Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:HD)
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikipedia Help Desk
  • This page is only for questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia. For other types of questions, use the search box or the Reference desk.
  • Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
  • We are all volunteers, so sometimes replies can take some time. Please be patient. Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.

  • New users: While this is a good place to ask questions, new users may prefer to ask for help at the Teahouse, an area specifically for new users to get help with editing, article creation, and general Wikipedia use, in a friendly environment.
Are you in the right place?
Search Frequently Asked Questions
Search the help desk archives and other help pages


December 7[edit]

I would like to add my company to wikipedia as a video hosting website...[edit]

Hello Volunteer,

I appreciate your service. My name is Nathan Nelson and I started a company called

I would like to add it to Wikipedia, but am not sure how to make that happen.

If you could please assist me in doing this, it would be wonderful.

Thank you for your time and help.

Best Regards,

Nathan Nelson owner and CEO — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blurbsurfer (talkcontribs)

Blurbsurfer, the short answer is that you probably shouldn't. See WP:COI. When your company is notable enough per our WP:CORP guidelines, then someone who is unaffiliated with your company probably will create an article.
Also, you may want to read over WP:USERNAME to see why your username is seen as promotional and not allowed.
In the meantime, I'll leave a welcome message on your talk page which will be a bit less brusk than this quick answer to your concerns. †dismas†|(talk) 00:04, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hello, Nathan. Thank you for coming here and asking, rather than just going ahead and doing it. But I'm afraid you have a rather common set of misapprehensions: that Wikipedia is anything to do with advertising or promotion, and that it is in any way falls to you to create an article about your company.
Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia: it contains neutrally written summaries of what independent reliable sources have already published about subjects. It is not interested in any information which has not been reliably published, and it is not interested in what anybody or any organisation say about themselves, or what their friends, relatives, employees, agents, or associates say about them.
If several people who have no connection with your company have published in-depth writing about the company (and that would exclude anything based on interviews or press releases) in reliable sources such as major newspapers or books from reputable publishers, then there can be an article about the company, based almost 100% on what these independent sources have published. If these sources do not exist, then your company is in Wikipedia jargon not notable, and no article will be accepted, however it is written.
If such sources exist, as I say, it is possible for there to be an article. You are discouraged from writing it because your Conflict of interest may make it hard for you to write in a sufficiently neutral way. You could request an article, with the independent sources, at requested articles.
Finally, I'm afraid your user name is probably not acceptable, because user names which imply that they are editing on behalf of an organisation are not permitted. If you wish to stay and help us improve Wikipedia (at which you would be most welcome) I suggest you abandon that account, and create a new one with a name which doesn't suggest that you are editing on behalf of a company. --ColinFine (talk) 00:13, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Suitability of non-English article subjects[edit]

If a subject is largely unknown in the English-speaking world, but is notable enough in other parts of the world to have non-English citations and an article on another language’s WP, does it merit an article here? I thought we would have considered it non-notable as it’s not relevant to English speakers, but WP:N doesn’t seem to say anything of the sort. I can’t find anything to the contrary, either. If it matters, the subject that prompted this question was the Czech computer game series Gates of Skeldal. — (talk) 04:15, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't see why WP:N should be restricted to subjects known to the English-speaking world. Just like a real encyclopedia, the goal is to share knowledge. This is the English Wikipedia, naturally there's going to be at least some bias in favor of subjects relevant to English-speakers, but there is no requirement that sources be in English. They can be in any language as long as they are reliable. Sro23 (talk) 04:24, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
References for articles on the English Wikipedia need not be in English, though references in English are preferred. Since the requirement for an article is being able to find references, and references need not be in English, being known in English speaking areas is not required. RJFJR (talk) 16:19, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
So in other words, every single valid article we have in any language could well be published in every language. Is that about right? Thanks for clearing that up. — (talk) 23:44, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Talk page deletion[edit]

How can I delete a talk page on a subject that I didn't mean to create? — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiPR1234 (talkcontribs) 10:23, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Does this refer to Maya Jenkins? If so, as the page is currently subject to AfD here, the talk page will be automatically deleted along with the article if that is the decision reached. If it is kept then so will the TP be. Your post at the talk-page has been removed by yourself but there is no reason to delete the TP because of it. Please sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 11:51, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Further, you should not be creating, or editing, pages for subjects with which you nave a connection. Please see WP:COI for more information, together with WP:RS, WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. Eagleash (talk) 11:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Looking for Hilary Clinton[edit]

How can I search for typo text if the typo exists as a redirect? I put "hilary clinton" into the search box, because I wanted to find pages that had this spelling error, but the search box sent me to her article. (talk) 13:43, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

On PC, (I'm using Chrome, may be different on other browsers), you must type the phrase, and wait for the dropdown menu from the search bar to populate. The lowest option on the menu should be containing... hilary clinton. Click this to search for articles containing this typo. TimothyJosephWood 13:56, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Alternatively, on PC you can also click the magnifiying glass in an empty search box. This will open up a new page Special:Search - searching on this page does not jump to the best hit, but list all hits and possible hits. It also contains additional search features and a help function with more info. GermanJoe (talk) 14:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
If you want to see all the redirects to an article, go to the article, on the left click on "What links here". Then click "Hide transclusions" and "Hide links". What is left is the redirects. - GB fan 14:02, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
I got this tip from Help:Searching#Syntax: Type ~"Hilary Clinton" into the search box. Using the tilde ~ means you will always be taken to the search results rather than an article (unless the pagename includes the tilde). Using double quotes means you don’t get hits for Hilary Duff. — (talk) 23:49, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
User:Timothyjosephwood and User:GermanJoe may be interested to know this, too. Face-smile.svg67.14.236.50 (talk) 23:51, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Junaid Jamshed[edit]

Hi! It is in news that the Pakistani religios-singer "Junaid Jamshed" was the passenger of ill-fated flight "PIA PK 611". Many users (mostly anonymous) are editing the article and adding / removing content without providing any "confirmed news source" of his death. Please "page protection required", Thanks! M. Billoo 14:47, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

The place to request page protection is WP:RFPP. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:56, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! M. Billoo 15:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
M.Billoo2000, I've seen this and semiprotected Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:23, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 :) M. Billoo 15:36, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Changing headline / title page[edit]

Hi there,

I'm editing my first full Wikipedia page on EV charging providers - I've realized EV-Box is spelled different from the page title. Is there a way I can change it?

Thanks, Hugo — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:27, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Hugo, not sure if you are asking to change all the "EV-Box"s in the article to fit the Page Title "Ev-box" or the other way around. In any case, try this: WP:DISPLAYTITLE. Best. Maineartists (talk) 15:45, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Are you sure, Maineartists? This doesn't seem to fit any of the criteria of Template:DISPLAYTITLE#Description. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:08, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
@Hugosbento: I moved the article to EV-Box. —teb728 t c 11:03, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Criteria of printworthiness[edit]

I see that a template for redirect pages can include either {{R printworthy}} or {{R unprintworthy}}. However, the only documentation I can find on the actual concept of printworthiness is this essay, which is informal to the point of being incomprehensible. Are there any actual guidelines that reflect a consensus? Thanks —jameslucas (" " / +) 16:19, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

changing title of page[edit]


I represent Gray Reed & McGraw. Our wikipedia page is titled "Gray Reed & McGraw, P.C." → Gray Reed & McGraw, P.C.

Our firm has changed names and our page just be titled "Gray Reed & McGraw". The ", P.C." needs to be removed.

I'm not sure how to make that edit myself. Can you help?


Grayreed (talk) 17:30, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

The firm's Web site still shows the corporate name as "Gray Reed & McGraw, P.C." (at the bottom of the page and in the logo). Sorry, we can't just change the page title without a source that shows the change in the name of the firm.General Ization Talk 17:33, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
First important notice: please be aware there is no such thing like 'your wikipedia page'; there is a wikipedia page about you (or about your company). See Wikipedia:Ownership of content.
Second important notice: please do not 'make the edit yourself'. As you 'represent Gray Reed & McGraw' you have a strong conflict of interest; see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. If you want the change to be made, the best way is to put appropriate notice at the article's talk page.
CiaPan (talk) 18:03, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
P.C. stands for Professional corporation and should be omitted in any case per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (companies)#Article title so I have moved the article. But since the official website gives the full name as Gray Reed & McGraw, P.C., also at, I think P.C. should be restored in the opening sentence where an IP removed it yesterday. I can find no mention of the alleged name change at the website (which has a news section) or anywhere else. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:54, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
And have done. General Ization Talk 20:03, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Deleting my personal page[edit]

Hello I do not wish to be a part of wikipedia. How do I delete this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:57, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

You seem to be referring to Kianosh Khodakaram. That is not your "personal page", it is an article written (presumably) by an independent editor (apparently) about you. You may not simply delete it. Please see WP:OWN and WP:ABOUTYOU. General Ization Talk 17:59, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
General Ization is correct, you should not edit a page you personally connected to. Having said that, Wikipedia takes seriously the need for accuracy in biographies of living persons. I have reviewed the article and found it to be suitable for speedy deletion. Depending on how other editors feel, it could be deleted in as little as a day. —jameslucas (" " / +) 18:12, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
JamesLucas, You removed at least one valid source and then nominated it using BLPPROD. BLPPROD can only be used if there are no sources that confirm anything, even in the history. You can't remove sources and then say it is unsourced. The article is not eligible for any speedy deletion either. - GB fan 18:32, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
This doesn't seem like the appropriate venue for this kind of discussion. I'll respond at Talk:Kianosh Khodakaram. —jameslucas (" " / +) 18:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)


I noticed that the use of the letters RFC followed by a number (for example, RFC 1) automatically creates an inline external link to the corresponding page on the IETF's website. Isn't this in violation of the Wikipedia preference for placing external links in a links section instead of in the body of the article? And shouldn't it be the editor's choice whether or not to have a link somewhere? Bever (talk) 22:20, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

It's just a magic link that's no different from ISBN linking (e.g. ISBN 9781572301849); this is a core part of the software, not something that can be disabled projectwide. Just insert junk code between the letters and the number if you want to prevent the link, e.g. RFC <nowiki></nowiki>1 produces RFC 1. Nyttend (talk) 22:36, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Watermarks in photos[edit]

Is there an issue with having watermarks in photos? This image made me think of the question. †dismas†|(talk) 22:27, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Never mind. I took my own advice for new users and checked WP:WATERMARK. It seems it is frowned upon. †dismas†|(talk) 22:29, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

December 8[edit]


I recently donated for the first time to Wikipedia. Today I learned that Wikipedia intends to censor David Seaman, Journalist, by removing an article about him in its entirety. I would like my money back. Also, I will never use your site again and I will recommend to friends and colleagues that they stop as well. I will not tolerate censorship of this nature. I am confident my friends will feel the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:18, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

  • Not a censorship thing, just look at the state of his article. It says virtually nothing about him. Rather than seethe over perceived wrongs, find some reliable sources and flesh out that article. Typically articles about people are removed due to there being nothing significant found about them, so if you have sources and content, by all means edit that article and add them. CrowCaw 00:29, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Well, you can always improve the article yourself and save it from deletion. How much was your donation? Going by the average donations they would not even equate to an hour of my professional time. We donate our time here for no payment. You made a donation to the whole of the WPF not just one article. Your donation will help maintain WPF which provides you and others with the privilege to both read and contribute yourself, not buy and own an article.--Aspro (talk) 00:43, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
It's only an hour ago David Seaman (journalist) was nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Seaman (journalist). Discussions are usually open for at least seven days so there is plenty of time to improve the article to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (people). PrimeHunter (talk) 00:46, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Citing a scene from a movie?[edit]

I have the following sentences on a biographical page describing a scene in a movie, "In the 1994 movie The Getaway, starring Alec Baldwin and Kim Basinger, Rodd Wolff plays one of the killers hired to capture the Baldwin and Basinger characters in a border hotel in El Paso. Rodd's character gets shot twice by Kim Basinger in the hotel gun battle, he survives, but is ultimately shot and killed by both Alec Baldwin and Kim Basinger as he comes up a flight of stairs, then Rodd falls backwards down the stairs.[citation needed]" As you can tell someone added that a citation is required for those sentences. I have not found this description in any source, it's just my description from viewing the movie. My question is, is there anyway I can cite this, or do I just need to delete the sentences? Zootsuit1941 (talk) 02:32, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

There is no citation needed. The film is the reference. Anyone can go and watch the movie to confirm what takes place.
I would however change out the actors names with the names of the characters that they play. In the narrative of the film, Basinger, Baldwin, and Wolff don't do anything. Their characters do. Let the reader know which actor is playing which part but after that, just refer to the characters' names. †dismas†|(talk) 03:33, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your input, I'll do that. Zootsuit1941 (talk) 06:47, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Referencing errors on What in the World? (television show)[edit]

Reference help requested. How do I rectify the referencing error I made today on the page What in the World?(Television Show)?Veteran Photographer (talk) 04:53, 8 December 2016 (UTC) Thanks, Veteran Photographer (talk) 04:53, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Veteran Photographer, I've reverted your edits, your personal opinion is not a reference. You need independent verifiable sources. FWIW, the format <ref name=<ref> reference> was the problem, with a stray second <, format should be <ref name= aname> reference</ref> Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:46, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

can't post anywhere[edit]

can't post anywhere because I would like to change the creep catcher page i am trying to work with editors but seems I keep on getting banned thought i posted to the tea house but can't see my questions

This is not the place for a lengthy discussion

'Creep Catcher' Vigilantes Prompt Warning From Medicine Hat Police [1]

Alberta 'Creep Catcher' Charged For Vigilante Tactics - Huffington Post [2]

Creep Catchers target man with cerebral palsy | CTV News [3]

Penticton man works to catch online predators, but police not pleased [4]

Creep Catchers: UBC law professor warns of vigilantism's dangers [5] this one identifies where they falsely accused a police officer

EDMONTON CREEP CATCHER APOLOGIZES TO MENTALLY ILL ... [6] this was only one person involved with creep catchers

Edmonton police describe Creep Catchers vigilantes as 'reckless' after ... [7]

ABSOLUTE ZERO UNITES!: "Creep Catchers" wannabe vigilante ... [8] legal blog

Charge dropped against Mountie targeted in Creep Catchers sting [9]

Alberta Creep Catchers member charged with criminal harassment [10]

Creep Catchers crossed 'many lines' targeting man with disabilities ... CTV News-Nov 22, 2016 [11]

Help or harm? Lawyers fear Creep Catchers prioritize attention over ... Surrey Now [12]

Creep Catcher vigilantes accused of threatening women who ... [13]

Man falsely accused in Surrey Creep Catchers video received death ... 2, 2016 [14]

Former Creep Catchers member condemns group after woman in ... [15]

Inspector Tyler Svendson says no successful charge has ever come ... 3, 2016 [16]

Social worker says Kelowna Creep Catchers have gone too far 24, 2016 [17]

Are Creep Catchers exposing predators or making victims of people ... Edmonton Examiner-Jul 27, 2016 [18]

Creep Catchers' vigilante efforts against child predators hinders ... Calgary Herald-Sep 30, 2016 [19]

Police upset with Nanaimo vigilante's 'To Catch a Predator'-style sting CTV News-Feb 18, 2016 [20]

'Online predator' vigilante's viral video useless to investigators: police 13, 2016 [21]

Creep Catchers: UBC law professor warns of vigilantism's dangers Ottawa Citizen-Sep 11, 2016


Creep Catchers called out for preying on vulnerable [23]

Member of Red Deer Creep Catchers charged Red Deer Express [24]

"Creep Catcher" Trial Set For Tomorrow Morning - SwiftCurrentOnline ... [25]

Creep catchers condemned by Alberta's Internet Child Exploitation ... [26]

Calgary man in 'creep catcher' video says his reputation unfairly - CBC [27]

Calgary Pedophile Hunter Under Fire as Man Claims He Was Framed

Sarah Berman Vice 


Surrey Creep Catchers wrongly identifies another man in viral video ... [29]

Teen member of 'Creep Catcher' targets Saint John predators 5, 2016 [30]

Family speaks out against Creep Catchers after woman's death 29, 2016 [31]

Edmonton police describe Creep Catchers vigilantes as "reckless ... Edmonton Sun-Sep 29, 2016 [32]

Creep-catcher backtrack [33]

Creep catchers condemned by Alberta's Internet Child Exploitation Edmonton Sun-Apr 13, 2016 [34]

'A real danger and darkness' surrounds Creep Catchers, professor ... [35]

These where the ones rejected

This article includes an Q&A with a legal professional explaining that creep catchers may be involved in distributing child pornography themselves when they share explicit chat logs, how they have misinterpreted some of the laws and how they break privacy laws

Christie Blatchford of the National Post opined that "Creep Catcher’s vigilantes are at least as creepy as the pedophiles they chase" [36] perhaps this would go better under the media title rather than creating a new one called critisisms

Jason Proctor of the CBC writes Creep Catchers: 'Justice as entertainment' means never having to say you're sorry [37] perhaps this would go better under the media title rather than creating a new one called critisisms

Kendra Slugoski and Caley Ramsay of Global News associates the organization with the suicide of a woman. Creep Catchers accused of preying on the vulnerable after Edmonton woman commits suicide" [38]

would any of these be considered to be legitimate? The Blackfalds one because the author had a close family friend affected by it is the considered poor? and as a result also would then negate the lawyers credibility? I could not find it used else where.

So when editing should I provide these cites as footnotes for each edit how many do I need? or use direct quotes from articles? to back up my edits

So Perhaps it would be best to say Creep Catchers believe themselves to an anti-pedophile activist group but many feel they are a vigilante group. Creep Catchers also often misuse pedophile and then provide the links from wikipedia?

Creep Catchers also have falsified their whois data or made it private there is no business associated with creep catchers, and has not registered as non-profit organization what would I need to cite to verify that? It seems to me they need to cite nothing to assert that they are Canadian non-profit organization.

I think if any thing the exisiting page is non-neutral and mostly fictious.

In the categories at the bottom of the page they are listed as Internet vigilantism so didn't think it was that far of a stretch.


  1. ^ >
  2. ^
  3. ^
  4. ^
  5. ^
  6. ^
  7. ^
  8. ^
  9. ^
  10. ^
  11. ^
  12. ^
  13. ^
  14. ^
  15. ^
  16. ^
  17. ^
  18. ^
  19. ^
  20. ^
  21. ^
  22. ^
  23. ^ h
  24. ^
  25. ^
  26. ^
  27. ^
  28. ^
  29. ^
  30. ^
  31. ^
  32. ^
  33. ^
  34. ^
  35. ^
  36. ^ Creep Catcher’s vigilantes are at least as creepy as the pedophiles they chase
  37. ^ Creep Catchers: 'Justice as entertainment' means never having to say you're sorry
  38. ^ Creep Catchers accused of preying on the vulnerable after Edmonton woman commits suicide

Truthitmatters (talk) 07:09, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

This isn't a place for the lengthy discussion of an article, and you have not been banned. As you were told in response to your question at User talk:C.Fred#Thank you for your feedback but if I can not use the talk and the people in there are non neutral what am I to do?, you need to start a discussion on the talk page of the article, at Talk:Creep Catcher (not Talk:Creep Catchers where C.Fred mistakenly added an s). See also the advice which you received on your user talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Social Media Plugins or Icons in Wiki pedia page[edit]


Could you please help me to know, how can we link a social media plug in with wikipedia page?

While searching a company page on google, in right side there may be wikipedia result. Here, in bottom , there is a header 'Profiles' and Facebook or Twitter Icon which direct to respective social media pages. How can we bring this in a company page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RiyaMiniVarma (talkcontribs) 07:38, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

@RiyaMiniVarma: The "Profiles" part is not from Wikipedia. Here is our stock reply to a related type of question:
Symbol move vote.svg Are you by any chance referring to a photo or text shown to the right of a Google search? Google's Knowledge Graph uses a wide variety of sources. There may be a text paragraph ending with "Wikipedia" to indicate that particular text was copied from Wikipedia. An image and other text before or after the Wikipedia excerpt may be from sources completely unrelated to Wikipedia. We have no control over how Google presents our information, but Google's Knowledge Graph has a "Feedback" link where anyone can mark a field as wrong.. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Help with notability flag[edit]

Hi, a page has been created about me Mark Lindley-Highfield. Someone who has a personal issue with me User:Mark.hamid has flagged the page up for notability issues. What concerns me is this individual having a personal issue with me and editing the page, the fact that they made no attempt to improve the article and also that they made no comments on the article's talk page about why they flagged it up.

It also concerned me that they flagged it up with a comment of WP:ACADEMIC. While I am an educator and this is mentioned in passing in the article about me, the article does not focus at all on my academic work, and from what I can see the article does not seem to point to my notability on this basis. While I am the only UK academic to specialise in my research area (conversion to Islam in Mexico: see this link[1], I do not consider myself to be a notable academic. It seems to me then that the following comment on WP:ACADEMIC might apply 'It is possible for an academic not to be notable under the provisions of this guideline but to be notable in some other way ...', but I wanted the opinion of other people to decide. I am not fussed about appearing on Wikipedia, so if you want to speed delete the page, I am happy too, but having a flag of notability being questioned seems more damaging to my professional reputation than their being no page at all. Although I note that Wikipedia:How to delete a page say that 'It is better to improve an article than to delete it for not being good enough.'

I have just been googling about editing a wikipedia page and realise I have made a mistake myself in editing the page about me, changing the reference to my knighthood to an 'award'. In the UK, I cannot bear a foreign award, so it is only valid outside of my country of residence, so I didn't think this should be foreground so much here. Forgive my editing this directly.

Now that I know that I am not meant to edit an article about me, I was wondering if someone here could please take a look at Mark Lindley-Highfield and see if they can improve the article. If it cannot be improved or does not meet notability requirements, perhaps you could delete it.

What I would like to make clear, though, is the conflict of interest of User:Mark.hamid and that I do not believe myself to be notable as an academic. In terms of the broader situation, yes, I have been featured in national and regional press regarding a number of things and I am referenced in a number of scholarly works about my work on conversion to Islam in Mexico. Note that there are only a handful of people writing about this area in the world, so there will not be many publications about it. None of the publications I have been featured in have been solicited by me.

I would appreciate someone's improvement of the article. Thank you. MarkLindleyHighfieldofBallumbieCastle (talk) 09:03, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Wait, what do you mean Mark.hamid is the one with the conflict of interest? If the article is about you, you have a conflict of interest and should read our rules on them. And unless you know Mark.hamid offline (warning, see WP:OUTING), I fail to see how you've concluded that it's a personal issue (see WP:Assume Good Faith). The article does not meet any of the requirements for speedy deletion or even for WP:PRODding; WP:Articles for deletion remains the only option. However, since the article is about you, you should not be doing anything with it. I'll skim the sources really quick and see if at least two are specifically about you but unaffiliated with you. If there are none or only one, I'll start the AFD process and it'll probably be deleted by the end of the week (that or someone will find sources and the notability tag will be thrown out). Ian.thomson (talk) 09:13, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
This, this, and this, in combination with this (which, despite the intended focus, would mention you as much as the king if they hadn't quoted you talking about him) almost seem to qualify as significant coverage. The first three by themselves would fall under WP:BLP1E, as would the fourth source by itself. I don't know whether or not to count Burke's Peerage (while they do restrict inclusion more than the phone book, I've not seen it in other articles and am generally suspicious of anything like a directory). Regardless of Burke's Peerage, I could see the argument going either way as to whether or not that counts as just two instances of BLP1E or whether it qualifies as sustained coverage, and whether or not a local news story regarding international relations qualifies significant coverage. I'm inclined to lean toward the latter in both cases. WP:BASIC notes that multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability. That said, WP:ACADEMIC doesn't really seem to apply to this article any more than it does to anyone else who just happened to attend a university. Ian.thomson (talk) 09:56, 8 December 2016 (UTC)


"Interlanguage" links[edit]

At Heiner Thiel, I see several links like this Michael Croissant (de) to articles in German Wikipedia. If I'd been creating that link, I'd have written de:Michael Croissant, or maybe Michael Croissant (de). What is the reason for preferring an "Interlanguage link multi"? Maproom (talk) 10:17, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

The {{ill}} gives a redlink to the English page while it doesn't exist, turning to a normal blue link when it does. The link to the English page doesn't exist in your versions. This is explained at Help:Interlanguage links#Inline links. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:23, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
I've just spotted that in the Interlanguage version, the "(de)" is a link. It makes sense now! Maproom (talk) 14:23, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

modification of the Title[edit]


Could you please let me know how to edit the Title on the top Title section? Currently it is not editable. We have an English page ( and now we have created a French page, but the title was existing from the past and now the name of the company has been changed and I need to change also the title. The title should be changed from "Association européenne des constructeurs de matériels aéronautiques" to "ASD-STAN".

Thank you in advance for any tips.

Regards, Pari Aliyeva — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paliyeva (talkcontribs) 13:05, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

fr:Special:Movepage/Association européenne des constructeurs de matériels aéronautiques. (talk) 13:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Possible to export Wikitables to CSV[edit]

Dear Wikipedians,

there are solutions to convert CSV to Wiki (e.g. [1]) and there are many browser extensions to convert HTML tables to CSV. But these extensions are not satisfying for Wikitables, because they miss any sort-keys and are not able to copy filepaths (e.g. [[File:...]]).

I have a wikitable for which the original spreadsheet is missing. Is there any way to get it completely to CSV? Thanks in advance.--TIB-NOA (talk) 13:26, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

You can look at Wikipedia:Tools. Ruslik_Zero 17:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Preventing a line break[edit]

In the article Article (grammar), there's some text "although there are occasional uses of an historic(al) in American", and the "historic(al)" is at the end of the line. "historic" is at the right end of the first line, and "(al)" at the left end of the second line. Can these be put together? I tried nowrap, but it didn't work. [2] (talk) 13:40, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I think you may be a little confused. The line breaks depend on the width of the browser window. If you manually make your browser window narrower or wider, you will see the line breaks change accordingly in order to scale the article to the width it's being viewed at. TimothyJosephWood 13:54, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Derp. By "article" of course, I mean "Wikipedia article", not the "article" which is the subject of the Wikipedia article Article (grammar). TimothyJosephWood 13:55, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Proper typography would nonetheless require the chunk of letters with no spaces to be unbreakable, i.e. having the whole historic(al) jump to the next line when there is enough space for "historic" but not for "(al)".
It is unbreakable in my browser (Chrome) right now, and there are no tricks in the Wikicode, so I think that is a browser issue. TigraanClick here to contact me 14:15, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
In Internet explorer, it is breakable, whether or not I use nowrap. Is there some code that can be added to prevent it from breaking in all browsers? (talk) 21:33, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Reference help[edit]

Hello, I just need a clarification on citing a single book multiple times on the article. I couldn't understand from reading 'citing sources' section. Please someone help me..!!Jayabilla (talk) 15:42, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

@Jayabilla:The easiest way to cite a source multiple times is to name it. For example instead of just typing<ref> you would type <ref name="Blah">. So, for example:

Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum blah blah.<ref name="SupermanAutobiography">{{cite book|last1=Kent|first1=Clark|title=My Life as Superman|date=29 February 2016|publisher=Daily Planet Media|location=Metropolis}}</ref> Blah blah blah, lorem ipsum lorem ipsom.<ref name="SupermanAutobiography" />


Lorem ipsum lorem ipsum blah blah.[1] Blah blah blah, lorem ipsum lorem ipsom.[1]


  1. ^ a b Kent, Clark (29 February 2016). My Life as Superman. Metropolis: Daily Planet Media. 

~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:51, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

You'll find the processs explained at Help:Referencing for beginners#Same reference used more than once. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:54, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
@Jayabilla: If you want to refer to different pages of the same book use, eg <ref>Kent (2016) p. 4 </ref> and similar, and put the full book description as a "Cited texts" after the reference section Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:05, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
@Jimfbleak and Jayabilla: An alternative style, which I find more convenient, is to use {{Rp}} to give an inline page number after the reference. So you do <ref name="SupermanAutobiography" />{{Rp|4}}, which renders as

Blah blah blah, lorem ipsum lorem ipsom.[1]:4 (talk) 17:43, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for clearing my doubts regarding citations.Jayabilla (talk) 17:06, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Is there a template like {{tlc|...}} for wikilinks?[edit]

Something that would convert {{example link|target|text}} to [[target|text]] for formatting examples? Ideally, it would support a suffix, too, so {{example link|public transport||ation}} would render as [[public transport]]ation

It's hard to imagine this doesn't already exist, but I can't find the name. (talk) 17:32, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

P.S. If it doesn't exist, then I'll create it, and am soliciting suggestions for a name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:13, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

De-registered username[edit]

I was discussing Wikipedia with a friend yesterday, and he said that he didn't edit because he had once tried to register an account, but the user name he wanted, and uses for other things, had been taken. (I'm not defending that view, but I do understand it.) Today I looked at the username in question, and it says

User account "Nottherealname" is not registered. This user has been renamed. The rename log is provided below for reference. Maintenance script (talk | contribs) renamed user Nottherealname(0 edits) to Nottherealname~enwiki (SUL finalization)

So I tried to register an account in that name to see what would happen, and it told me

Username entered already in use. Please choose a different name.

It seems that the username is associated with no edits, but it is permanently out of circulation. It's using up namespace for no purpose. Is this normal in the circumstances? Is there a way to get the username released? Maproom (talk) 18:14, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

The script you mention was run as part of WP:SUL. It means that someone from another wiki has the username, and the fact it is not registered here means that they have not yet logged into this wiki. For more information about the account see Special:CentralAuth/Nottherealname. -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:22, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) When you see someone renamed to foo~enwiki, it means that the primary user of that account is on another project. Because of SUL, Wikipedia accounts are shared across all Wikipedias, so what you'll have here is a situation where User:Nottherealname is active on German (or Italian, or Japanese…) Wikipedia and has never edited here, but the name needs to be kept free for them in case they ever move across. In the same way, nobody else will be able to register Maproom at Cree Wikipedia, even though you've never once edited there and presumably never will, unless they can persuade you to voluntarily change your name across all Wikipedias. If you go to m:Special:CentralAuth/Nottherealname, you can see what the user in question's home wiki is. ‑ Iridescent 18:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, Iridescent, for your clear and thorough explanation.
Out of curiosity, I checked the link you give, and found that the name is local to So I went there and looked at the user's account, and found
Wikipedia heeft geen pagina met de naam "Gebruiker:Nottherealname".
Start deze pagina

(Wikipedia has no page with the name ...   Start this page) It also encouraged me to look on Commons and a couple of other places, but I still found no such user. I'm still puzzled. Maproom (talk) 18:48, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Look at the nl.wikipedia's contribution history for that account; it's possible that it's someone who registered the account and has never actually used it, or a vandal all of whose contributions have been deleted. If that's the case, you might want to ask at nl:Overleg Wikipedia:Verzoek voor hernoeming van account to see if they have any equivalent procedure to WP:USURP here. (Don't worry if you don't speak the language; enough Dutch people speak English that I'm sure someone will be able to communicate with you, although I'd be kind and avoid technical language or Wiki-jargon.) ‑ Iridescent 18:59, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
The Dutch message you quoted just means there is no user page. If the account did not exist then the page would have said that in red above the quoted text. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:13, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
The Dutch userpage also has a link to "Gebruikersbijdragen" (user contributions) showing that the user has never contributed there. I may look into usurping the name. Maproom (talk) 20:21, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
You can select English at nl:Special:Preferences to make it easier to navigate a wiki if you don't know the language. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:32, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Wrong categorisation[edit]


I have just began to translate the French Francis Jeanson into English (Francis Jeanson (writer) but had to add (writer) otherwise the Jeanson network page would have been the only page "avalable". Now that the English page is close to completion, I've tried to delete the unnecessary (writer) part just to find out I am not allowed to proceed. Also, the [[category:Prix Fénéon winners]] should not include Jeanson network which has nothing to do with the Prix Fénéon and I don't know how to get things right.

Can someone please correct this little mess? thanks in advance; LouisAlain (talk) 19:25, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

@LouisAlain: Francis Jeanson was a redirect to Jeanson network. I have now moved Francis Jeanson (writer) to Francis Jeanson. You could have started the article by editing the redirect (see Help:Redirect#Creating and editing redirects), but an administrator was required to move the article over an existing redirect. The redirect was in Category:Prix Fénéon winners before. That was actually correct. It's possible and allowed to place redirects in categories where the target of the redirect wouldn't belong. Jeanson network was never in the category. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
What needed to be done has been done, thank you; LouisAlain (talk) 20:42, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Notability question[edit]

See Draft:Kaye Fox. Is notability questionable when a biography is based entirely on obituaries published in various sources? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:55, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I hope not. If I want to establish notability for a recently dead person, obituaries are the first place I look.They tend to be well-informed and adequately balanced. (I suspect there are notable people who are known only from their obituarists.) Maproom (talk) 21:42, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
If the world only noticed someone after their death, was he/she really notable in the WP sense? Or, in other words, is a notable corpse regarded the same as a notable person? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:29, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Certainly per WP:GNG. Probably not per WP:1EVENT. – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 22:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)


While patrolling new articles, I noticed the option to review is no longer available. Anyone know what happened to it? APK whisper in my ear 21:25, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

It is presumably because you don't have the "new page reviewer" user right (see WP:New pages patrol/Reviewers)? --David Biddulph (talk) 21:33, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
Ahh, ok. Thank you. APK whisper in my ear

Repeated reverts without plausible explanation since 2 years[edit]

Hey dear reader, since the last 2 years, I have been trying time to time to add tourism section at India. I discussed on the talk page as well a year ago, only one mention-able reason was provided- It does not contribute sufficiently to India's GDP. However, I found that it contributed more than 6% to India's GDP (India's total GDP being one of the largest in the world in volume). I also provided official, World Bank data and latest sources for this using official websites. None of the information I am adding is irrelevant or without citation. It is as important to be included in the page as the poverty section. It will be violation of neutrality if I , as an Indian, honestly do not feel that the article depicts any place in India I have ever visited or seen. I am also being told that World Bank and Government data is not sufficient and newspaper/journal links are needed to verify it (do journals really carry out country wide surveys to give thumbs up to results of World Bank and governments? I would believe they simply quote such an extremely reliable data) Therefore, please help with this as it has been long enough for this issue to resolve. I have seen countries with way less impressive profiles than India , having Science and Technology and Education sections. More than 5 Indian Business schools are in top 100 in the world and more than 30 Indian universities are in top 500 (I have QS Rankings website links for these too). India is the second country to reach Mars in first attempt and its launch systems regularly launch payloads from more than 50 countries, including US. The page needs a makeover but I am not being allowed to even use trustworthy sources to make the changes. Thanks a lot! :) PS-Ugog Nizdast Pppooojjjaaa (talk) 22:47, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

@Pppooojjjaaa: See that Talk page FAQ, question 3 and 4. You are welcome to edit but know that India is a featured article. Most of its content was checked and agreed upon, making new changes there are therefore subject to greater scrutiny, see WP:OWN#Featured article. When you get reverted, you mostly need to discuss on talk to achieve CONSENSUS. We invited you to discuss on that article talk. Not to mention that this section you're proposing has been repeatedly asked for before, search in the talk page's archives before you repeat previous arguments. This is what is usually done while making controversial/disputed changes. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 00:33, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@Pppooojjjaaa: I'm sorry but I recommend you practise editing on low-traffic and low quality pages, places where there is a dire need of improvement in our WikiProject India. You're a relatively new here and straight away diving into such an article is just reckless. I've posted on talk what was wrong but really don't expect us to keep correcting you on that page and explaining again and again. Your wasting your time and ours. You can't possibly expect us to check whatever you've replaced with old agreed on content every time. That falls on you to propose changes on talk first. Improving a FA isn't just find news reports and updating it, we need real reliable sources. I know I'm sounding too critical but I keeping advising you here and not that very visible article talk where I've only commented on your edits. Ugog Nizdast (talk) 18:00, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
I have made over 100 edits, I am the reason why 3 of the protected pages show correct nationality of living personalities, and as long as my point is correct, important and cited, it needs attention regardless of how new I am. I am new relatively that is why I am discussing here and on the talk page. Hence, I welcome your answer on talk page of India where I have asked for all the points needed and required to include 3 sub sections- once I have that checklist, I will present all of them. THanks again Pppooojjjaaa (talk) 18:08, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Sorry you have not had a good experience on Wikipedia. I hope you don't mind my asking, just out of curiosity, whether you have any connection with Myoksha Travels Pvt. Ltd. Dbfirs 09:13, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Help:ned help finishing my page. citation issues[edit]

HI, I need help with my article Scott Marshall Smith. It is very close but having a few minor citation errors. Any help would be amazing!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marydaland (talkcontribs) 23:01, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

I don't see any citation issues with Draft:Scott Marshall Smith. †dismas†|(talk) 23:41, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
They've been fixed, mainly by Primefac. Eagleash (talk) 23:47, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

December 9[edit]

Proposal to consolidate articles in the marketing communications/ advertising subject area[edit]

I am not sure that I am posting my query in the right place, but here goes...

I would like to propose a way to consolidate and rationalise the increasing number of articles in the marketing communications and advertising area causing high levels of repetition. At the moment there are many articles that canvass the same subject matter, using slightly different terminology.

In the broad area of marketing communications, articles that cover more or less the same content include:

Integrated marketing communications IMC - covers the marketing communications mix which is also known as promotion
Marketing communications - all marketing communications should be integrated, so this article covers the same material as integrated marketing communications
Promotion (marketing) - promotion is simply another term used to describe marketing communications, so this covers the same content as the two preceding articles
Promotional mix - a truncated version of the article on Promotion (marketing) so also covers the same content

In the area of advertising, articles that cover similar content, albeit with a different perspective, include:

Advertising - article contains an uncomfortable mix of socio-historical aspects of advertising, and advertising as a managerial function.
Advertising management - this article is currently being restructured by self; a plan for completed article can be found on discussion page
History of advertising - claims to be a more detailed version of the Advertising article

(NB: The article dedicated to Advertising is heavily skewed towards a history of advertising in terms of verbiage. It contains only a very cursory treatment of advertising management. The discussion of the socio-historical aspects is fair. The management of the advertising function is perfunctory, low level and contains serious omissions and other flaws. Thus the article on Advertising and History of advertising cover very similar content.

In addition to all this apparent repetition, there are also articles dedicated to specific elements of the promotion mix, including Personal selling, Direct marketing, Direct response media, Direct response television, Sponsorship, Public relations and many more (too numerous to itemise) which simply repeat material already covered on the articles listed above.

It seems to me that the number of repetitive articles combined with different and confusing titles needs some kind of rationalisation. For any user with a limited understanding of marketing communications, it would be very difficult to navigate the proliferation of articles that canvass the same subject matter, leading to real difficulties locating relevant information easily and causing confusion about which articles are superior or more accurate. My feeling is that this type of repetition is not only unnecessary, but it is counter-productive.

I would like to propose that this unnecessary level of repetition be avoided by the following recommendations:

1. The article on Advertising be devoted to the socio-historical study of advertising. This would mean that it be removed from the Business and Economics portal and become part of some type of humanities/ social science portal)

2. The article on Advertising management become the main page for any discussion of advertising as a managerial activity in the Business/Economics Portal

3. The articles on Promotion (marketing), Promotional mix, Integrated marketing communications and Marketing communications be merged into a single article entitled "Integrated marketing communications (IMC)" because this is the preferred terminology used by marketers and advertisers (and also because there is very strong opposition to any removal of the IMC article -see article's talk page).

4. The myriad of minor pages devoted to individual elements of the marketing communications mix (personal selling, direct marketing, sponsorship, as listed above) be made into dictionary definitions rather than free-standing articles.

5. That some type of disambiguation be devised to direct users to relevant pages when they search for articles in the area of marketing communications and/ or advertising.

I have noticed that some editors, after having confronted pages like Advertising, which contain an uncomfortable mix of social, historical and managerial topics, tend to decide that they need to develop their own new page dedicated to a specific area such as History of advertising. Thus the raft of articles lacking in a clear focus is contributing to the proliferation of new articles and playing into this unnecessary repetition.

I have posted comments about this level of repetition on the discussion page of most of these articles. However, based on prior history, users on marketing pages only post comments or respond to issues about once in every 8 years! So, I am not holding my breath waiting for any reply to my suggestions. I wonder whether some kind of intervention from Admin might speed up the process and help to remove repetitive content and rationalise these pages in the marketing area? BronHiggs (talk) 00:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Image help[edit]

I uploaded an updated poster of Fifty Shades Darker (film) yesterday at File:Fifty Shades Darker film poster.jpg. Someone reduced it for me. I went to look over the picture again only to see that the previous version is still there. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} 02:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

@Callmemirela: I'm confused at the problem here. The previous versions have to be removed by an administrator and per policy that will happen seven days after the {{Orphaned non-free revisions}} template was placed on the page. The previous versions of the image will be removed after the 14th. There is nothing more for you to do. --Majora (talk) 02:30, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@Majora: That I know. The issue I have is that an old version of the poster is being displayed rather than the newest one. Please see the file history at the bottom. There is the hidden reversion of a poster I downloaded, the reduced image, a new poster I uploaded and then the reduced version of the new poster. However, the main image is showing the old poster. That's what I don't understand. Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} 02:33, 9 December 2016 (UTC) is? I'm seeing the most recently updated version on my screen. Which would be this one: The article also shows this image. I did remove the sizing in the infobox as the infobox does that automatically. --Majora (talk) 02:37, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@Majora: Yes, it is. Please see this poster I uploaded yesterday. Now, see the most recent revision. Also, please see the thumbnails in file history. Do you see what I am saying? Please disreagrd my issue. My browser's cache had not been erased and was showing an old poster. My apologies! Callmemirela 🍁 {Talk} 02:52, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
No problem. I was going to suggest the cache next actually. Glad everything is alright. --Majora (talk) 02:58, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Set up archive on talk page[edit]

Hello, how do I enable auto archiving on my talk page ? Thanks. Js82 (talk) 02:16, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

@Js82: The instructions can be found at Help:Archiving a talk page#Automated archival. You can also see an example of this on the top of my talk page if you wish. --Majora (talk) 02:28, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Hi @Majora:, thanks a lot for your response. I put in the code from your page at the top of my talk page, but I do not see any archives set up. (I guess topics older than 30 days should have been archived based on "algo=old(30d)"). Is there anything else that needs to be done too ? Thank you. Js82 (talk) 03:15, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@Js82: I turned the counter back to 1. If you kept it the way you had it the bot would have started at Archive 2. You don't have to do anything else. The next time the bot runs it will begin archiving. I also have my archive setting purposefully higher than most. My archives max out at 200,000 bytes since I find that having a lot of archives is pointless. Feel free to mess with that setting as well. It is the maxarchivesize one. The {{talk header}} has automatic archive navigation built into it. So as soon as your archives exist it will appear. The bot archives things once a day. Not sure if you missed it yet but it will being archiving within the next 24 hours or so. --Majora (talk) 03:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your kind explanation and help !. Js82 (talk) 03:21, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Is my sandbox private?[edit]

Is my sandbox private or can anyone view it? I need to know this because I don't want anyone to view what I'm going to write (I don't know if I needed to say that) Thanks! Ramister (talk) 02:24, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Every page is viewable to everyone unless it is deleted by an admin. It isn't technically your sandbox. It is stored on the servers of the Wikimedia Foundation and you have agreed to release whatever you have written there under the license stated at the bottom of every edit box. You can view my sandbox and I can view yours. --Majora (talk) 02:26, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
On English Wikipedia the entire User: namespace, User talk:, Draft: and Draft talk: namespaces are automatically not indexed....meaning most search engines including Google, meaning most readers will not find them. However anyone may search and view them Wikipedia directly by using the Special:Search option.--Moxy (talk) 07:18, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Please remember that the Sandbox is there to help work on articles for Wikipedia, not for other personal use. You might like to read Wikipedia:Misuse of the sandbox, which starts out with: "The sandbox is a page where users can make test edits and preview them. Users have more freedom when editing the sandbox ... however, there is still a degree of editing restrictions in the sandbox; for example, users may not post libelous or defamatory material. Such content may be considered vandalism and removed at any time, and repeated infractions can lead to a block." --Gronk Oz (talk) 06:51, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
No, it is very much not private; anyone in the world may look at it. Further, like all Wikipedia pages, every past revision is also stored and available for anyone to look at. (You can give it a hard-to-guess name, but anyone can find it via Special:Contributions/Majora.) Actually deleting anything from Wikipedia is a rare and deliberately restricted process; see WP:REVDEL. But it is understood by all that sandbox material is rough draft and not ready for public comment.
What you can do is write the draft, then when you're happy with it cut and paste it to another page and delete the original page, thus rendering the edit history non-public. (WMF still has a copy of such deleted pages, but special permission is required to see it, and nobody will bother.) (talk) 14:05, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Contributing. Donating and why.[edit]

I would gladly donate but everytime I tried to edit some jerk would delete the information. I hold a PhD and served 14 years in the US Army until my last deployment I was injured. I served in roughly 5 campaigns / "wars / operations". Additionally, I had 10 deployments!! I received all my education post injury / medical retirement. I'd LOVE to contribute and see NUMEROUS issues within the military info.. if you created a "hierarchy" where people can't delete what you contribute you'd have far more contribubitions!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:30, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia does not use original research. All material is just a summary of professionally published mainstream academic sources (generally avoiding primary sources because, again, we don't use original research). If you edit with those two ideas in mind, very little you add will get deleted. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:22, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Template help & disambiguation[edit]

The following articles have templates within templates that construct a link to the article National Park Railway Station when passed National Park. However, this is a disambiguation page.

The links should be:

How can this be fixed? MB 04:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

The South Australia one was easy, see this edit. The other two were dealt with by this edit gto the relevant template. --David Biddulph (talk) 05:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Where can I find guidance on criticizing another editor for making some corrections while not fixing other parts of an article?[edit]

I know not to do that, but I can't find the page that spells it out (not for me, you understand). At least I think I once saw such a page. Chris the speller yack 05:49, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

I see where you are coming from. How about Wikipedia:Wikipedia is a volunteer service - Editors can contribute as much as they want? -- John of Reading (talk) 07:54, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Resolved: I think that will get me where I need to go. I'm grateful. Chris the speller yack 14:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Change of copyright status[edit]

An image was uploaded to Commons from Flickr, which was ostensibly under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license at the time. However, the original image hosted on Flickr has since become All rights reserved. Should the image on Commons be deleted now?

Original image on Flickr: [3]
Image uploaded to Commons: [4]
Derivative of image uploaded to Commons: [5]

Ypna (talk) 05:54, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Resolved [6] Ypna (talk) 08:47, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Seeing your own edits on your watchlist ?[edit]

Hello, Can I get to see my own edits also on my watchlist ? Currently I only see edits made by other users. Thank you. Js82 (talk) 06:02, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Sure! Go to Preferences, click the Watchlist tab and deselect 'hide my edits from the watchlist'. Face-smile.svg AddWittyNameHere (talk) 06:21, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@Js82: Hm, looks like I forgot to ping you. Here we go. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 06:22, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot !! Should have done a better job of figuring that out myself. Js82 (talk) 06:28, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
You're welcome—and we all overlook the obvious from time to time, don't worry about it. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 06:32, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Uploads in mobile version[edit]

When I search for my uploads on enwiki from the mobile version, I get my commons uploads as a result... why is that?--The Traditionalist (talk) 09:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Odd. It depends on the search method. and both give Commons uploads. and both give enwiki uploads. has an "uploads" link to Special:ListFiles while has an "Uploads" link to Special:Uploads, so desktop users are probably more likely to find their way to Special:ListFiles with local uploads, and mobile users to Special:Uploads with Commons uploads. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:06, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
It appears from phab:T50732 it's deliberate that Special:Uploads shows Commons uploads. It seems very confusing that it doesn't say so or have a link to local uploads. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:12, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

The Sinclair Method - Why has this page been deleted? And why is there no deletion log?[edit]

Also, when I click on a link to The Sinclair Method on I am now redirected to the Wikipedia page for alcoholism.

Please could the editor responsible explain the basis for this decision to delete/redirect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:4AC5:1B00:5D09:A49D:D49:19E3 (talk) 10:28, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

There is no deletion log simply because the page was not deleted. If you look at the history you'll see that it was moved to Sinclair method, and then you'll see from Talk:Sinclair method that this was merged into Alcoholism#Medications and it now redirects there. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:40, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
There is no deletion log because the article was not deleted. In September 2016 Jytdog merged the content into Alcoholism#Medications and redirected the title there. The history of the article is still available. Click here and then look at the history. - GB fan 10:44, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

The Sinclair Method deleted[edit]

Hello, yet again one of the most progressive and successful treatments for alcoholism has been deleted from Wikipedia. It is hugely concerning an activity so reckless could occur, but even further disturbing there is no record of its deletion. Millions are suffering and dying from this illness and I can only gather under some false pretext the most successful treatment (79%) is absent from Wikipedia. At what point can you ensure this _never_ happens again? The anti-intellectualism behind this need be rooted out and dashed from moderation activities. TSM has been featured on TEDTalk and just recently heard before the senate. Kindly address this error immediately. Lives are at stake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:10, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

As has been said above, it hasn't been deleted. And of course lives are not dependent on what Wikipedia says. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:44, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Also, please assume good faith regarding other editors and their contributions. This is not a huge conspiracy, but likely an attempt to improve the content's structure and presentation. If you disagree with these structural changes, please start a discussion at Talk:Alcoholism. The help desk here is primarily for "questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia", as noted in the big blue message box on top of this page. GermanJoe (talk) 14:06, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The content in WP about the Sinclair Method is in the section mentioned above: "The Sinclair method is a method of using opiate antagonists to treat alcoholism by having the person take the medication about an hour before they drink alcohol, and only then.[1][2] The opioid blocks the positive reinforcement effects of ethanol and hopefully allows the person to stop drinking or drink less.[2]


  1. ^ Anderson, Kenneth (Jul 28, 2013). "Drink Your Way Sober with Naltrexone". Psychology Today. Retrieved 18 July 2016. 
  2. ^ a b Sinclair, JD (2001). "Evidence about the use of naltrexone and for different ways of using it in the treatment of alcoholism.". Alcohol and alcoholism (Oxford, Oxfordshire). 36 (1): 2–10. doi:10.1093/alcalc/36.1.2. PMID 11139409. 
We should talk about this at Talk:Alcoholism but just to say, I merged it because I found no independent MEDRS sources talking about this.
Jytdog (talk) 19:45, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Odd behavior in navigation popups[edit]

This is not important, just curious. It may be evidence of an unimportant bug in navigation popups.

I have navigation popups enabled in "preferences" – "gadgets". When I hover over the link Brown-necked parrot, it shows me the first paragraph of the article, including the string "<em>Poicephalus</em> parrot". Where do the em tags come from? The word is bracketed by double apostrophes in the source code of the article, and by <i></i> tags in the article as served to my browser. Maproom (talk) 11:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

It happens when there are italics markers inside a piped link like [[Poicephalus|''Poicephalus'' parrot]]. I reported it in 2014 at Wikipedia talk:Tools/Navigation popups/Archive 9#em tags in piped links with no reply. <em>Poicephalus</em> parrot produces "Poicephalus parrot" but popups does not generate correct code when it's inside a link. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:57, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Deleted contributions[edit]

When I click on "deleted user contributions", in addition to the showing me the deleted contributions, if any, it now shows me a large box entitled "Search for contributions". How do I eliminate the box and go back to the old display? Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:13, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Large interface boxes like this happen when MediaWiki features are converted to use mw:OOUI. I think MediaWiki's OOUI looks bad. Place the below in your CSS to hide it. You lose the namespace selector for deleted contributions. Once something is converted to OOUI, I don't think you can get the old look back without coding it yourself in JavaScript or something complicated like that. You could add the code to Special:MyPage/skin.css to only hide it in your current skin and still have the option to change skin to see it. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:48, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
.mw-special-DeletedContributions .mw-htmlform-ooui-wrapper {display: none;}
Thanks, that did the trick!--Bbb23 (talk) 13:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

mita overvliet[edit]

Hello mynme is mita overvliet and i would like to react to the article of mita overvliet. I was suspenden for 2 years ,first the ban was 4 years but after my case with the CAS in switzerland the IWF had to change there rules and make the suspension from 4 years to 2 years. This was done for all other athletes and actually my case in cooperation with the doping authorities in the netherlands was the breakthrough for it. Also my results where higher in some competitions, my results in the osmanaliev tournaments which isheld everyyear in kirgistan was 75/100 also remco eenink was ever realreally my coach i am only registrated in the netherlands because of my dutch paspoort. I trained 1,5 year in rumenia and 5 months in spain and 7 years in the bundeswehr in germany andand i live now in kazakhstan/russian border siberia where i train. I have been for 10 years in trainingcamps,and now i will start again. One ofthe reason my suspension was made from 4 years to 2 years was because there was a medical problem with my physical condition that included cervix cancer and was the reason of a high level of norandrosterone in the body,and the furosemide i honestly admitted and showed my papers frfrom the prescription from other competitions that was made by the docdoctor,for the competition in 2011 idid not have the right paper. This case is sensitive for me because i was so fighting hard anand it worked out,we have had always so many problems witwiththe weightlifting in the netherlands espacially the federation.things ae changing now because of remco eenink. My coaches where peter kaeks in germany and in kazakhstan anatoly vasilich liu-shin. But remco has been a soort of a sport psychologist for me. Sorry to write sso uch but i was upset with the information about mmyself on wikipedia.

The great gudmundur sigurdasson in iceland has teched me olympic weightlifting aand thats howit started. I hooe you guys can adadjust the information about me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mitaovervliet (talkcontribs) 14:16, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

The place to comment is at Talk:Mita Overvliet, including references to published independent reliable sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:28, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Silly formatting question[edit]

I sometimes use a custom variation of "Citation Needed" to indicate a not-serious answer. Example:[7][8]

I use the following markup...

[ [[Citation (horse)|Citation]] [[Need, California|Need]][[ed (text editor)|ed]] ]

...which displays like this:

[ Citation Needed ]

I would like it to display as "[Citation Needed]" instead of "[ Citation Needed ]", but if I try to remove the extra spaces like this...

[[[Citation (horse)|Citation]] [[Need, California|Need]][[ed (text editor)|ed]]]

...I get this:

[[[Citation (horse)|Citation]] Needed]

So, is there some clever way to format my silly bit of markup so that it displays without the leading and trailing space? --Guy Macon (talk) 17:25, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

You can put nowiki tags around each of the outer square brackets, thus: [Citation Needed]. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 17:31, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Guy Macon, why not go all the way?[Citation Needed]TimothyJosephWood 20:13, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Perfect. Thanks! --Guy Macon (talk) 20:17, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Guy Macon, Oops. Forgot to color the brackets. Try this:[Citation Needed] TimothyJosephWood 20:24, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Even perfecter. I guess I should have added a [Citation Needed] after the word "perfect" above... :) --Guy Macon (talk) 20:42, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Homeopathy is not Psuedoscience[edit]

Homeopathy has actually been based on thousands upon thousands of bits of research that have been conducted over the last 150 years. It is based on certain principles which our modern American health care model does not have . You can disagree with the basic tenets, but the research and the logic is there. I am not saying much here because I have no idea where this will go just a test. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

You should probably cite at least a few examples of those "thousands upon thousands of bits of research"? Ruslik_Zero 20:42, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
The Federal Trade Commission just cracked down on homeopathic remedies. The new rules require packaging to effectively communicate two key disclaimers:
  • "There is no scientific evidence that the product works."
  • "The product’s claims are based only on theories of homeopathy from the 1700s that are not accepted by most modern medical experts."
Sources:[9][10][11][12] --Guy Macon (talk) 20:59, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
You might like to read our articles on Placebo, Confirmation bias and Randomized controlled trial. Dbfirs 21:52, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
And for the position of Wikipedia, please read WP:FRINGE. --ColinFine (talk) 22:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

2017 in baseball and music articles[edit]

What No Article about baseball in 2017 and no 2017 in music There's only 3 Weeks Left. come on get your lazy butts in gear now. (talk) 20:56, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

WP:SODOIT and WP:NODEADLINE. Or you can post at WP:RA RudolfRed (talk) 21:51, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
As I said last time you posted this (or something very like it) throwing insults at large numbers of volunteers is not an effective way of achieving anything. --ColinFine (talk) 22:58, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Not convinced we need either, since 2017 hasn't started. Thus, we can't cover what's happeninh in baseball/music in 2017 without bring able to see the future. Joseph2302 (talk) 01:06, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Clint Conque Wiki Page[edit]

I was simply trying to make minor adjustments to records and update our head coach's picture on his wiki page and it went through fine yesterday. Now it is all coded and doesn't look correct. How do I fix this? I am not a coder and do not understand anything like that. Not sure what is the problem with the page now. Please help or simply correct it for me if possible. Not sure if I did something to mess it up or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Notaroy69 (talkcontribs) 21:00, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Fixed (diff) --Fuortu (talk) 21:07, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Question about redirects/not automatically following them[edit]

Is there a way to set my preferences that I'm overlooking, or any other method, so that I do not automatically follow redirects to their target pages? Basically, I'd like wikipedia to treat every redirect I click as though the link has &redirect=no after it, if possible. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 21:47, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

2017 NCAA Division I FBS Football template[edit]

I Don't know how to make a template. (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Basically the same way an article is created. Except you put "Template:" in front of the title when you put it in the search box. Oh, and you need an account. †dismas†|(talk) 01:00, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

December 10[edit]

Donation problem[edit]

Wow, I really want to give a cash donation again this year , but every time I tap the "Amazon" option I see a screen with about 10 lines of text, starting with "you agree to share your personal information."

Then the screen quickly is replaced by the Amazon login page!!! And the back button doesn't work!!!!! (iPhone 5s iOS 9.1) Sorry, I'm not typing in any of my info when I'm not allowed to read those terms. Fix it asap or better luck next year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1014:B052:910B:E9EF:30C5:F5E:372E (talk) 06:48, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

The Paypal donation option says: "By donating, you agree to share your personal information with the Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit organization that hosts Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects, and its service providers pursuant to our donor policy. Wikimedia Foundation and its service providers are located in the United States and in other countries whose privacy laws may not be equivalent to your own. We do not sell or trade your information to anyone. For more information please read our donor policy." I don't know whether the Amazon version has the same text. Dbfirs 08:34, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Search for files on Wikipedia, but not on Commons[edit]

At the Special:Search page, there is an "Advanced" tab, where I can select the "File" namespace. Unfortunately, the search results mostly contain files from Commons. How can I filter the search results, for them to contain only Wikipedia files, and exclude Commons ones? --Djadjko (talk) 00:13, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

@Djadjko: Add the prefix local: to whatever you are searching for. For more information see mw:Help:CirrusSearch#Prefix and namespace --Majora (talk) 00:19, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Brooksbank baronets[edit]

please fix ref number 6 and leave in quote - it is not from a newspaper and I need your help if that is OK. Thankyou101.182.188.199 (talk) 01:49, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Fixeddismas†|(talk) 02:02, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
For the umpteenth time, please read what the "publisher" parameter (if used) should contain, see Template:Cite web#Publisher. It says "Name of publisher"; it doesn't say "Date" (for which there is a parameter named "date"), and it doesn't say "URL" (for which there is a parameter "url"). Looking at another of your edits to the same article, it isn't appropriate for the "publisher" parameter to contain "ã Copyright: Heraldic Media Limited. All rights reserved."; the name of the publisher, if you want to include it, is simply "Heraldic Media Limited". If you don't understand what the "publisher" parameter should include, please leave it blank. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

How can I add a question in brackets?[edit]

hello guys, new here! I've wanted to ask in a question in a specific article, that tells of a deal made in France during the 18th century, that specifies how much was paid. But I'd like to add a little bracket that says {75 million what?} because that could tell something about the nature of the treaty (whether it's franks or pounds).

Any help would be greatly appreciate!:) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:10, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

The article's talk page might be a good place to ask the question. Which article was it? Dbfirs 08:38, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
I think you're looking for the clarify tag, to put[clarification needed] in the article. Maproom (talk) 09:57, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
Yes, as above, or possibly the quantify tag, to put[quantify] in the article. Hogyn Lleol (talk) 10:06, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
It's not directly related to this example, but in case it comes in handy later, there are also some specific templates for asking for clarification (such as {{when}}): see the list at {{Inline cleanup tags}}.--Gronk Oz (talk) 10:59, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

About uploading pictures[edit]

I am a new user of Wiki.Im not able to upload pictures.would you pls help me by telling the reason for thisSiva1331 (talk) 06:47, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

You need to make at least 10 edits to become autoconfirmed before you are able to upload images. Ruslik_Zero 08:48, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

updation about kayastha community[edit]

kayasthas are purely suryavanshi kshatriyas. Rig ved and yajur ved gives pure and full accounts of this. There real caste name is SHRI BRAHMA KAYASTHA RAJANYA where rajanya is the real word for kshatriyas according to rig ved purush sukta. And rajputs are not real kshatriyas they claim to be kshatriyas by giving false proofs of ancient lineage they are foreigners to indians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:08, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

This comment probably belongs on the talk page of whichever article it refers to. Maproom (talk) 10:00, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Website in infobox & external links[edit]

Is there any policy on whether a website should (or shouldn't) be listed in the "External Links" section of an article if it's also listed in the infobox?

No running battles regarding it - it's just something I've often wondered. Wikipedia:External links does mention both infobox and external links, but not what to do if both are present. Does it even matter? Chaheel Riens (talk) 10:57, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Chaheel Riens, if you look at the question in a different way: "Is there any policy on whether a website should (or shouldn't) be listed in the infobox section of an article if it's also listed in the "External Links"?" The answer is yes, because many mobile viewers never reach the bottom of the page and for them, the infobox serves as a great one-stop summary. So yeah, there's no issue in having the links in both the places. Lourdes 12:46, 10 December 2016 (UTC)