. Any recommendations? What did I forget? Thanks, --Gereon K. (talk) 12:45, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Solved by Eagleash. Thank you! --Gereon K. (talk) 13:11, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :Hello, not sure if it is what you wanted, but I have placed {{-}} (or you can use {{clear}} if preferred) between the placings so that they appear as separate lines/sections. If not please feel free to undo! Eagleash (talk) 13:14, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

This solution requires that {{-}} is always placed after it and may mess with the formatting of some user talk pages. {{Babel field}} is meant for userboxes and is a poor choice for an award on user talk pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:23, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I could not find another suitable template. Now how do I center the names in the last three rewards? --Gereon K. (talk) 16:16, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

You can use <center>(name)</center>. -- The Voidwalker ^Discuss 23:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Hunt of a Lifetime Foundation

Dear persons, Hunt of a Lifetime President & Founder Tina Pattison here. Can you correct your definition of "I collected funds to make his dream happen" & "that folks donated funds" to "all services & product to make the dream happen was donated by Safari Club Int'l/Pittsburgh, PA Chapter, Safari Outfitters Association in Wyoming, Clayton & Gene Grosso Outfitters of Nordegg, Alberta, Canada & the wonderful townsfolk/Businesses of Nordegg, Alberta, Canada.

Any questions feel free to call me:(Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.165.212.75 (talk) 15:28, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

24.165.212.75 No, because the proposed text is not neutral tone, nor is it reliably sourced. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:08, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

24.165.212.75 In the future, to request an edit to a page where you have a conflict of interest, use {{edit request}} on the talk page of the page you want edited. —  crh ₂₃  (Talk) 16:12, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

As an aside, I'm nominated the article for AfD. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:17, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Tina. This not strictly a notable article and should be deleted. However, I will gloss over that for now. The only way we can include the help of your sponsors is if you or somebody else can give us a reference to a news paper article or something that states this. Where it to be on your own website that would not be good enough. Sorry to be a sourpuss but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that requires third party references. Suggest you ask around your circle for anyone that is computer literate for help. In the mean time I will do some formatting for you on the article.--Aspro (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

A further thought. Tina create an account – instructions here: Wikipedia:Tutorial/Registration. Your organization my not be notable today but you have gotten sponsors and a following of local support. So maybe soon it will be notable enough for inclusion here on Wikipedia. If you create an account, I or another editor can more the proto-article over to your draft page. Wikipedia:Drafts You can then improve it until ready for submition. I/we wont do this however on your anonymous IP 24.165.212.75 because you have conflict of interest so we need to know who you are. Usually creating a article for ones own purposes is frowned upon, yet if you can crate an article that is notable & verifiable & neutral, that overrides the conflict-of-interest.--Aspro (talk) 17:25, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Please review the AfD. There is evidence there that the organization is already notable. The IPs's request is being correctly denied, but it appears little effort was made to establish the notability of the organization before declaring it non-notable. General Ization ^Talk 17:29, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

General Ization I reviewed sources, and didn't find enough to pass WP:GNG. Please son't assume laziness/incompetence on my part. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:39, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I didn't assume anything except that, for whatever reason, your search failed to find multiple reliable, independent sources I found quite readily. Will discuss your conclusions concerning WP:GNG at the AfD. General Ization ^Talk 17:43, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Having done some more research, the organization itself is notable, so rather it is the article that needs more work done on it to bring it up-to standard. So I vote against deletion.--Aspro (talk) 18:02, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

@Aspro: Please !vote at the AfD. Your comment here will have no effect on that proceeding. General Ization ^Talk 18:21, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

How can I create a forward to a page in another Wiki

Dear all,

When clicking on "German" in the language sidebar of this [1] English article, I would like to create a forward to that [2] German article page. How can I do it?

Thankfully,

--orschiro (talk) 16:44, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Storage_water_heater [2] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiler

First, if I understand you correctly, that can't be done. If a user clicks on a link, that's where they're going to go. Not to an introduction to what they will eventually be seeing or something like that. And second, I don't know why it would be necessary. Could you explain in better detail why this is needed? Then maybe we can offer a suggestion that is possible. Dismas|^(talk) 17:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

The language links in the sidebar are handled by Wikidata, have a read of the instructions for inter-language links here. The link you want to make wasn't possible, due to a clash between Storage water heater and Hot water storage tank. Since it appears to me that the German "Boiler" translates closer to the English Storage water heater, I have changed the wikidata pages accordingly. —  crh ₂₃  (Talk) 17:11, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, very appreciated! The link does work now. Just to clarify: is the normal user able to cross-link articles in different languages? All I wanted to achieve by that link is that the English article links to the corresponding German article. orschiro (talk) 20:12, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes, just like Wikipedia, anyone can edit Wikidata! Your enwiki account carries over, so you have the same login credentials. Due to it being primarily a database, it is quite different to editing Wikipedia. More depth can be found at the Wikidata help pages. —  crh ₂₃  (Talk) 21:02, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I think that Wikidata was the missing link in my chain of understanding. Will have a look at it and create an account there. Thanks so much for your help! orschiro (talk) 05:15, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Threatening tone by editor

The latest edit of the Bellevue Education article,( 08:16, 25 April 2016‎) has the following summary

"Joint venture mention updated for accurate reflection of Trust and moved to rightful place. Blog mention removed as taken from a source that posted unproven and discredited allegations. Anyone who reposts is at risk of implicating themselves as such."

"implicating themselves as such" this is not language I am used to seeing on wikipedia. Also no evidence that the referenced source mentioned was "unproven and discredited" its just asserted. Any views or comments?

I also see that the "blog mention' text has now been removed three times, once without reason given, by an unregistered user, so reinstated by another editer, removed again by a registered user with no profile who has only every edited the Bellevue Education article, and who wrongly described the changes as minor, so i reverted the edit and on this third time by another registered user who who has only ever edited Bellevue Education related material. I have not reverted again, as I would like to hear from the community...Daithidebarra (talk) 16:45, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I haven't looked at the article but you might want to look at WP:BLOGSOURCE for a valid reason why a blog source might be removed. Dismas|^(talk) 16:57, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that Dismas I have now looked at BLOGSOURCE, and it strengthens my view that, as yet, no valid reason has been put forward for that reference to be removed. the blog in question by the way is Sarawak Report look forward to more comments from you all.Daithidebarra (talk) 17:16, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I wonder if someone has confused 1MDB with IMDB, which is well know to Wikipedia editors as an unreliable source? Maproom (talk) 22:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

joey davis ncaa record

joey davis ncaa d2 4xncaa champion without a lost 133-0 notre dame college of ohio — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:6000:6487:8B00:2098:631C:814B:602 (talk) 18:28, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Did you have a question about editing Wikipedia? --David Biddulph (talk) 18:37, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Edit Content

I have tried updating a persons bio with another marriage but the site never updated it. I have the marriage cert. and wondered if you need proof? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.143.66.69 (talk) 21:47, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

This post is the only edit by your current IP address. Which article and marriage is it about? Wikipedia requires already published reliable sources and not personal documents like marriage certificates. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:18, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Broken logo in article

On the Homestar Runner page's logo, the logo is displayed incorrectly on many browsers (e.g. Google Chrome on Windows 7) and is supposed to be displayed like the thumbnail on the file page. I'm not sure what the issue is, and I think it might be an overlap issue with the .SVG file. I'm not very sure on how to solve this, and the thumbnail appears to be correct. What happened, and how can this be fixed? Thanks. -Liance^{talk/contribs} 22:36, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't know that it was displayed incorrectly on my system (Chrome, Windows 10), but it seemed unpleasantly large, so I have made it smaller. Maproom (talk) 22:57, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

April 26

Reference error on the Legacy section of the Bonanza page.

<Apparently I did not enter the reference correctly in the Legacy section of the Bonanza article. I was listing a scene from the movie City Slickers and U-Tube (where the scene may be viewed) was my reference. Thanks for any help!

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:bdc0:cf90:c9d7:2d7d:8e87:74df (talk) 00:34, 26 April 2016‎ (UTC)

The error message on the page said "Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page)", and the words "help page" were in blue indicating that it was a wikilink, in this case to Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input. Another editor has reverted your edits. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Orthostatic headache

Reference help requested. How do you use a reference multiple times so it does not show up in the reference section twice? Thanks, RReilles24 (talk) 02:17, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Well RReilles24, a reference you would like to cite multiple times needs to be given a name. That can be accomplished like this. You know how a reference is sandwiched between tags? It looks something like this:

<ref> (reference goes here) </ref>

To give it a name, change it to this, replacing "name" with the desired name (Keep the quotes though!):

<ref name="name"> (reference goes here) </ref>

Once that is done, you may cite it elsewhere in the article by placing the following where you want to cite this source:

<ref name="name" />

That's a basic explanation. Make sense to you? I hope it was helpful! SarrCat ∑;3 02:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict) You had tried to use a named ref without having defined it. I've sorted it out in this edit. I've also tidied up a number of cases where there were spaces between punctuation and a ref; according to the Manual of Style the ref should follow immediately after the ref without spaces. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:46, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Creating Two Draft Articles and Unmerging Their Histories

Let me try to explain what I am asking about. In a particular case, I would like to create or request the creation of two draft articles, about two different people with the same name, whose draft BLPs have been in the same page. I know that in this situation the people have to be differentiated by disambiguation. That isn't the question. The article in question is Draft:Jeff Cavins. It seems, on reading the history, that the draft was a BLP of a technologist, and was worked on inconsistently, and never made it into article space. Then someone overwrote it with the BLP of a different person, a Catholic writer. In my opinion, they probably should have created a separate page, and disambiguated it, but they probably didn't know any better, being new. What I think needs to be done is a sort of "history unmerge", to create two draft articles, one for each person, so that different editors can at least try to establish notability for either of them. If Wikipedia had a "Save As" function that would move an old historical version of the page, that would do what I would like to see done. Is this something that can be done within Wikipedia? How can we recover from this understandable newbie act that seems to have now muddled two people? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

@Robert McClenon: There is a way to do this but only an admin can help you. A HISTSPLIT has to be performed on the page splitting the page into two and moving the relevant history where it belongs. If an admin doesn't respond here you may want to poke someone at AN or on one of their talk pages. --Majora (talk) 03:36, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Buddhism

Talk page archives Talk:Buddhism/Archive 17, Talk:Buddhism/Archive 18, and Talk:Buddhism/Archive 19 are not showing up in the talk header archive list on Talk:Buddhism. Does anyone know why? Thanks--76.14.40.2 (talk) 03:10, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

16 was deleted, 18 and 19 are redirects back to the main talk page. 17 seems to date back to round about the time of archive 12 or so (in 2009 & 2010). I was going to say that it would be best to ask Viriditas, as he did a lot of manual juggling of archives at that time, but I see that he hasn't edited since February and his last edit talks of health problems. 15 is the latest in the current automated series. - David Biddulph (talk) 03:33, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Collapsible list

I'm wanting to create a collapsible list for an article, but I don't know how to do so. Can anyone give me pointers? Thanks. --Beneficii (talk) 03:26, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Did you see this page (Template:Collapsible list)? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Missed it. Thanks! --Beneficii (talk) 04:15, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

we want to register wikipedia

Hello we want to register on wikipedia our company name is Asian Granito India ltd website www.aglasiangranito.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruchirjethva (talk • contribs) 05:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Ruchirjethva Wikipedia is not a free advertising or web hosting site- only companies that pass Wikipedia's notability guidelines will have an article written about them.

If after reading Wikipedia's notability guidelines you believe your company passes them, you can request for an article to be written here. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:07, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Moving an Infobox

Is it possible to move an Infobox to the left of an article please? On the page Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire (motor car), the right-justification of the "Sapphire 234 engine" infobox makes the page look very clumsy. Is it possible to move this to the left side of the article, directly under the "Sapphire 234" text? GTHO (talk) 05:46, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Suggestion for Sapphire 234, no guarantee that the accessibility folks (screen-reader, mobile, ...) tolerate this. –Be..anyone 💩 06:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Complementary colors

If I have a hex code for a color, is there some mathematical way to determine the hex code of its complementary color? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 06:37, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Yes: subtract its hex code from FFFFFF. So, taking the 2A8000 you mentioned earlier, we do the subtraction

   FFFFFF
  -2A8000
  _______
   D57FFF

getting D57FFF as the result. The subtraction is easy, there are never any "carries", we just replace 0 by F and vice versa, likewise 1 & E, 2 & D, 3 & C, 4 & B, 5 & A, 6 & 9, 7 & 8. Maproom (talk) 08:53, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

New Article Submission

Hello Wikipedia, I'm here to submit my article and I wanted to know the requirements of it. Waiting to hear reply from you.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fjackets (talk • contribs) 07:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Fjackets. Please read WP:Your first article very carefully. Personally, I wonder why a new user would even think of plunging straight into one of the most difficult tasks there is, and would strongly advise you to spend some time editing existing articles before you even start. --ColinFine (talk) 08:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Issue in Article Name

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_of_Energy_Management_and_Research

The name of the institute is now "Great Lakes Institute of Management, Gurgaon" and the current website address is http://www.greatlakes.edu.in/gurgaon. The erstwhile website www.iemr.in is also getting redirected to the new web address. It is requested to kindly make the changes in the Article as well as the web address. Dsachdeva123 (talk) 08:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Talk:Albert Kitson, 2nd Baron Airedale

I have found it hard to correctly format a book on this talk page. Please help. Please leave in all of comments. Thnaks so much 101.189.0.102 (talk) 08:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done. Maproom (talk) 09:09, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Phallocentrism

Hi: I want to move User:Jacobisq/Phalllocentrism to Phallocentrism, but am blocked by a redirect at the latter space pointing to Phallogocentrism. It's a redirect with possibilities, so there must be a straightforward way of doing this, but I've not been able to find it....Jacobisq (talk) 09:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

@Maproom: There is actually no straightforward way of doing it: since the redirect to be overwritten has a non-trivial edit history, you need an admin to delete it first. You can request this under G6, using the template

{{db-move|page to be moved here|reason for move}}

on the page to be deleted. For more detail, see WP:MOR. —  crh ₂₃  (Talk) 09:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)