Wikipedia:Help desk

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

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

Ask a question

September 29

Empty reason for deletion

Some pages, such as User:Tokyogirl79/book synopsis and Draft:Queensland State Velodrome, have a deletion log entry without any reason for deletion. How can one store a list of such pages? GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:30, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Are you looking for a list of pages which were deleted without a specific reason provided? Tiggerjay (talk) 05:09, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

In case you're not clear, it's always possible to delete a page with no rationale whatsoever. Never a good idea, but it's the default. If you're an administrator, when you click the "delete" button, you're presented with something like File:Delete-NAS.PNG, although the dropdown menu displays "Other reason" instead of a reason. "Other reason" always gets hidden when you click "Delete page"; if you click it without changing anything, the page gets deleted without a rationale, so you have to pick an option from the dropdown (e.g. G12 speedy, as in the image) and/or type something in the blank. For future reference, if you discover such a page, you can always ask the deleting admin, or if that's not practical (e.g. the admin's no longer active), just make a request at another administrator's talk page, or go to WP:REFUND and say something like "this page got deleted with no rationale, so please undelete this page and then re-delete it with a rationale". Nyttend (talk) 19:27, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Bulk download of images from a list

Hi.

Sorry, new to this and not sure where else to ask. I have searched the FAQ, archive, general internet and Mediawiki extentsion but cannot find a clear and simple solution.

I would like to download a list of images directly.

To explain why, I am trying to set up a working copy of Mediawiki/Wikipedia in order to learn how it works and how to administrate it. For example, I have most elements working, including various templates and portals, but am missing all the graphic icons for them.

Special pages offer a list of missing images (Special:WantedFiles).

I was wonder how it would be possible just to take the list generated, and use it to download them directly and automatically. Ditto for a few categories of topics (for dummy content). I appreciate that some graphics and images might be here, and some over at Wikipedia. I don't want to make a book or a PDF, just need the raw data.

I have read some really complex articles about downloading complete dumps from mirrors, setting up environments and and using command lines to extract images etc but that seem like overkill for what I'm after.

Is there an easy way to do it (and bulk uploading).

Thanks. --Wordfunk (talk) 07:40, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Does Wikipedia:Database download help? Rwessel (talk) 07:58, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, but I am afraid not. It's out of date too, there is no "upload.wikimedia.org". Strange there's a function to make a book but not one to download a category or topic's worth of images.

Downloading the entire database and then digging out just the one's you need is impossible. It's a TB of data they say.

The problem is, each file is held on a "File:example.jpg" page, but the actual jpeg is then buried in some random folder somewhere, e.g. "/wikipedia/commons/5/57/example.jpg".

What about all the graphics used in the templates etc, are they available as a single "skin" download?

Appreciated. --Wordfunk (talk) 17:17, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Ah, OK, it seems it's a known issue, see: Add image data option to Special:Export and has been hanging around since 2006 or 2008.

Betacommand added a comment.Via Conduit · Mar 21 2014, 4:50 PM

"This has the potential to make moving data from project to project, and even having a standard import/export with default data much easier. Right now setting up and or importing templates/articles and similar are very time consuming as you have to track down every image that is being used and manually move that to the new project. This would also make moving data to and from commons much easier and enable maintaining attribution without having to jump through hoops".

That's exactly what I am talking about, so it seems the answer currently is no. You've got to sit and move 100s, if not 1,000s of them, individually by hand. --Wordfunk (talk) 20:40, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to our world...--ukexpat (talk) 13:33, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

My first article

Mawra Hocane has been tagged as speedy deletion. It was previously deleted, so I have improved the references.--NewMutants (talk) 11:03, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Just because someone’s chosen occupation means that they appear in some films as an actor or actress does not make them notable in an encyclopedic sense. The reference provided all appear to be advertorials rather than reliable sources. So I think this article should go to AfD again. Promotional material like this is more suited to be posted somewhere else but not here.--Aspro (talk) 13:16, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Uploading a picture

Dear helpers,

I have created a Wikipedia article, and it is coming along pretty well, but it lacks some pictures. So I decided to upload some pictures. The pictures are uploaded in Wikimedia Commons and can be found in Wikimedia commons already. When I use the link that is given to me in the Wikimedia Commons upon completing the upload process in my article the little message box simply stays there and does nothing. It doesnt give me any reason to see what is wrong. Is it my article, my picture, or my computer?

Kind regards Maddmaxie (talk) 13:28, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Maddmaxie, what page are you referring to? I've looked at your recent edits and I can't see any obvious problem. The format is [[File:filename.jpg|thumb|caption]] Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:50, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

(ec) Hello @Maddmaxie:, if you are referring to File:Gezicht op het Badhotel te Domburg.jpg, this file is searchable and accessible in Wikipedia (at least for me). Or did you mean a different file? Please provide a link to the problem for such questions, it's easier to help then. As a general note, newly uploaded Commons images may sometimes need a bit of time (a few hours, 1-2 days), until they are searchable in Wikipedia (depending on the servers' mood, I suppose). But the linked file is OK and can also be added to articles with the above File tag (just tested). GermanJoe (talk) 13:52, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

2 more points:- 1) file names are case sensitive, so must be copied exactly 2) when a file is first added to an article it can take several seconds for the image to appear, so people preview the page and assume they have got it wrong, as it is not immediately visible - it is worth hanging on for 15-20 seconds before assuming there is a mistake. - Arjayay (talk) 14:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you guys. I just needed to give it some time, it indeed worked. Thank you for the quick help.--Maddmaxie (talk) 14:23, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Help:Cite errors/Cite error references missing key

re Bill Alexander theatre director

I've just added citations against 'recent work' but they seem to have disappeared??? eek also, I don't know how to cite the fact that Bill and Juliet have four grandchildren? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moobel (talk • contribs) 14:27, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Moobel. I assume you are talking about the article Bill Alexander (director). It saves volunteers responding time if you provide a link to any article you are asking for help with.

You had (or some earlier editor had) included a list-defined reference to Trowbridge, Simon (2010). The Company : a biographical dictionary of the Royal Shakespeare Company, but had not actually cited that source by including the proper ref tag <ref name="Trowbridge" />. I have added it in what seems to be the proper place. Note that if this source can also support othre statements in the article, this same tag can be added in other places to indicate this.

If a source states that they have four grandchildren, this is cited just as any other supporting source would be. However, is this really significant encyclopedic information about this subject?

Please note for the future that section headers use sentence case: "Later work", not "Later Work".

I hope all this helps.Please check to see that no errors have been introduced by later fixes. DES ^(talk) 15:36, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

LIST OF NRI IN DUBAI

R/Sir How can I get list of INDIAN NRI at DUBAI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.212.186.214 (talk) 15:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Please clarify. What or who are NRI???? And what does this have to do with editing Wikipedia? --Orange Mike | Talk 15:05, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

NRI is Non-resident Indians. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:15, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Nick Gromicko's Wiki page

Nick Gromicko

We have tried several times to upload a list of articles in which Nick Gromicko or his company InterNACHI have been referenced or quoted, and every time we do, that list is deleted by the following day. We're not sure why, or how to proceed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.164.36.69 (talk) 16:06, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

For starters, you should not be thinking about it as "Nick Gromicko's Wiki page" - it is "the Wikipedia encyclopedia article about Nick Gromicko".

Secondly, who is "we"? If "we" have a connection to Nick Gromicko, "we" should not be editing the article directly. Instead, make suggestions on the article talk page. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:10, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

If you do make a suggestion on the article talk page, please use {{Request edit}} to alert other editors that changes have been requested.~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:24, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

@Maddiefoster: I noticed that most of the list that was included just provides links to where Mr. Gromicko was quoted. At Wikipedia, that does not confer notability on a person. Articles need to be about the subject, i.e. Nick Gromicko. If nobody is writing about him, then we don't consider him notable. Dismas|^(talk) 17:07, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Article has been speedily deleted per Wikipedia:CSD#A7.--ukexpat (talk) 13:56, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Cite Error

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.154.65.181 (talk) 18:43, September 29, 2015 (UTC)

Article: Royal Northern College of Music

• You added <ref></ref> tags without adding an actual reference. Please see referencing for beginners for information on how to cite. --Stabila711 (talk) 19:08, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

I do not know what to do with this user.

I know not if this is the better site to ask this, but I don´t know where ask. Long ago, in the Template:Ethnicity in Louisiana, I included a parenthesis next to the word " Creoles" to placing in it to "Cajuns" and "Isleños in Louisiana," because both peoples are Louisiana Creole people. However, a anonymous user is removing this parenthesis. I put the parenthesis several times and the user removed it in all of them, without even indicate why eliminated the parenthesis in the summary editing. Even I indicated, in the talk page of the user, that he should not remove the brackets and that if he did that he should indicate why eliminated. The user not only did not answer, but he returned to remove the parenthesis that I put. I do not know what I can do with this person. I do not know if I should indicate this to an administrator to he blocked him, or do other thing, and I need to know, because it starts to be very annoying.--Isinbill (talk) 19:53, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

You can wait some time and see if the user reacts to the talk page message that you posted on the IP's talk page. If not and they revert again, you can go to WP:RFPP and request semi-protection. Ruslik_Zero 20:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

September 30

Jim Carrey

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Should content about the death of an ex-girlfriend/boyfriend, or even current girlfriend/boyfriend, be included in a celebrity's article? If so, how much? Content about the suicide of Jim Carrey's girlfriend was just added to his article, in the personal life section. Numerous mainstream media such as NBC News and FOX News are reporting that she is an ex-girlfriend, not current.[1][2] Some others are claiming that they recently got back together or possibly got back together, including TMZ, where the story apparently originated. The only source currently included in the Carrey article is Gawker. So, putting aside the sources, should that content be in the article? I'm not sure if it matters, but they only dated in 2012 according to sources, and again this year if they actually started dating again. From reading many celebrity bios on here over the years, my understanding has been that only "significant" relationships - like marriages and long-term relationships - should be mentioned in an article, and that brief or on/off relationships should not. I have never edited the article and will not touch this content. I'll leave that to editors who are much more familiar with the rules of biographies. Czoal (talk) 20:02, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

While I was waiting for a reply, I found the BLP noticeboard and asked for help there instead. Perhaps that's a more appropriate place for my inquiry anyway. Czoal (talk) 23:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

DMX Max air transfer system reebok, motion analysis, engineering

I am asking for more information about the "DMX Max air transfer system" used by reebok for running shoes. Not being able to find the correct category in the request page, I have resorted to this. A google search says this technology is "motion analysis" and is an engineering science. Reebok also used a technology called "energaire" for a shoe, also Spalding used "energaire" technology for it's Denise Austin running shoe. Having owned a pair of the Spalding Energaires', I know that the shoe sole on the ball of the foot, has an air cushion, a bubble if you will. Maybe other people are interested in the technology of creating the sole of a running shoe using various engineering techniques that incorporate using this air-pocket system. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.59.100.183 (talk) 00:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6.8 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:57, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Fraud

Please help me with... I am the owner of a TV station in the US Virgin Island-WSVI. I used to think this was a reliable service and I have been a contributor over the years. I have gotten a real wake up call. Someone -It seems by the name 'I Dream of Horse' has been enetering lies about who owns my business and the lies have been attributed to JVC Broadcasting Company, an entity I know know nothing about.

For the record-using your own info on the WSVI wikipedia page here is the owner of WSVI and WZVI TV http://licensing.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/ws.exe/prod/cdbs/pubacc/prod/sta_det.pl?Facility_id=2370

And here are the stations owned by JVC. Note there is no mention of a TV in the Virgin Islands as you report in Wikipedia. http://www.jvcbroadcasting.com/our-stations Even though I have made changes this person comes back and changes the changes.

What is going on with you people?

Telling me who is doing this so I can get my lawyer involved. Thank you

63.138.96.6 (talk) 02:20, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

David Lampel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.138.96.6 (talk) 02:23, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

• First off, read no legal threats. It is highly recommended that you retract your threat immediately or you could be blocked per Wikipedia's policy. Second, I dream of horses reverted an unexplained blanking of a page which looked like vandalism. That is standard practice. That is why we have edit summaries. This is not "fraud" and this is no place for lawyers. Unexplained blanking of pages will be reverted. I see you have included an edit summary the next time you removed the section. That should suffice. --Stabila711 (talk) 02:30, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

• Further, it's not "your page" as you've indicated in your talk page comments. Just because you happen to own the TV station doesn't mean you get any special rights or privileges over other users. On the contrary, you have a conflict of interest and should not be editing the article directly. JIP | Talk 08:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

• I have removed the unsourced claim that JVC owns WSVI. I could find no connection between the two with Google. The page histories show the claim was added a week ago by 2601:19B:8201:2AD0:AE22:BFF:FEDA:1B7, an unregistered user with no other edits. Other involved users may just have reacted to inappropriate page blanking or what looked like inappropriate section blanking. Such edits are usually vandalism and editors don't have time to investigate everything. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:45, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Page on Wikipedia

Sir/Madam,

I'm a prudent banker in India, working as Asst Vice President with Axis Bank wish to have a page on Wikipedia. Is it possible.

Pls advise

Jayant Edake — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.39.13.232 (talk) 04:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

• Well that depends on if you meet our notability standards for inclusion. Also please see the general guidelines for all articles. Wikipedia articles must have reliable sources that are independent from the article's topic. Just because it exists does not mean it is fit for inclusion on Wikipedia. If you believe that you meet these requirements. I recommend reading your first article. In addition, I recommend going through the articles for creation process as you have a conflict of interest. This will let you create the page that will be reviewed by another editor to make sure it meets the standards set by the Wikipedia community. --Stabila711 (talk) 04:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Since it seems like Axis Bank already exists (mea culpa for not checking), I changed the notability link to persons and struck some words since it seems more accurate to this question (thanks CiaPan and RegistryKey). The rest of my comment still stands --Stabila711 (talk) 17:53, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
• If I understand the question correctly, you want to have your biography page. If so, please be aware there are special restrictions on writing biographies of living people (→ Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons) and even more on writing about ourselves (→ Wikipedia:Autobiography). --CiaPan (talk) 07:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
• Page already exists, see Axis Bank. RegistryKey^(RegEdit) 08:16, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Corrections to a Wikipedia page

I am a paid consultant working for MSCI, Inc.

They have asked me to make changes to the Wikipedia page about the company, because the current information is outdated.

Am I allowed to do that, if I disclose my relationship with the company?

Thanks.

Frank Beck — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frank Beck (talk • contribs) 11:58, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Greetings. Putting an Wikipedia:Edit request on the talk page is probably better, along with a reliable source for the change proposed.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Frank Beck, Jo-Jo Eumerus' suggestion is a good one. I have dropped a welcome message on our talk page with some general information links for you.
• I believe that if you edit any page on a paid basis you must reveal that, or you may be wp:blocked. Even then the edit must be NPOV, encyclopaedic, reliably, and if possible independently, sourced, and not promotional etc.
• Not being an expert on WP policy in this area, please see the Wikimedia web page "FAQ on paid contributions without disclosure", which I think covers your query. 220 of ^Borg 12:28, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Note, however this only applies to pages whose changes that you are doing as a paid employee/consultant. Someone editing the organization that they were a volunteer for would fall under to the Conflict of Interest rules which are less strict. And no problem editing pages for German singers if you aren't formally attached to them. :)Naraht (talk) 18:50, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Similar name different subject

I have a question on how to reference a person or create a link to a person on a page. When i created a link on the page, I found that a page was made but the page reference goes a different person with the same name. Apparently the person I want to reference does not exist. How does one create a reference to a different person with the same name on a page... how would Wikipedia know which page I mean? (I guess I need to build the page about the new person)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.252.24.66 (talk) 14:14, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Without actual names it's hard to tell, but apparently nobody has (as yet) found the other person of the same name, the one you were referring to, notable enough to write about. When we have two or more persons with the same name, we usually disambiguate them by clarifying who we mean with a parenthetical note and/or middle initials: we have articles on Kevin H. Smith, Kevin Smith (editor), and Kevin Smith (Australian actor), for example, and a page Kevin Smith (disambiguation) that lists all our Kevin Smith articles. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:57, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

If I understand you correctly, you are trying to add a red link, or a link to an article that hasn't been created yet, but there's already an article about a different person at that location. Let's say the person you want to write about is named John Smith. As you can see, we have lots of articles on people named John Smith. Maybe your John Smith is a musician, so you might put John Smith (musician), but there's already an article there, so you might put your redlink at John Smith (violinist). You would then disguise this in the article using a piped link, so typing [[John Smith (violinist)|John Smith]] gives you John Smith. When you made the article for John Smith (violinist), at the top you could use a hatnote to point back to the other John Smith. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:00, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

208.252.24.66 Dates are also used to disambiguate people. Occasionally there is more than one, say, John Smith (footballer) possibly with unknown middle names, but born in (or died) in different years. Example John Smith (Medal of Honor) there are three, but different birth-dates. 220 of ^Borg 15:15, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Perfect... i understand... thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.252.24.66 (talk) 15:29, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

"Appears to be written as an advertisement" flag should be removed

Hello! I have been working to remove issued that caused the page for Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center page to receive the “article appears to be written as an advertisement” flag. I believe I have dramatically reduced if not eliminated the bias and added links and citations. I’m curious if an editor would please re-review it and perhaps remove the tag. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jessicam.bagwell (talk • contribs) 15:33, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

The tag seems appropriate. Mlpearc (open channel) 15:38, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

@Jessicam.bagwell: Your only contribution was posting the question here. Assuming that you are the IP which did a lot of editing on the article, I don't think a lot of issues with tone were fixed. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 15:44, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

It still sounds far too promotional, even after the edits last month (from whom I believe is a student at Texas Tech University). This places the editor(s) in a poor COI position -which should be disclosed before they start to edit. Yet, we have a Wikipedia guide: Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide to help such editors that wish to help improve Wikipedia articles. Hope you find this helpful and happy editing. It appears to read promotional (I think, I don't know about other editors here) as it focusses too much on the benefits they provide, not simply the Universities features. A medial trained person would focus on the latter, whilst a sale and marketing person - the former.--Aspro (talk) 12:23, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Help me I don't know what a sock user is

help me I don't know what a sock user is and apparently I am one? I just started here and almost immediately had my wikipedia commons user page deleted and I made a good friend Cordless Larry but now I don't understand what is happening to my account. I promise I'm not an idiot, and cordless larry might vouch for me but he might also think I'm an idiot, and to be fair I might be biased but I was notified on my email and this is what I just copied off of a page that mentioned me: "It makes no sense to register so all the deranged monkeys can throw shit at another foolish editor who joined the community of nutters like User:Lightbreather who has long used her backup sock User:Darknipples (obvious as hell by all the gun ban propaganda she promotes and coming on the scene first when LB thought she could be banned and was temporarily and now has a new backup sock User:Asdiprizio which will in time edit gun articles but LB knows her recent permanent ban is to fresh to start promoting her anti-gun agenda through another sock. PS Do not edit others talk page duechebag. Addendum: Sorry to the lunatics who edit here and who are able to support themselves. " please help please I am just trying to get an article written about a pioneer writer in animation named Khaki Jones. Asdiprizio (talk) 16:13, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

@Cordless Larry: , Is this your friend or our "friend" from the Teahouse? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:15, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Hi TheRedPenOfDoom. Asdiprizio is an editor I helped out at the Teahouse. If you're referring to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Freshmangrandcaravan, then, no, I don't think there's any link. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Defined here Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. RJFJR (talk) 17:29, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

@Asdiprizio: To answer your first question (What is a sock user?), a sockpuppet is when someone who already has an account creates another account and then uses both accounts in a deceptive or disruptive manner. Please read the page on sock puppetry. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 17:35, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

This is the comment in which Asdiprizio was accused of sockpuppetry. It was made by an IP editor who has since been blocked, so I have told Asdiprizio not to be too concerned. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:27, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

thank you Cordless, you're the best! Asdiprizio (talk) 14:35, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Laser line level

Your information about a line laser a laser line level is inaccurate please do more research I am certain I have used one in the late 80s 2600:100C:B202:2CF8:18A1:A2FF:8293:82C5 (talk) 17:16, 30 September 2015 (UTC)John Box

That is not a question on how to use Wikipedia, which, as stated at the top, is what this page is for. If you think an article has an error you can edit it yourself, or ask someone to do so on the article's talk page, but you must be able to cite reliable sources to back up your change. "I am certain I have used one in the late 80s" is clearly not reliable, or verifiable
However, our article Laser line level has no mention of a date whatsoever, so what do you think is incorrect ? - Arjayay (talk) 17:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Perhaps Laser level? (Often confused with laser line levels). Even so, that just mentions that a certain type was patented in the late 80s, but makes no statement on how commonly (or if) these were available. Rwessel (talk) 06:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

And it states "The concept of a laser level has been around since at least the early 1970s" so is not what the IP was objecting to either. - Arjayay (talk) 14:31, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

New York Times

Is there anyway I can read The new York Times for free — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:581:8401:6170:C5D3:6E8F:813F:289B (talk) 18:19, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

While this isn't about editing Wikipedia directly (although often NYT articles are used as sources here), http://www.nytimes.com does (when I last checked) allow a person to read 10 NYT articles a month for free. For more than that a paid subscription is required. DES ^(talk) 18:25, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Also, if you're looking for older New York Times articles, portions of their archives are free. (I imagine stuff that's old enough to be public domain. I know stuff from 1905 is free but 1940 isn't.) ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:36, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

There are also 3 libraries in Pompano Beach, Florida - although I don't know whether they subscribe, nor whether they keep back copies. - Arjayay (talk) 18:46, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

If you disable javascript you can read everything for free. Ruslik_Zero 20:27, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

I was reading just today that ProQuest is available at certain libraries.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 22:17, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Article Warning

Hi, I'm following up on a page that had been flagged and I've done some substantial edits to it to make it more encyclopedic. Since the entry is on a living person, if this could be reviewed for possibly taking down the warning soon, that would be great. Simon Critchley

ThanksSarahVS (talk) 20:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Incorrect link

I was browsing through HBO's "The Wire" and one of the actors that plays Dr. David Parenti has a link to a completely different actor. Apparently there are two Dan DeLucas that are actors. Anyway, they are two different people and it is obvious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.73.138.134 (talk) 23:59, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

• Assuming you mean this article it has been fixed. Since there is no mention of Parenti on the main The Wire article I had to guess which article you meant. --Stabila711 (talk) 00:24, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

It was worse than that. Special:WhatLinksHere/Dan DeLuca had eight links from articles and files but seven of them were to the wrong actor. I have changed all seven to [[Dan DeLuca (actor, born 1970)|Dan DeLuca]] which renders as Dan DeLuca. The pages can be seen at Special:WhatLinksHere/Dan DeLuca (actor, born 1970). PrimeHunter (talk) 11:19, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

October 1

creating a new page

I'm wondering if I can create a new wiki page using/linking previous wiki pages and information? I would like to link up information relating to Iron Overload and Iron Deficiency As a page does not already exist: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AWhatLinksHere&target=Iron+Overload+vs+Iron+Deficiency&namespace= thank you for your time. Regards Kim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.189.71.144 (talk) 00:23, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Kim, I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "using/linking previous wiki pages and information". All wikipedia articles should be supported by citations to reliable sources. No Wikipedia article is ever considered a reliable source to be cited in another, as per WP:CIRCULAR and other polices and guidelines. Usually a new page should not cover the same topic that is covered in an existing page, but narrow topics can coexist with broader ones. Also, be careful to avoid original research and particularly synthesis that goes beyond available sources. DES ^(talk) 00:37, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

• Also, I am not quite sure why you would want to do that anyways. Overload and deficiency are opposites of each other. Overload is too much and deficiency is too little. I don't see why you would need a comparison page when the two are antonyms of each other. --Stabila711 (talk) 00:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
  • 1) you could try to make the case to merge the two articles into one (i dont see it, but it is out of the areas where i even pretend to have competency) 2) while you cannot use a Wikipedia article as the footnoted source for another article, you are free to use the references that support any wikipedia article to support claims in another article. (Wikipedia has an article about X that is supported by sources A, B, and C. In writing an article about X-PRIME, I can use sources A, B and C that have already been collated at X sources A, B, and C also talk about X-PRIME.) (note that if you take text wording as well as the references, you must appropriately attribute the original creation as per Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.) -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:00, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

References

Pageview database needs some administration

Recently, editors have noticed some dates have not compiled for the pageview database at http://stats.grok.se/. We have been trying to get someone's attention at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Missing_stats_dates. Now that User:Henrik has become inactive, there is no one to take ownership of such requests. We have been getting ad hoc requests handled at times, but right now we need someone who knows how to perform the machinations that update the database.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:07, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Rob Pilatus

I have two questions regarding Rob Pilatus. (1) The article shows two different dates of birth (in the lead and the infobox) and neither is sourced. The date of death has multiple sources and says he died at 32. How should the conflicting dates of birth be handled? (2) Source number 12 is a German language source (and is a dead link). Can sources written in a language other than English be used on the English Wikipedia, particularly when there's no way to know what the source says to verify the content? Czoal (talk) 01:48, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

• 1) If the age of death is sourced you can use {{Birth date based on age at death}} to work backwards.
• 2) Yes, sources in another language are acceptable just like off-line sources are acceptable. If it is a dead link you can try https://archive.org to see if there is an archive for the page. --Stabila711 (talk) 02:03, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Another editor must've seen this thread because they made some edits about the birth date. The edits appear to be different from what you're recommending, so I better not touch it. Czoal (talk) 02:54, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

@Czoal: The results for the reader are essentially the same. I just did it manually rather than letting the template do the work. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 03:51, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for taking care of it. Czoal (talk) 04:01, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Moved a page, but the new page has the old page's talk page

Hi, I created Women in music and to do so, I had to move another article (Women in Music, an article about a newsletter) to the new title Women in Music (periodical). The new article is working fine except that when you go to the talk page on Women in music, it takes you to the talk page of Women in Music (periodical). I would appreciate advice on how to fix this issue, Thanks!OnBeyondZebrax • TALK 04:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

• @OnBeyondZebrax: Whenever you move an article it automatically creates a redirect for both the old article name and the old article talk page. I broke the redirect for Talk:Women in music so you should be good. --Stabila711 (talk) 04:43, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I appreciate your assistance with fixing this!OnBeyondZebrax • TALK 04:45, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

@OnBeyondZebrax: The article relies on one major source and I doubt its neutrality as well as its need to exist. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 04:47, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Why not? There are articles about Women in computing and Women in science. Perhaps it would be better off in list form like List of women in mathematics. The article is brand new. Just because it relies on one source does not mean it is unacceptable for inclusion. There are plenty of articles here that rely on one source. --Stabila711 (talk) 04:50, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Duplicate text

Is it right to copy-paste a paragraph from one article to other article referring to tohe samew topic. The text in question is the following:

The proportion of Hungarians in the Carpathian Basin was at an almost constant 80% during the Middle Ages.[14][15][16][17][18] Non-Hungarians numbered hardly more than 20% to 25% of the total population.[14] The Hungarian population began to decrease only at the time of the Ottoman conquest,[14][15][18] reaching as low as around 39% by the end of the 18th century. The decline of the Hungarians was due to the constant wars, Ottoman raids, famines, and plagues during the 150 years of Ottoman rule.[14][15][18] The main zones of war were the territories inhabited by the Hungarians, so the death toll depleted them at a much higher rate than among other nationalities.[14][18] In the 18th century their proportion declined further because of the influx of new settlers from Europe, especially Slovaks, Serbs, Croats,[citation needed] and Germans.[14][15][18][19]

I don't think it is a good idea to put the same thing in two articles, but I'd like to have a confirmation that I am right. 86.123.40.170 (talk) 07:09, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

See Copying within Wikipedia. You can reuse the text under the CC-BY-SA terms which cover all Wikipedia content, but you need to attribute the original article, either in the edit summary or with the {{copied}} template. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:41, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Hitting the random button and seeing if the articles that come up could be improved.

I have been hitting the random button and seeing if the articles that come up could be improved. Sometimes something like Devi Kanya Kumari comes up. For the life of me I cannot figure out what the article is talking about and I don't think the average reader will be able to get anything from it either. What do I do with such an article? I hate to give up and try another random page in the hope that it will be easier to fix.

To show what I am talking about, here are a couple of random quotes from the article:

"So for using similies, and satyres for a poem they personified many manifestations of the supreme almighty for better understanding."..

I suppose I could reword this so it looks like English and fix the spelling errors, but what does "personified many manifestations of the supreme almighty" mean?

Then there is this:

"The poor Devi waited for the Lord and finally she thought that she has been snubbed. With unbearable insult, pain, grief and anger she destroyed everything she saw. She threw away all the food and broke her bangles. When she finally gained her composure she chooses to be a Sanyasin forever and took penance. Ages later Bana, tried to lure and approach the goddess without realizing who she was. The infuriated Bhagavathy, who was the Bhadrakali herself, slaughtered Bana at once. Moments before his death Bana realized that the one before him is the Bhagavathy, the Almighty itself. He prayed her to absolve him of his sins. Bhagavathy maintained her divine presence in the place, in the Devi Kanyakumari Temple."

That sentence looks like a direct cut and paste from [3] so I went back and found the edit that added it.[4] That edit also contained

"For the purpose of rites and rituals in the temple the Bhagavathi is imagined as (Sankalpam) as Balambika, the kid goddess. The rites and rituals for the worship of Devi Katyayani, one of the Nava Durga is practiced here. She is considered as Bhadrakali Bhagavathy by devotees while worshipping her."

That sentence looks like a direct cut and paste from [5].

The problem is in determining whether those sources copied from Wikipedia. The dates on them suggest that Wikipedia was first, but the fact that both sources contain a lot more material in the same writing style that was never in Wikipedia suggests that we copied them. Or perhaps we both copied from some other sources I didn't find? --Dalek Supreme X (talk) 08:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Outdated content: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

Dear Editors:

I am an employee of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute and, thus, for ethical reasons, do not want to edit SIPRI's page. However, I have twice submitted corrections on the 'talk' pages of both our institute and it's new Director, with no response from Wikipedia's editors. Could you kindly help make the appropriate changes (outlined below)? I would be very grateful.

The article on the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute lists Ian Anthony as the Interim Director (see article text below). However, Dan Smith (formerly head of International Alert and PRIO, respectively) was appointed Director by the Swedish government and took up his new role on 1 September 2015. Like SIPRI's article, Dan Smith's article has not yet been updated to reflect his new position. Please reference the articles below (in Swedish and English) which document the change in SIPRI's directorship. I am also happy to supply SIPRI's own press release on the subject, if it would help.

Thanks in advance!

Best regards,

Kate Sullivan

Current text in article on the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute: "Director The Director, who is appointed by the Swedish Government, has the main responsibility for SIPRI's work programme. Dr Bates Gill served as SIPRI Director from 2007–2012.[3] In September 2012 the Swedish Government appointed the German economist Tilman Brück as his successor.[4] Brück held the position of SIPRI Director from January 2013 to June 2014.[5] In June 2014 the SIPRI Governing Board appointed Dr Ian Anthony as Director for an interim period.[6]" Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

Current text in article on Dan Smith: "Dan Smith OBE (born 1951) is a British author, cartographer and peace researcher. He is the Secretary General of the independent peacebuilding organisation International Alert and Professor of Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Manchester." Dan Smith (British author)

Articles citing Dan's move from International Alert to SIPRI: (International Alert)

(Mundus International)

(Swedish Government)

(Svenska Dagbladet, Swedish newspaper) Kate.A.Sullivan (talk) 11:48, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

References

@Kate.A.Sullivan: I have updated the articles. Thank you for bringing the issue to our attention. Article talk pages are a good, but often slow, avenue for updating content since not all articles are watched by our diligent editors. As a major in international relations, SIPRI is a topic I am familiar with and knowledgeable about, so I will be watching this article in the future and keeping it up to date and up to standard. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 14:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

For future reference, Kate.A.Sullivan, if you add the template {{request edit}} to your suggestion on the talk page, it will get brought to more people's attention. --ColinFine (talk) 21:00, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Article is not factually correct

Snakehead (fish)

This cites that the Snakehead can be found in "two ponds in Philadelphia". I am an avid snakehead fisherman in Philadelphia. They can be found in the Delaware River, Schuylkill River, at FDR Park (I'm guessing those are the two ponds you're talking about) and in literally 40 other bodies of water in Southeastern PA. They are also all over South Jersey.

You can barely cast a line without catching one if you know what you're doing. Might want to update that.

This is no longer a rare fish in our area. I've caught 284 in the past 4 months.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:4A:8302:9E9:492D:78FD:EAAC:29C1 (talk) 12:15, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Do you have a published reliable source that can be referenced? - David Biddulph (talk) 12:26, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Note: The article that is used as a reference for that sentence is from 2007. I expect things have changed, as you say, but we'll need a new reference to update that info. Dismas|^(talk) 12:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Changing the title of a wikipedia entry

Hi, I was wondering if it would be possible to change the title of Croton Oil entry. There are several different types of croton oil that do not cause skin irritiation so this entry is misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lhw1121 (talk • contribs) 14:07, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Generally this would be done using the page move process. However, if the information about different types of croton oil can be verified in reliable sources, it would make more sense to add this information to the existing article, rather than change the title. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:09, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I'd love to donate, BUT.....

I use Wikipedia all of the time. It is, without question, the greatest reference guide to be found on the Internet.

But, before I donate, I'd like to clear up two definitions, which are meaningful to me.

Southpaw: Since "Rocky", most people think that the term "Southpaw" originated in boxing. And, with the new boxing movie "Southpaw", even more people will be misinformed. Yes, the term Southpaw refers a Leftie, which I am. But it didn't originate in with boxing. It originated in baseball. Specifically, Major League Baseball.

MLB stadiums are built with Home Plate in the West and Center Field in the East. (The one exception is the new Comisky park, which had to be facing differently due to the space on which it was built).

The reason MLB stadiums are built this way is so batters don't have to look in to the sun, and the expensive seats are in the shade, for afternoon and early evening games.

When the pitcher is on the mound, his left hand is to the South.

We can thank Vin Scully for introducing that term, in reference to Sandy Koufax.

CC: CC does not stand for Carbon Copy. You did refer to it’s proper usage in your definition, but it shouldn’t even referenced by Carbon Copy.

The actual meaning of this acronym is CIRCULATED COPY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.134.80.17 (talk) 14:29, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

That latter assertion is sheer and utter nonsense, and reeks of folk etymology by people too young to remember the widespread use of carbon paper and carbon copies. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:48, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

See

• http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/carbon-copy.html
• http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/28105/where-did-cc-and-bcc-come-from
• http://techdaycamp.com/2011/10/the-story-behind-cc-and-bcc/
• http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/carbon-copy
• http://calexis.com/blog/2014/03/27/the-politics-of-the-carbon-copy/

and other sources for "Carbon Copy". DES ^(talk) 17:55, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

As for southpaw, our Southpaw article is a redirect to southpaw stance. This is because the baseball definition for 'southpaw' is just that, a definition. Therefore, it is at Wiktionary. Specifically at wikt:southpaw. The 'southpaw stance' article is more than just a definition. It is an encyclopedia entry. I know that may seem like a pedantic difference.

Maybe our 'southpaw stance' article should point out that the root of the term's name comes from baseball. Dismas|^(talk) 14:54, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Footnote/References consistency

Calais1984 username Trying to get the footnotes consistent is what I am having difficulty with. Also why is when typing stuff in and it's saved, then it's not there. I've just noticed I'm missing a footnote/reference. Beats me. I'll re-do it. Over to you please.14:41, 1 October 2015 (UTC)Calais1984 (talk)

Draft:Medical Error Action Group I believe.--ukexpat (talk) 16:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

@Calais1984: Have you tried the help page info at WP:REFB? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:02, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Help with my Wikipedia page and my user-name change

HI, Thanks for helping me out! I am Fiberartist42 who created the Central Arizona Museum Association page on Wikipedia. I noticed that on September 24th someone edited links and the Archived CAMA records one doesn't work. Also I was notified early in the process that the user name Camamember wasn't appropriate since it indicated membership in the organization I was writing about. I filled in the form and was duly registered as Fiberartist42, the user name under which I completed the page. There still seems to be some confusion as to the user-name change on the site. Help! Fiberartist42 (talk) 16:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Central Arizona Museum Association (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Just added a convenience link. Dismas|^(talk) 16:56, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I've fixed the link that you mention. I'm not sure why you weren't able to do it yourself. Dismas|^(talk) 16:58, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

As for the username confusion, when your username was changed from Camamember to Fiberartist, your talk page was simply moved to the new name. Nothing in the content of the page was changed. That's why notices on your talk page still have the old name. The contributions on the CAMA page though were changed in the database to associate with your new name. That help? Dismas|^(talk) 17:04, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Yes, your user name change went through in August, and your user talk page was automatically renamed as part of that process, see this edit. Your draft article was accepted on 18 September and moved to Central Arizona Museum Association, and I see that you have made some further edits to it since. The "Archived CAMA records" link in Central Arizona Museum Association##External links goes to http://www.azarchivesonline.org/xtf/search ; isn't that where it should go? You could, I suppose link to this more specific URL? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I have concerns about the copyright status of some of the images in that article, namely the pics of the brochures/promo materials and of the state proclamation.--ukexpat (talk) 18:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Tooltip

Since when did the "View history" tooltip change from "Past versions of this page" to "Past revisions of this page"? GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 17:49, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Tooltip-ca-history said "Past versions of this page" before it was deleted 26 August 2015. Now we instead see the MediaWiki default "Past revisions of this page". PrimeHunter (talk) 19:45, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Note that the MediaWiki default was once "Past versions of this page." with a period. MediaWiki:Tooltip-ca-history was apparently created in 2007 to override the default and omit the period. The default has since changed to both omit the period and replace versions by revisions. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:55, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Improve the MW page

MediaWiki:Sharedupload-desc-create is displayed when you attempt to create a description page here for an image that's on Commons. For example, go to [6] to see the message in action, since the image is actually at Commons:File:Armed Klansman in southeastern Ohio, 1987.jpg. The MW page provides a link to the image at Commons, "Maybe you want to edit the description on its file description page there", but the link goes to the file itself. I'd like to change the link so that it goes directly to the edit screen, i.e. click it and you're taken to [7]. What changes can I make to the MW page so that it doesn't go simply to the Commons main filepage? The current code (still the MW default, not modified here) is This file is from $1 and may be used by other projects. Maybe you want to edit the description on its [$2 file description page] there. Nyttend (talk) 20:48, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

$2 is simply the url like https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Armed_Klansman_in_southeastern_Ohio,_1987.jpg, so the simplest way to do make the edit link you want is $2?action=edit. But File:Armed Klansman in southeastern Ohio, 1987.jpg is missing several features on commons:File:Armed Klansman in southeastern Ohio, 1987.jpg such as Commons categories, section edit links, History tab, and links to the uploader and their contributions. I think it's better to direct people to the Commons file page where they can see the features and choose to do something before or instead of editing the page or a section. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:35, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

(1) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Armed_Klansman_in_southeastern_Ohio,_1987.jpg$2?action=edit doesn't work; the result is File:Armed Klansman in southeastern Ohio, 1987.jpg$2. Is there another way to do it? (2) I don't understand why it matters that we're missing things like Commons categories. Why do they matter here? I'm just suggesting that we be directed to the Commons edit page instead of the file description, since it seems reasonable that the typical person editing the page was intending to edit the Commons page, so it will save a step by sending them directly to the edit page instead of making them detour through the description page. Nyttend (talk) 23:11, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

$2?action=edit in the message would make working links like https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Armed_Klansman_in_southeastern_Ohio,_1987.jpg?action=edit. Users may for example click edit on the English file page to try to add categories which are already on the Commons file page. I don't like the idea of cross-wiki edit links. I think users should at least view a wiki before trying to edit it. I wouldn't want Commons or other wikis to have direct edit links to us. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:19, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Okay, now that's thoroughly bizarre. I've been editing en:wp and Commons for nine years and never realised that I could just append ?action=edit to a filename to get to the edit page: I thought I had to be in the w/index.php? type of URL. Now as far as your other comment, I understand. I'll have to disagree, so I guess I'll welcome your input at the proposals village pump. Thanks a lot for the technical help. Nyttend (talk) 00:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

?action=edit works on all /wiki/ pages. The url https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Armed_Klansman_in_southeastern_Ohio,_1987.jpg?action=edit is in your own original post so I'm extra surprised to hear you didn't know about it. I think /w/ url's are preferred in most situations because they are disallowed for robots in https://en.wikipedia.org/robots.txt. But here the English file page edit url would usually have /w/ so compliant bots wouldn't reach the page with the /wiki/...?action=edit url. robots.txt works on prefixes and couldn't disallow the latter. PrimeHunter (talk)

Okay, now I'm really confused, because I didn't notice that I'd done that. How did I get there? [8] is what I thought I was doing. By the way, feel free to comment on the Village Pump proposal about making the change; I copied your reason for disagreeing with my suggestion, so you don't need to say anything unless I misunderstood you or you want to say more. Nyttend (talk) 20:01, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

question about linking to galleries

Hello, I am a photographer and I have many galleries of animals and insects. I would like to link my galleries to the individual information pages for each animal and insect. What would be the best way to do this? I try, and I receive a warning that I am spamming, when in fact I just want the photographs to be viewable for everyone's viewing and information gathering.

Thanks, Rob

An example would be: http://www.robprophoto.com/archives/animals_and_insects/praying_mantis/index.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobProPhoto (talk • contribs) 21:21, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

• @RobProPhoto: The way Wikipedia works is that images must be uploaded and tagged with the proper copyright. They then can be placed into the proper articles. Linking to an external website is considered promotion and is against WP:SPAM. If you wish to upload your work that is fine (and appreciated) but you must go through the correct channels. If you wish to maintain copyright over your images you can upload them under free use however to do that you must upload them to only this Wikipeida and you must be autoconfirmed to do that. Right now you would have to go through files for upload. If you wish to donate the images to Wikipedia please see WP:DONATEIMAGE and follow the instructions. If you have any other questions please let me know. --Stabila711 (talk) 21:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

I see that all the images in your praying mantis gallery are heavily watermarked, which probably makes them unacceptable for use in Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 21:48, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

--Stabila711 Thank you for your response and information. I am not looking to release my copyright to my photos, however I am trying to share the information on my pages. I think I may have given you a bad page example. From this next example, you can see I have included quite a bit of added information at the bottom of the webpage on the particular topic at hand. Please view this page, and let me know your thoughts. http://www.robprophoto.com/archives/animals_and_insects/astoria_sea_lions/index.html Thank you for your time and patience — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobProPhoto (talk • contribs) 22:03, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

@Stabila711: - please read up on WP:NFCC - uploading to Wikipedia is an alternative to Commons only in certain narrowly and specifically defined circumstances, not a broad exception to the licensing requirements of Commons.--ukexpat (talk) 00:40, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@Ukexpat: Thank you, but I am aware of that. My point was Commons is only for free use images. Non-free use, or fair use, images cannot be uploaded to Commons. If the user wanted to upload an image under fair use they would have to upload it directly to the English Wikipedia not Commons. --Stabila711 (talk) 00:44, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Which would require meeting all the WP:NFCC criteria (stricter than free use), which the images being discussed here would not.--ukexpat (talk) 00:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

We are not a collection of an external links, nor here to provide your website with traffic see the policy here about what type of links are acceptable and what kind are not. We would love it if you are willing to share your photos freely via the Wikimedia Commons, but otherwise, people will need to find your photos on their own. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

• @RobProPhoto: Well text is different from photos. All text in Wikipedia must be attributed to reliable sources and be verifiable. To take your example, you could improve the article on sea lions by including their fighting habits if, and only if, your points are backed up by reliable sources. These can include marine biology journals, reputable newspapers, etc. Articles here cannot really include "personal experience" stories as that information is not really encyclopedic. We also cannot copy and paste information from other websites as that is also copyrighted. So any information that is properly sourced would have to be written in your own words. --Stabila711 (talk) 22:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

RobProPhoto has been blocked indefinitely. Czoal (talk) 02:19, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

SCOTUSblog

Is SCOTUSblog a reliable source? Czoal (talk) 22:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

For what claim in what article?

They are heavily quoted by reliable sources about things US Supreme Court and so it may be appropriate to use for analysis about a decision or something. Probably not appropriate for claims in the BLP area. Not appropriate in establishing notability. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:42, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. It's regarding contentious content at Laurence Tribe; in particular, this section. The article's edit history will give you a clear idea of what's going on. There are discussions about it on the article's talk page and on the BLP noticeboard. And, yes, whether the content is even notable is a primary issue. Czoal (talk) 23:00, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

FYI... the discussion started with this thread on the Tribe talk page, then spilled over into the thread below it. Czoal (talk) 23:07, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Update Request

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Hello sir/madam, I am writing this mail for the updated request in Deepika Padukone page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deepika_Padukone)

The request: I have gifted a website for her, named www.IamDeepikaPadukone.com, so i request you to updated the link on her page as fan made website.Even actress Deepika Padukone is aware this site & confirmed this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Deepika_Padukone&oldid=683697615#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_1_October_2015

Please find the news featured in press/media below:

Link1: http://www.missmalini.com/2014/11/27/aww-deepika-padukone-receives-a-special-gift/

Link 2: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/videos/celebs/Deepika-Padukone-gets-special-gift-from-fan/videoshow/49062131.cms

Link 3: http://businessofcinema.com/bollywood_news/deepika-padukones-special-gift-fan/183831

Link 4: https://en-maktoob.news.yahoo.com/photos/10-crazy-things-bollywood-fans-slideshow/10-crazy-things-bollywood-fans-did-favourite-celebrity-photo-021232464.html

Link 5: http://www.bollywood.com/celebrities/deepika-padukone/news/deepika-gets-website-gift

Link 6: https://www.clapsnslaps.com/blogs/view/an-unusual-gift-from-fan-to-deepika-padukone/?/blog/an-unusual-gift-from-fan-to-deepika-padukone

Link 7: http://www.india.com/showbiz/deepika-padukones-fan-gifts-her-a-website-204307/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohitjaindeigner (talk • contribs) 23:04, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Per WP:FANSITE, "Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject, one should generally avoid providing external links to:"..."Blogs, personal web pages and most fansites, except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities who are individuals always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)" Czoal (talk) 23:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

• I have also responded to your semi-protect edit request on the actual page the same way as Czoal. External links to fansites are not usually accepted. In addition, the link you provided is dead and does not display any actual information. --Stabila711 (talk) 23:32, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

October 2

Pippa Middleton

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I have returned the ancestry section on the Pippa Middleton page. But I cannot do the chart (Arbathenal) which is underneath it - I have mucked it up somehow. Please help. Cheers M.125.168.85.156 (talk) 00:10, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Fixed.[9] You apparently tried to copy from the diff page [10] but that will include text from the presentation of the diff. You should have clicked "edit" at the time stamp of the old version and copied code from its source. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:30, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I hope it doesn't turn into an edit war. The editor who removed the content started a talk page discussion. IP 125 responded to it, then immediately restored the content (4 minutes later). Czoal (talk) 00:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Question about supposed Pending AFC submission in article space

This is an inquiry about the category Category:Pending AfC submissions in article space. Browsing its parent category, Category:Pending AFC submissions, I see that it has one entry. That entry turns out to be Bruce West (newspaperman). However, there is no obvious reason why that article is in that category or the related category Category:Possible AfC copy-and-paste moves. I see that the article was promoted from draft space to article space yesterday by User:Anne Delong using the AFC Helper Script, not by a copy-and-paste, and the script should remove the Pending AFC category. I don’t see a template in the article that can be removed in accordance with the instructions. First, can someone explain to me why this article is in the category, when it seems to have been properly moved into article space? Second, can someone either remove the article from the category or explain to me how to remove the article from the category? Thank you.

This is an AFC question, and normally AFC questions go to the Teahouse, but this is a question for AFC reviewers and other experienced editors, and I don’t need tea at 2115 local time, or top-posting. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Robert McClenon. I looked at the page and saw that Category:Pending AfC submissions in article space and Category:Possible AfC copy-and-paste moves are added when an AfC page is submitted for review. They are deleted again when the page is accepted into mainspace. I presume that they are used as markers to trigger maintenance operations such as checks for duplication and cleanup of AfC comments, etc., after acceptance. I can't explain, though, why the page still appears in the categories when it has been accepted, and the categories no longer appear on the list at the bottom of the page.—Anne Delong (talk) 02:32, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. So you and I are both unsure. I did read the explanation, and seems that it didn't help either of us much. Maybe a third experienced editor can explain. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:35, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

By the way, I have changed Bruce West to a disambiguation page, which now directs to two people and a former electoral district. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:35, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Reformatted per WP:MOSDAB.--ukexpat (talk) 02:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Good idea.—Anne Delong (talk) 07:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The page is no longer in those categories. Maybe it was a problem of delayed indexing?—Anne Delong (talk) 07:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Charles Frederic Moberly Bell

Please check what is wrong with the "other sources' section in this article. Thanks Mike125.168.85.156 (talk) 01:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• That is part of the {{MW 1935}} template. The red link indicates that we don't actually have an article on The Modern World Encyclopædia. There is nothing wrong with that. --Stabila711 (talk) 01:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Unremarkable software updates

WP:NOTCHANGELOG is pretty clear that we shouldn’t list changes in software updates if primary sources are the only sources available. But what should we do if third-party sources only announce the update’s availability and list some changes (without republishing primary sources), and the update has barely any WP:WEIGHT? For example, if the total secondary coverage is limited to something like, “Users of Foo will be able to update to Foo 1.2 tonight, and enjoy extra widgets on the kajigger. The devs have also fixed a mildly annoying bug.” So, two main questions:

• If our article on Foo includes a version history, should a description of this version be included?
• If all updates have this kind of coverage, should the article include a version history at all?

Thanks. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 01:54, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• I guess it would depend on the article. For example, iOS version history has every version update along with updated features. I guess if the update was only a bug fix update that could probably be grouped with the last update with a single line bugs x, y, and z were fixed with update Foo.1 and it wouldn't need its own entry. --Stabila711 (talk) 02:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

  The tables in that article seem a gigantic, blatant violation of NOTCHANGELOG… but I suppose that’s for another discussion. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 02:23, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

  Not really. Apple is so widely talked about that every single update has at least a few reliable sources talking about it. A few of those updates rely on Apple as a source but most of them don't. Same thing with Android version history. It all depends on what sources are talking about it. If your hypothetical product has the same thing I don't see a problem with you including the updates but since you haven't really given us an article to work with we have to use what we already have. --Stabila711 (talk) 02:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

  Right, iOS isn’t a good example of what I’m asking about here. Hence I said it’s for another discussion. A better example might be less well-known embedded software, such as the firmware/system software for a video game console (which was what prompted these questions). —67.14.236.50 (talk) 02:53, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

  Well then no. If there isn't reliable secondary sources then they don't get individually listed. There isn't an article List of Xbox One updates (it is redirected to the main article). There just isn't any secondary sources talking about every update Microsoft releases for Xbox. On the other hand there is an article List of Ubuntu releases since each major update does have sources talking about it. It just depends on what exactly we are talking about. I'm sorry if I am not getting my thoughts across clearly. --Stabila711 (talk) 03:08, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

  That should probably redirect instead to Xbox One system software, which did list every single update in a table with very few non-primary citations. (That listing has been removed and replaced with prose [if WP:Proseline] with adequate sources. Other “console system software” articles are much the same, but need more work.) —67.14.236.50 (talk) 03:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Would WP:VPP or another page be a better forum for this question? —67.14.236.50 (talk) 03:01, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

  You can try another forum but they are going to have the same issues. NOTCHANGELOG is dependent on what other sources are saying. If we don't have an exact example we can't really decide where it falls. --Stabila711 (talk) 03:08, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

  I’ve started a discussion there, asking whether NOTCHANGELOG is even relevant, after you pointed out other articles that violate it. So my questions here may be moot. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 04:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Lupton family

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

please place accent over nee - Baroness von Schunck nee Lupton- in the section Olive Middleton. Also the words "Anne" and "Olive" in the Francis Martineau section on this Lupton family page need to be linked into the section Olive Middleton, nee Lupton which in the 20th century section at the bottom of the page, I need yoyur help here. thanks again 125.168.85.156 (talk) 02:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

{{nee}} - How many times have we explained how to do this?--ukexpat (talk) 02:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Not enough, apparently. Haha. Czoal (talk) 02:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lupton family (2)

Please help - you will see how I am struggling to get a link in the "Francis Martineau and descendants" section on this page - the red words - Olive Middleton, nee Lupton - need to be able to link into her section which is in the 20th century section at the end of the article.

ALSO - Please remove the little dots underneath the word "nee" in the nane "Baroness von Schunck (nee Kate Lupton)" in the sub-section headed "Olive Middleton (nee Lupton)". Srbernadette (talk) 05:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

There is no point in continually asking the same questions if you don't remember the answers (or look them up in the archives). See this, and then this about the toolip on née. I've also left a note on your user talk page, so that you can refer to it in future.

As for the link to a section in the same article, the way to do it is with a hash sign in front of the section name in the wikilink, so [[#Olive Middleton (née Lupton)]], see this edit. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Olialia Group

To whom it may concern,

Few days ago i made an article about the Olialia Group (https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olialia_Group <https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olialia_Group> ), unfortunately it was deleted by administrators with the explanation that it is kind of advertisement.

It is not!

I found many articles about Virgin Group, Virgin Radio and so on. So why you deleted my article about the Olialia Group but leaving those kind of articles about virgin? It is very unfair, and I request you to return my article.

If you want you can read about Olialia or Olialia blonde island and etc.

Will wait for your reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arunev (talk • contribs) 07:37, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• @Arunev: This is the help desk for the English Wikipedia. The different language Wikipedias are completely separate entities with their own administrators. We have no control over what happens there. Please ask your question at the Lithuanian help desk. Thank you. --Stabila711 (talk) 07:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Dead links to a source

The internet resources

• "QL history FAQ: Hardware". http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/roklein/ql/Hardware
• " QL History FAQ: Firmware" http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/roklein/ql/Firmware

referenced in List of Sinclair QL clones, Preemption (computing) and possibly other pages, seem dead. However they have got archived:

• http://web.archive.org/web/20110709090943/http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/roklein/ql/Hardware
• http://web.archive.org/web/20110614034239/http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/roklein/ql/Firmware

—how can I find all references to subpages of http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/roklein/ql/ to replace links with WebArchive ones? --CiaPan (talk) 08:54, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@CiaPan: Special:LinkSearch does this job - Results. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Article Wizard Saved

It's under Melissa Mccarty the article is in saved draft mode for help, its short sweet with 3 reference links did I do it right? I was told you could help look it over and see before its published.. .its in save mode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melissa2121 (talk • contribs) 09:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• @Melissa2121: I cannot find any article called Draft:Melissa Mccarty or Draft:Melissa McCarty. Are you sure you saved it? Once you get to the last page of the Wizard you can enter your draft title. You then have to click the Save page button to save your draft. If you did save it you can place {{subst:submit}} on the top of the article. That will signal the editors at articles for creation that it is ready for review. --Stabila711 (talk) 09:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Melissa2121, I'm not sure what you mean by "its in save mode". If you mean the draft has been created in your browser, but you have not clicked the final save to come to the end of the article wizard, then it has not been saved, and no one but you can see it, so no one can help with it. If the wizard is still open on your computer, save the contents as Stabila711 explained above. That will not "publish" it it will only create a draft, and anything that seems to be a problem can easily be changed. Your post starting this thread is the only edit you have made to Wikipedia with this account so far. DES ^(talk) 14:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Lupton family (3)

Great news - I did a link on one page to another section below. I DID IT myself!!!Please understand that I find editing very hard. I know that helpers have given advice - but it is hard for me to follow and even find on the various talk pages. I am sorry for my slowness.

BUT I NEED HELP WITH THE DOTS PLEASE:

I am hoping that you will remove the little dots underneath Olive's name in her OWN section (which is underneath the 20th century section of the page). Cheers again and please be patient MikeSrbernadette (talk) 11:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Well done on the linking! The dots are created by the {{nee}} template (which generates a small popup to define the terms when a reader hovers their mouse over it). In Wikipedia terms it's preferred, but if it really bothers you you can always remove the curly brackets to get rid of the template. Bear in mind that others may feel differently, and might well put them back, though. Yunshui ^雲_水 12:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

... and see the answers in the section from a few hours ago. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Adding a company

Hello, I am confused as to why the page I created is being deleted. How do I go about getting it to stay up? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allergy Partners (talk • contribs) 14:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Hi. You can see Wikipedia's policy regarding the addition of articles about companies to Wikipedia at WP:CORP. You should also read WP:COI. -- The Anome (talk) 14:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Allergy Partners. The article Allergy Partners was deleted by User:RHaworth with the logged reason "A7: Article about a company, corporation or organization, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject". It could also have been deleted as "blatantly promotional". You have a pretty clear Conflict of interest, and are strongly discouraged from creating or directly editing such an article. If you do go ahead, I would recommend the use of the article wizard to create a draft, and submitting that draft for review via the articles for Creation project. Note that any such draft must be neutrally written, not at all promotional, clearly indicate why this firm is significant, and establish notability through citations of independent reliable sources. See the golden rule and the links provided by The Anome above. Also Wikipedia:Username policy prohibits accounts that have Usernames that unambiguously represent the name of a company, group, institution or product. Please change your username promptly or you will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Changing username. Please remember that any Wikipedia account should be used by one and only one person, shared use is not permitted. DES ^(talk) 14:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Page creation

Hello, I would like to add a page to Wikipedia, however I am not sure I can because I work there. It is a national company and I am the digital marketing specialist for them. Any ideas on how I should go about this? We have magazine articles and such to support our case.  :) Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quel Bach (talk • contribs) 14:40, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello, @Quel Bach:. No, as someone with a conflict of interest you should not create an article about the company, and if you do make any edits about the company, you would need to clearly identify yourself as a paid editor. See the terms of use.

As far as an article about the company being appropriate for Wikipedia, the company would need to meet the basic requirements for an article or the special options for companies. If the company does meet those criteria, you can make a request that a third party create the article and if you provide links to the reliably published third parties that discuss the company, it is more likely that someone will take up that task. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I suggest you read Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with close associations. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

How to create an article

Hi, I am new and I am trying to create some articles about textile designs and designers. I started one but it says User:Gingerswitchel:Sandbox at the top, I can not title it. Also, I'm unclear on whether or not it's published. Very confused! Help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gingerswitchel (talk • contribs) 16:13, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The text currently exists as a draft in your user space. To submit it for review, please edit it to add the text {{subst:Submit}} to the top and click "save page". However, at the moment the draft would be rejected because it does not cite a single source to demonstrate that the subject is meets the notability guidelines. Please see WP:RS, WP:REFB and WP:BIO for further assistance.--ukexpat (talk) 17:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

How to fix Congressional term end dates?

Someone or several someones has been changing Wikipedia articles on US Senators and Congressman who served before 1933 to indicate that their terms ended on March 4.

In fact, Congressional terms ended on March 3. Presidential terms ended on March 4 because the US Constitution mandated an oath taking at noon on March 4. As a result, cabinet appointments also ended on March 4.

Terms for members of the US House and Senate ended on March 3 because there was no requirement for a noon oath taking on March 4.

I've been making corrections when possible, but I could use some help because there are so many March 4 errors. Is there a way to get these corrections made and get other contributors to stop making edits which incorrectly state March 4 as the end date?

You can verify that Congressional terms on March 3 with these references:

Here; Here; Here; and Here.

Thanks,

Billmckern (talk) 18:40, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@Billmckern: Have you considered one of the Wikiprojects like Wikipedia:WikiProject United States presidential elections or maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

if the edits were made by a single editor during a fairly consecutive run with no other changes, if you can find it on their contribution history and can right click "undue" "undue" "undue" lol .... -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:07, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I think TheRedPenOfDoom means "undo" "undo" "undo" ;-) but that option is not available in the standard contribution history, it needs an extra script like Twinkle or Huggle, which you may not have installed. - Arjayay (talk) 20:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Oops! and Ooops! Without the tools, you could still right click on the (diff) choose "open in new tab" again and again and again, and then from each of the tabs "undo" - its a lot more work but you can see where the damage has been done. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Huh? "undo" is always available to everyone; otherwise IPs couldn't do it, but they can. Perhaps you're thinking of rollback, which requires special tools or additional user rights. Nyttend (talk) 20:37, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

While "undo" is available on individual diffs at the individual article page level; on the page of contribution history of a user, "undo" is not directly available as an easy option for a user to be able to click click click on each of the edit lines. I was thinking of the "rollback", but that is not appropriate as the edits would not be "Vandalism". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Undo is not always available in the "contribution history", only the individual edits, as TRPOD has explained above - Arjayay (talk) 21:28, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Oh, you meant Special:Contributions. It's on every line in the history of contributions to a page (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia&action=history, for example), and that's what I thought you meant. Nyttend (talk) 01:38, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

I think a big mistake has been made here and that the March 3 end date will have to be reverted back to March 4 in hundreds of articles where Billmckern changed it. Please see the discussion below. Czoal (talk) 03:13, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Request help to fix blatant vandalism

I am posting here to request help to remove several instances of vandalism from the Pierre Nanterme article. In each case, the edit was made recently, but doesn't seem to have been caught. As you'll see, the changes are clearly incorrect and are very confusing for readers, so I hope someone can help.

On the article's Talk page, I've left a full request listing out the issues, but to summarize:

• Throughout the article M. Nanterme's name has been changed to "Ramon Politan"
• His birthdate, nationality and birthplace have likewise been changed, including in templates and categories

The reason I'm asking here is that I'm not able to make these fixes myself as I have a conflict of interest. I'm making this request on behalf of Accenture, contracted via PR agency Burson Marsteller. Since I follow the "bright line", I do not edit live articles myself where I have a COI. Would someone be able to remove the obvious vandalism from this article? Thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 19:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The article has repeatedly been attacked by unregistered vandals. I have reverted the latest series of such edits. Maybe an admin could semi-protect. Maproom (talk) 19:33, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

In fact I didn't, because Dismas got there first. But I have made a couple of other reversions of recent vandalism, as you requested on the talk page. Maproom (talk) 19:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks so much! I think the only thing remaining is the mention of "Bulacan" in the infobox, which is definitely not his place of birth. Really appreciate the quick response! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 20:03, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Since it's clear (from the length of time that vandalism hangs around) that few people have the page watchlisted, I've pending-changes protected it. Deor (talk) 02:05, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Search suggestions

Some hours ago, when I searched wikipedia, nice suggestions popped up so I didn't have to type the whole term to search.

Not anymore (mobile and desktop view, Chrome for Android, Android 4.3, works in android stock browser despite being older).

Thanks guys... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.151.198.7 (talk) 19:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I don't have an answer for you but this is probably a better question for WP:VPT than here. The Help Desk is a place for questions about editing and not really for technical issues. Dismas|^(talk) 19:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

One Sided News on wiki homepage

i'm disappointed by news staff who post news covering certain regions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.160.68.12 (talk) 19:39, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The most recent news items, in chronological order, have been about:

1. US
2. worldwide
3. Saudi Arabia
4. Afghanistan
5. India
6. Syria

So there's a bias towards the "Middle East". But that is things have happened: two civil wars, and a stampede that killed hundreds. Maproom (talk) 19:53, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Every user, even those without an account, are welcome to discuss what should appear in the news section at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates. So, the content is, at least somewhat, in your hands. Dismas|^(talk) 19:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

There is no "news staff", only users. The only staff are the people who run the servers, and manage the Wikimedia Foundation, all content is created by users, and that includes you. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:18, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Image Storage

I am a new user intending to create a single article and do not intend extensive edits to other articles. I would like to include images in the article and have the images stored on my account. However as I read the requirements for upload, my status as not having initiated a number of edits will not allow me complete the upload as an auto-confirmed user. Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by S051125E (talk • contribs) 20:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Just wait a few days. Autoconfirmation requires at least ten edits, and it's not granted until four days after you register your account. You already have more than ten edits, and you just registered today, so you'll be autoconfirmed four days from now. However, what do you mean by "have the images stored on my account"? When you upload an image, it's noted as being something you uploaded, but it's possible to use any uploaded image on any of Wikipedia's 61,324,721 pages, even pages where an image shouldn't be used. Nyttend (talk) 20:54, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

THANKS; assumed "10 edits" applied to editing articles other than one I was creating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by S051125E (talk • contribs) 21:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@S051125E: I will note that you have an awful lot of edits to go. The draft version of your article does not establish that the subject meets our criteria for a stand alone article and none of the the content is appropriately verified by a citation to a reliably published source. As you add footnotes, they should be to third party sources discussing the subject so that it is clear that the article reflects the mainstream opinions of the subject and is not merely a Wikipedia editors personal opinions and analysis. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

No, "ten edits" means ten times clicking the "save page" button; as far as autoconfirmation is concerned, the software doesn't care what kind of page it is. Nyttend (talk) 21:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Sorry I wasnt clear. My comment about "more edits to go" was not about getting auto confirmed to be able to load pictures, but getting the article to the point where it would be appropriate for main space. having pictures in an article that doesnt have references does not help it get to "live". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Page for Alex Rocco

I notice that you have a photo of him with Sandy and his award, yet you do not state the year he received that.  

frankly I'd like to see that listed. I knew this man as he was my neighbor And I baby sat his kids. a good guy who turned his life around and should not have experienced his (step)son going before he did. thank you kindly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.2.98 (talk) 20:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm confused. Elsewhere in the article, we read "He received an Emmy Award as Best Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series for this role in 1990", and the "Television" table also mentions him being awarded a 1990 Emmy. Were you talking about something else? Nyttend (talk) 20:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Not to mention that the caption of the photo in Alex Rocco is: "Rocco at the 1990 Annual Emmy Awards, September 16". PrimeHunter (talk) 22:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Maybe the IP's eyes prevent him from seeing "1990", which is mentioned three times in the article in relation to that award. Czoal (talk) 00:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Obscenity Guidelines

Life is full of things that are perceived as obscene/indecent by some people and yet they are part of reality. What are the guidelines for reporting historical events on wikipedia that some people may find distasteful? Thanks Sliven2000 (talk) 21:41, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Greetings. The policy in question is WP:NOT#CENSORED; if it serves an encyclopedic purpose, it can stay.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:47, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Thanks Jo-Jo. Well it says "Material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available". In the case I have in mind it would definitely be less informative/accurate so it means it should be included. Having said this, I imagine if you report events containing "obscenities" it will likely be subject to a high level of edit-warring, i.e. people that find it offensive will keep coming along and deleting it, How can you prevent this as it is just a waste of time and energy to keep toing and froing over an issue? Sliven2000 (talk) 22:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

only very very rarely is anything done in the name of preventing potential disruption. we deal with actual disruption of all kinds from pointless trolling, POV pushing and actual vandalism in the same way. revert. give increasing levels of warnings to the user. take measures to prevent the user from continuing to disrupt. The third level may be a block or a ban of the user or if intensive level of disruption from wide array of IPs, a limited time of "protection" of the article so that only autoconfirmed users may edit. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:15, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Ok thanks. I think I will put a pointer to an item on the Talk page pointing to WP:NOT#CENSORED to reduce potential conflicts but deal with anything that happens when it occurs. Sliven2000 (talk) 22:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

October 3

Citation Service - Formatting Error

Dear Wikipedia-Community,

this is a ticket about a minor issue with the citation service that got rejected via email:

---

[...]

just wanted to let you know, that your citation service is having a formatting error in MLA- and Chicago-Style.

[Picture]

It seems the punctuation ('.' and ',') is switching place with " used after articles name.

[Picture]

-- Reproduction:

Visit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSON or the article named "YAML" or assumingly any other article on wikipedia.

Click "Cite this page" on the left navigation panel:

[Picture]

[...]

---

I got redirected here. If screenshots required let me know.

Secretely, I guess it is rather a programmers task.

Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810D:ACC0:7B8:45DF:22C7:EE37:93ED (talk) 02:58, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Congressional term end dates

I noticed from the discussion above that Billmckern has changed the end date of Congressional terms from March 4 to the March 3 in probably hundreds of articles. I'm pretty sure there is a big misunderstanding on his part about what the end date means. March 4 means that the term ended when the clock struck midnight on the night of the 3rd/morning of the 4th. So it means the terms were to March 4, not through March 4. The only difference with the president is that his term ended 12 hours later, at noon. I've looked at many Wikipedia articles about the U.S. Congress from the 1st Congress forward and they all say that terms back then ended on March 4 (see the term duration in the infoboxes). But the editor has already changed the date in so many articles for members of Congress, and I assume will continue doing so until he gets to all of the ones that show a March 4 end date for the term instead of March 3. Czoal (talk) 03:06, 3 October 2015 (UTC)