Help desk
< June 3	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 5 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

June 4

What happened to my book? Snierman

I used the book tool to compile a list of articles and now that I've returned later in the day--I cannot find it or access it. What did I do wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snierman (talk • contribs) 01:00, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Were you logged in as User:Snierman? Cresix (talk) 01:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Only autoconfirmed or confirmed users can save books. An unsaved book may disappear between sessions. Would you like to be confirmed now? PrimeHunter (talk) 09:27, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with being Autoconfirmed

My account is over 4 days old and I have made at least 10 edits, but I am not autoconfirmed. What should I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by InformationContributor11 (talk • contribs) 01:18, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What led you to believe you were not autoconfirmed? Are you editing through a TOR network? Anyway, I have manually granted you confirmed user status as a user right, which will do nothing if you were already autoconfirmed, and if it you weren't, then it should override whatever was going on.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:59, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorting issue

I'm working on creating a new page in one of my sandboxes, and one feature is a rather lengthy table. I have the 'sortable' feature of the table is activated and each one section of the table sorts fine except for the final one; instead of sorting numbers from largest to smallest, it sorts in some weird manner that sorts numbers greater than nine separately from those that are less than or equal to nine. I've looked at similar templates and none of them have this issue, and my experimentation to fix it isn't working. How do I fix this and make the template sort correctly? Toa Nidhiki05 02:39, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is that the references inside the table are messing up the sort. The page at Help:SORT#Numerical_sorting_problems kinda says that it shouldn't, but the example they give doesn't have any references in the table cells that are being sorted. RudolfRed (talk) 02:52, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe if you have anything other than a pure number in the cell, it treats it as text and sorts it like text. The easiest solution is to move the references to a separate column.--SPhilbrick (Talk) 11:26, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll have to see about that. Toa Nidhiki05 15:04, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your link is somehow being connected to mine

Hello. My name is Kim. I have a fan page on Facebook at the following link......https://www.facebook.com/GrannyDs. For some unknown reason, whenever I post and share from my page on Facebook. It puts the following name in my posts as a link to my page. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Granny-D/112933575422468?rf=126424307400147, which is causing a BIG MIX UP among my friends and fans. And all of my posts are being directed over to this page also. Wikipedia, seems to be the only source on this page where I can contact someone about this error. I have contacted Facbook Support about this issue also, but decided it best to also contact you with hopes that you might be able to get this matter resolved.71.228.42.53 (talk) 02:44, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have no connection to Facebook. If they are not displaying things correctly, you'll have to take it up with them. Dismas|^(talk) 02:49, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook community pages may incorporate content from Wikipedia— such use complies with Wikipedia policies on reuse of content. We at Wikipedia have no control over how the content is included nor can we help to remove it. Facebook does have a topic on Community pages and profile connections on their Help Center. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:23, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a page basic

1. I am preparing an article in My SandBox

2. How do I upload a photo to My SandBox

3. Once I think the article is complete, to whom do I submit it

4. I asked basically the same questions a week ago and no response. Is that your policy? Or do you respond?

thanks

Caldude85

Caldude85 (talk) 03:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you were logged into this account when you say you asked the same question last week, then you only attempted to do so; this is your first edit to the help desk. Please read our requirements that topics of articles be notable, the subject specific guideline applicable to articles about people and our guide to identifying reliable sources, which is crucial to understand in order to meet notability requirements. I am pointing you to these pages because I have doubts that the topic in your sandbox can meet these requirements. In any event, I am going to post below a standard template that describes the process of uploading and using images, but please note that unless you know of a freely-licensed image that is compatible with our license or in the public domain, I don't think you will be able to use an image. While we do allow certain copyrighted images to be used under a claim of fair use, this is rarely allowed for images of living people. Note also that images claimed to be fair use must not be used while the page remains in your sandbox. There is no one you must submit it to. You can simply move it to the article mainspace when you think it is complete. But you might drop by here and ask someone to take a look befoe doing so because if, for example, it resembles its present state, it will likely be deleted very quickly once moved. The text appearing below this is the image template I advised I'd post.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:50, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must determine the proper license of the image (or whether it is in the public domain). If you know the image is public domain or copyrighted but under a suitable free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure of the licensing status, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy.
If you want to add an image that has already been uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, add [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information. I hope this helps.

there is a mix up?

Hi Wikipeadia I found on one of your Web pages called Ultimate Spiderman episode 109 & 110 are the wrong way around is this the way it spouse to be or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.238.11.132 (talk) 03:44, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The list at List_of_Ultimate_Spider-Man_episodes is sorted by the date the episodes aired. It's possible they were not shown in the order they were created. RudolfRed (talk) 03:54, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See also Production code number. According to List of Ultimate Spider-Man episodes episode 9 to be shown had production code 110, and episode 10 had code 109. I haven't seen a source for the production codes but note that episode 10 says "A special screening of this episode was shown at the Marvel Television panel at the 2012 annual Chicago Comic & Entertainment Expo (C2E2)." That was in mid April and episode 9 didn't air until May 20 so it sounds plausible that episode 10 was produced first. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:13, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Joint Casualty Resolution Center article

Dear Sir/ma'am

Hello.

After reading and attempting to jump thru all the various hoops needed to ask that a article be created,it was more of a pain in the ass than I had either the time or patience to deal with. I was searching for information,pictures, or anything at all on a joint unit created during the VN war in order to, among other covert activities,search and account for missing and dead service-members. The unit in question is called JOINT CASUALTY RESOLUTION CENTER, and was still active up until late 1990's-2000,when I lost track of their activities. If you can research this unit and post anything at all about it,including the pocket and shoulder patch(s), as well as the unit crest, beret flash, and parachute wing background (flash & oval are all black with a orange stripe going thru it, top right to bottom left,IIRC)

Any information is much appreciated,and if you need some minor help, I would be glad to give ya'll what I know.Ask for hep same area you appeal for donations,and provided it isnt a 30-step process,I will contact whomever and help with what I can. Also, someone has GOT to make the submittal process easier when looking to have a article created. As it is now, it is ridiculous-too many hoops to jump thru just to ask for "CREATE A ARTICLE ON________________________".

Thank you for your time,

SFC Craig — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.57.19.176 (talk) 07:44, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command help you? Dru of Id (talk) 08:02, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(JCRC [1] became "Joint Task Force - Full Accounting" in 1992 [2], which consolidated to JPAC in 2003). Dru of Id (talk) 08:20, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Category question

Can I get some guidance on this issue please: Wikipedia_talk:Categorization#Defunct_resorts? It's gone unanswered for 17 days on what seemed to be the right place to ask. Thanks! —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 09:14, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So your question is essentially "Shouldn't all categories at least have a paragraph defining them if not a main article?". This is not a requirement, and there are many many categories without a description. You may add one by going to the category page and clicking the edit button.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:31, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They are existing categories. It's not up to me to decide what they are about, is it? My question is primarily specific to those categories and that article, as I wrote, and secondarily in general. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:57, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Film capacitor

Please help: I tried to move my article User:Elcap/Film capacitor to an official wiki page "Film capacitor", but the article moved to "Wikipedia:Film capacitor". Please help to correct my mistake. Thanks, --Elcap (talk) 11:47, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. You forgot to choose the namespace in the drop-down list. Regards.--GoP _T ^C _N 11:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't the first time I've seen this happen. A new user might (understandably) think that, when moving a page out of user space, the proper location is Wikipedia. Seems obvious, but it is wrong. I wonder if there is an easy way to have a pop up warning, as it is almost always wrong, and if you really want to move it to the Wikipedia name space, you would know enough to ignore the warning. The warning would read something like " If this is intended to be an article in Wikipedia, you want to move it to the article namespace, not the Wikipedia namespace. If you are sure that you want the Wikipedia namespace hit continue".--SPhilbrick (Talk) 14:02, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can the dropdown list be set to be on article space by default? Then move attempts such as this would be correct anyway. Anyone wanting to move a page anywhere other than article space should be experienced enough to select the correct space. Roger (talk) 14:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The default namespace is the current one and I think that's best. Article as default would probably cause many incorrect moves to article space. The currently blank MediaWiki:Movepage-summary is displayed at top of all move forms. It could explain that "(Article)" and not "Wikipedia" means encyclopedia article. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:57, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

F.G.Natesa Iyer

I have created an article around F.G.Natesa Iyer, at User:AnanthanarayanaSharma/FG Natesa Iyer. Is it possible to have a "soft review" done, on things like notability, references, etc? Since he was a well known historical figure in South Indian politics and culture in the first half of the twentieth century,is it possible to get some more references and details? Anant (talk) 12:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the all caps section headings. The lead needs to be expanded to briefly summarise the article. Please do not refer to the subject by his full name. Use only the surname like this: "John P. H. Smith-Fleming was a tall man" is incorrect, "Smith-Fleming was a tall man" is correct. Unfortunately I can't figure out in this case what part of his name is the surname. Roger (talk) 12:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have expanded the lead. The name F.G.N.Iyer has been used throughout the article. Anant (talk) 14:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Need review of my article.

May the respected fellow members here furnish to me, a review of article created by me. It is Madhavi Mudgal. Thanks! VIVEK RAI : Friend? 12:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done - I made a few minor changes.--ukexpat (talk) 12:56, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is a Wikiproject allowed to have a "shared" sandbox?

Sometimes creating an article draft is easier as a joint effort rather than as primarily the work of a single editor. In such a case it would be easier if a sandbox can be under a Wikiproject because it can be inhibiting to the process if the user who happens to "own" the sandbox is expected to always take the lead and other editors might feel like they are "intruding" when they contribute to such a draft. Having a sandbox "on neutral ground" might help the drafting process. Roger (talk) 12:59, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:03, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The main sandbox is in theory shared by everyone, so I don't see why a Project shouldn't have its own shared sandbox.--ukexpat (talk) 13:05, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It might be prudent to create a new shared sandbox for each article being drafted, so that the finished draft can be moved to mainspace without dragging huge amounts of irrelevant history with it. I'd appreciate it if someone could pick me up if I've got the mechanics of moving pages wrong, though. Brammers (talk/c) 13:12, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also a good idea.--ukexpat (talk) 13:22, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, but I actually feel a bit sheepish now, as I have just discovered that WP:WikiProject Disability does in fact already have a sandbox - it's a bit dusty and covered in cobwebs but I'm about to start something new there. Roger (talk) 13:26, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Scouting project has the Article incubator where we collaborate on any number of draft articles. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 13:43, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Local upload

How do I upload a photo locally to only the English version of Wikipedia? Jheditorials 13:48, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Unless you're submitting it to Wikimedia Commons, the image would only be available on the English Wikipedia. But if the image is suitable for our wiki, the licensing will likely permit other editors to use it (with attribution) on other wikipedia projects. You might want to be more specific - do you just want to use it here, or do you wish to prevent other projects from using it as well? UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 14:15, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The question stems from these two discussions: [[3]] and [[4]]. Thanks! Jheditorials 14:28, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Transcluding only a section of a page into another page

Is it possible to transclude only a defined section of one page into another? I tried {{Source page#Source section}} but the whole of the "Source page" transcluded instead of only "Source section". Roger (talk) 14:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, see Wikipedia:Transclusion#Partial transclusion. It requires some preparation of the source page. -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 15:04, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Maybe someday I'll learn to RTFM before asking questions here. Roger (talk) 15:52, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CPU overloading

I've been having a problem with my PC for a while now. It's cnfiguration is thus- 2 GB memory, 2.8 GHz Core 2 duo prcessor and a 1 GB NVIDIA graphics card. The problem is that when I'm playing games like FIFA 12 and CoD6, they terminate abruptly resulting in a blue screen which complaints about overloading. I work on Windows7 and have Ubuntu installed on the system as well. What coud be the problem and how can I fix it myself ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.204.6.155 (talk) 14:34, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. I hope this helps.--ukexpat (talk) 14:49, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

HOW TO UPLOAD A PICTURE

i HAVE A PHOTO OF GOURI SHANKER HEERA CHAND OJHA . I WANT TO UPLOAD IT ON HIS PAGE AT WIKIPEDIA. HOW CAN I DO IT.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.109.221.102 (talk • contribs)

If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must determine the proper license of the image (or whether it is in the public domain). If you know the image is public domain or copyrighted but under a suitable free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure of the licensing status, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy.
If you want to add an image that has already been uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, add [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text.]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information. I hope this helps. And there is no need to SHOUT!--ukexpat (talk) 15:19, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do I know if a picture is okay to use on wikipedia?

I am working on improving the article of a famous person, particularly a president of a university. The article is currently a stub and does not have an image of the person.

I would like to add a picture of this person for his "infobox". How do I know that the picture of him is not copyrighted? ... can I just take a picture from the University's website? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.49.219.160 (talk) 15:38, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may not just take his picture from his website unless it clearly bears a free copyright license compatible with Wikipedia's licenses or is released into the public domain. In the absence of such material, you are required to assume any image is non-free copyrighted. We do allow use of certain images for particular purposes under a claim of fair use, but this is almost never applicable to living persons. Unfortunately, this is the state of copyright—you must have and provide positive evidence of lack of copyright, and for a large number of images, since negative evidence is very difficult to come by, you are stuck. This is the reason that we have many articles on incredibly famous people but with no photograph. It is very frustrating but them's the breaks.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:03, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

incorrect link on Quad City Eagles page

Quad City Eagles

Kurt Albrecht

Please fix one of your links embedded in an article for the "Quad City Eagles." Your page lists all of the members of their soccer team but one player in particular, Kurt Albrecht, has a link that take the reader to the page of a prominent WW2 Nazi soldier who died in 1959. As we know, most people only read the first few lines of a story of and due to that unfortunate reality, people will think that this player is a Nazi, which is obviously not true. The players name is correct, but please remove the link to the other page.

Thank you for your time.

Erik Albrecht — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.180.224.254 (talk) 16:28, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed in this edit.--ukexpat (talk) 16:59, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've also disambig'ed the three other players who linked to incorrect pages. Rojomoke (talk) 18:13, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Need Review and Copy editing help

Hello everyone. I would like to request fellow members here if they might be willing to give me some hand in copy editing and and re arranging the content on this page. Also add any necessary inputs if possible and rectify any grammatical mistakes if they still persist. Thanks! The article is this User:Vivek Rai/Palle Rama Rao VIVEK RAI : Friend? 17:46, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Citation Not Needed..

In the Eurovision Article there is the line: Most host countries choose to capitalise on the opportunity afforded them by hosting a programme with such a wide-ranging international audience, and it is common to see the presentation interspersed with video footage of scenes from the host nation, as if advertising for tourism.[citation needed] --- As far as i can see, this can not be citited under Wiki guide lines becuase only via watching the show would you know or not or can the citation be a personal comment ie - 2012 Eurovison had segways that showed places of natureal beauty in Azerbaijan, clearly a nice looking and well placed bit of advertising. Would this be acceptable? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MLaughton (talk • contribs) 17:55, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not. There is a grey area when an article about a film or TV programme says that something happens or is seen in the film or programme, and it is at least arguable that the item is a reliable source for facts about its content. But this is a different case, because it is making a general claim about Eurovision presentations in general. If it is not referenced to a reliable source, it is original research, and should be removed. --ColinFine (talk) 22:48, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's also disallowed original research to make your own analysis of why the images are shown. It may well be that their goal is to advertise for tourism but you should cite a reliable source for such a claim. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:46, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr Images

Is it ok to take an image from flickr and use it on a wikipedia page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.49.219.160 (talk) 18:26, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In many, many cases, the answer is no. I believe the images in the top and bottom categories on this Flickr page—"Attribution License" (CC BY) and "Attribution-ShareAlike License" (CC BY-SA)—are OK to use on Wikipedia, but even with those there may be problems if they've been uploaded to Flickr by people who don't have the right to so license them. The licensing information for each Flickr image appears under "License" on the right-hand side of its Flickr page; any image with "All rights reserved" or with a license more restrictive than the two I mentioned above (such as a prohibition of commercial use or of derivative works) is not compatible with Wikipedia's licensing. Deor (talk) 19:54, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See

Flickr image info.	License	OK here?
© All rights reserved	No license	NOT OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY-NC-ND	NOT OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY-NC-SA	NOT OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY-NC	NOT OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY-ND	NOT OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY	OK
Some rights reserved	CC-BY-SA	OK
No rights reserved.	Public Domain	OK

Look at the right side of a page on flicker and you will see the above signs. Then look at this table; only three types of licenses are allowed. Regards.--GoP _T ^C _N 20:57, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

our wikipedia page was deleted

Im currently interning at Water Music Publishing and we noticed that our wikipedia page was deleted by Ron Ritzman due to non-reliable sources but we're confused by what that means because our claims are true so right now our concern is to get the page restored which lies in the power of the administrators, thanks for the help.

-Marc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.125.240.100 (talk) 18:27, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, this is not "your" Wikipedia page, but rather a Wikipedia article about your firm. See WP:OWN and more importantly our guidelines on conflict of interest. If these assertions were properly cited to impartial third-party sources, they must still establish that the subject corporation is notable enough to merit an article about it in an encyclopedia. If that is the case, presumably at some point somebody else, somebody without your conflict of interest will write an impartial article about the company, properly sourced and with the requisite neutral point of view. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:42, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To get the page restored (to user space), follow the directions in WP:USERFY, but unless you address any problems pointed out by User:Orangemike, the article will likely get deleted again.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:52, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Email password reminder not arrived

I have sent out for a new password

To date it has not reached me.

Charles Stewart — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.153.89.123 (talk) 18:45, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Standard advice is to look in your spam folders. Otherwise there is not much we can do. Do you still have access to the email address with which you originally registered your account? --ColinFine (talk) 22:50, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Searching for wikipedia articles on the internet and article quality ratings.

Hello, my article, Manuel Sáez, shares the same title as another article on Wikipedia. It's the name of a person and the only difference between the two names is an accent. When I do a search on the internet, my artcle does not show up wheras the other article does. My article was assessed as Start-Class, is this the reason why it doesn´t show up in searches on the internet (e.g. Google)? I've recently revamped my article, is it possible for it to be reassessed? Many thanks for your time GreenMutant (talk) 19:52, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have no control over how search engines work. It is possible that the search engine(s) you are using are ignoring the diacritical mark and that the older, longer article Manuel Saez (which probably also has more incoming wikilinks) simply comes up far sooner than the newer one (Manuel Sáez (artist)) on search results. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:08, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(ec)I will move the article to Manuel Sáez (artist) and will add a pointer from the other article to this one. Hopefully that will help.

I haved moved it to Manuel Sáez as disambiguation is not required for the version of the title with the diacritic, and corrected the hatnote at Manuel Saez.--ukexpat (talk) 20:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is that acceptable? Having articles on two different topics with only diacritics being the difference in the article name? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:58, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why not -- there is certainly no technical reason for it to be unacceptable. If search engines are ignoring the diacritics, that will happen with or without the disambiguation.--ukexpat (talk) 21:02, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In most languages which use diacritical marks, the letter plus diacritic is considered an entirely separate letter; e.g., h and ĥ in Esperanto, o and ö in Hungarian, n and ñ in Spanish, etc. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:05, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then might I suggest adding a hatnote to Manuel Saez? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 21:07, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Of course you can suggest it. Better is to be bold and add it. RudolfRed (talk) 22:26, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page view question...

So I was looking at the page views for the Speech_generating_device article (views are at [5]). And the views show a fairly major spike followed by a consistantly high improvement — I'm curious to know what caused this — are there any tools availbile to look at the sources of incoming views? Would be a really interesting data set...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fayedizard (talk • contribs)

Very curious. I tried a general search of links to the article ([6]) and News archive searches sorted by date of both the title and the redirect to it to see if anything was reported just before the spike and nada. I'd like to know too.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:16, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't thought of googling for links - very smart :) actually I think I may have a suspision - Stephen Hawking shows a similar jump [7] and that's the week he turned up on big bang theory… so I maybe a big run off in this case. Would still be interesting to see see some wikiware (if that's not a word yet then I think I invented it) that splits up page views by where they came from (i.e. google/otherpages and which otherpages)… might help when people are attempting to moud the language of a particular article properly… Fayedizard (talk) 08:47, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

False information keeps being re-posted on my page, please help!

Hi Wikipedia, I work for City University of Seattle and would like to flag a section under our reputation section. I have amended this section a few times, as have others, and it keeps being changed back to the same false statement. The statement can be found on - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_University_of_Seattle. Here is the statement in total: "Allegations of Fraud in Switzerland (title) In January 2011 the circuit court in Zurich adjudicated the Swiss branch of the City University of Seattle bankrupt. [7] It was the second time in seven years that the Swiss part of the City University went bankrupt. In other countries there were similiar incidents. In 1991 the City University launched a subsidiary in Slovakia which went bankrupt in 2003. [8] Though the students enrolled paid millions of Dollars for tuiton fees each year, the Swiss branch had no assets in January 2011. After that local Swiss authorities filed a suit for fraud against the former headmaster of the Swiss branch of the City University of Seattle. [9] There have allegedly been irregularities concerning the deposited funds. [10] In addition to that the Swiss authorities make the allegation that the City University has taken advantage of the good reputation of Swiss schools to sell not recognized useless diplomas for money. [11] In the media coverage following these events the City University was mostly described as an institution with a bad reputation. Several Swiss newspapers and blogs described the City University as "dubious university" [12] or used the term "pseudo-university". [13] [14] It was not the first time that the City University was described in a negative way. As early as in the nineties the German politician Rezzo Schlauch called the City University "a third class school disguising as a university" (original: "eine als Universitaet getarnte drittklassige Volkshochschule"). The City University sued Rezzo Schlauch, but a German court defended Mr. Schlauchs view and rejected all claims. [15]"

As a senior level manager at City University of Seattle, I can tell you City University of Seattle (CityU) decided to close City University of Seattle Zurich once in the 1990s for admissions reasons. Then, we re-opened a City University of Seattle Zurich campus in the late 1990s and later declared bankruptcy in 2010/2011. This caused some negative editorial articles and blogs to be posted about CityU. However, Zurich was the only campus of CityU’s that went bankrupt. And, as this campus closed, CityU offered a tuition package to each student at the Zurich campus, making it so each student would not have to pay any extra for their education, should they want to continue with CityU in Switzerland or elsewhere. Students at this campus transferred to City University of Seattle’s Lucerne campus (ref: http://www.cityu.edu/locations/europe/lucerne.aspx), City University of Seattle Slovakia Bratislava (ref: http://www.cityu.edu/locations/europe/bratislava.aspx), City University of Seattle Prague (ref: http://www.cityu.edu/locations/europe/prague.aspx), and our U.S. Bellevue campus (http://www.cityu.edu/locations/americas/bellevue.aspx). We have seen students who were enrolled at the Zurich campus graduate, but we have not seen “millions” of dollars from them as this post claims. We have not seen even close to a million dollars. We have also never seen allegation that the City University of Seattle, or any of our locations have taken advantage of the reputation of Swiss schools or any school for that matter. We have also never sold our degrees to any student, rendering them useful. City University of Seattle is accredited by the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities, a regional accrediting body approved by the U.S. Department of Education (ref: http://www.cityu.edu/about/profile/accreditation.aspx). Regional accreditation serves as the most important means of assuring the quality of higher education through meticulous peer-review and evaluation. CityU has maintained continuous accreditation with the Commission since 1978, earning reaffirmation of accreditation in its last review in 2010. Members of this accreditation team also visited several other locations, including our international locations. This accreditation body would in no way stand for our selling degrees or taking advantage of other’s reputation.

We try very hard to uphold our reputation as a small, not-for-profit, university. Can I please ask that you remove and ban this post? It is false, wrong, and hurting our reputation. Thank you, City University of Seattle 209.221.168.11 (talk) 23:22, 4 June 2012 (UTC) 209.221.168.11 (talk) 23:22, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

First, it is not "your" page. See WP:OWN. Second, you have a conflict of interest here, see WP:COI. If you have any changes you want to make to the page, please post the changes on the article's talk page. along with verifiable sources (WP:V) RudolfRed (talk) 23:36, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree with the points RudolfRed is making, I think the tone of that reply is a little bitey. Wikipedia is concerned that articles be accurate and balanced, but the criterion is verifiability rather than truth. If a reliable source says something about you that you don't like, then that information may be added to the article, and you are not entitled to remove it (if it is not supported by such a reference, anybody may remove it). If you can find independent reliable sources that say something different, they may be added to the page - but as an interested party you should not do this, but confine yourself to suggesting it on the article's talk page. Normally the original statement should stay in the article as well, perhaps with text that points out that different sources say different things: if the statement is clearly superseded (for example by a retraction in the same organ, or if enough other reliable sources dispute it) it might be acceptable to remove it, but this is a matter for consensus among interested editors. --ColinFine (talk) 19:21, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, looking at it now, it is a little bitey. Apologies to the OP, and thanks for the better explanation you provided. RudolfRed (talk) 20:37, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]