Wikipedia:Help desk

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

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

Ask a question

September 5

Mass deletion procedure?

Resolved

 – AfD initiated at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Sharkey's Last Game. Protector of Wiki (talk) 06:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Alright, well I may have encountered some sort of problem. This article is a list of films in which Harry Carey acted in. Now, I quickly looked at the first article, and seeing that it definitely did not meet WP:FILMNOT for notability (no reliable sources even mentioning the film), I decided to WP:PROD it. I went back and found the second article, and the same problem persisted. Another PROD. Now, upon going back, and counting the hundreds of articles in this man's filmography, I'm a little nervous as to what should be done if the grand majority of these turn out to be non-notable for inclusion. I tend to have a life outside of Wikipedia, and I'm not exactly willing to verify the bulk each article for an AfD if it turns out to be that way. So, what should be done here? _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 02:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

There's really no way to go but AfD. We cannot assume that all the pages in Harry Carey filmography are deletion worthy. You can create an AfD for Bill Sharkey's Last Game and list the other articles worthy of deletion. Protector of Wiki (talk) 02:12, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, I'm about eight articles through, out of eight I've looked at. Is there some sort of a template I could use at AfD to collapse the articles listed? _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 02:20, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Use {{Collapse|1={{la|Article 1}}<br />{{la|Article 2}}|2=Articles also part of this AfD}}, replacing Article 1 and Article 2 with the names of the other articles. Add as many of the following that you need: {{la|Article}} and <br /> right after to keep them on different lines. Protector of Wiki (talk) 02:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a bunch. I can't wait to see the reactions at AfD when they find (AFAIK) 30–50 articles in one AfD. Although I did find one notable article so far, to be fair. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 02:33, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

considering the reaction to other as deletions, that might not have been the best advice to take. What I would suggest is that you really look for sources and see if you can find some criticism of the films, and limit the AfD to the ones for which you cannot-- it helps to be able to show the articles nominated are actually of equivalent non-notability--and to go in smaller groups. DGG ( talk ) 04:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Check an edit, please

Could someone check an edit for me? I'm at work and don't feel comfortable checking where the IP claims to have read the information that they posted.

The article in question is Vicca. A new editor, Jackaubrey2010 (talk · contribs), added a birth date which I removed due to it being sourced from IMDb. I advised JA2010 that IMDb isn't a reliable source on their talk page. 15 minutes later, they added the date back again. I again removed it. Now an IP has added it back claiming that they are referencing both WP:OR (the subject's manager), IMDb, and some site called risque.com. I edit porn articles often but have never heard of risque.com and considering the subject, don't feel comfortable trying to get there from a work computer.

So, long story short, could someone verify the sourcing. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 07:44, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Vicca's birth date sans year is mentioned in a blog post on risque.com here [1]. Not sure if it's reliable or not. --Torchwood Who? (talk) 07:58, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

(ec)TW beat me to it. I agree, you might want to check the reliability of risque.com when you get home. Astronaut (talk) 08:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

It's a self-published blog, and therefore generally unacceptable as a source for BLP information. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 14:48, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I couldn't figure out if it was a self-published source or if it was a company she works with or what. The format alone sent up some red flags.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 14:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Władysław

Surely Wladyslaw should be a redirect to Władysław (the correct Polish spelling) and not the current reverse situation? Astronaut (talk) 07:55, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

According to the Wikipedia policy on Foreign names and anglicization "The choice between anglicized and local spellings should follow English-language usage". I am unaware of then English usage of the name in question, but I would imagine that Wladyslaw would be the more common spelling (if only for typographical convenience), which would support the current situation. Equisetum (talk | email | contributions) 15:23, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

On the English Wikipedia, we have articles like France and Germany rather than République française and Bundesrepublik Deutschland which are redirects to the English names. --Teratornis (talk) 19:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Also remember that the non-english characters dont appear on english keyboards so are unlikely to be the common english spelling or be readily accesable except for a redirect or following a link from another article. MilborneOne (talk) 19:38, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

That's why I suggest the English spelling should remain as a redirect, so non-polish keyboards can easily type an anglicized version of the name. However, I was asking because the issue was raised on the talk page and I agreed with the comment. Astronaut (talk) 23:46, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

corporate lies from Whitefish Mountain Resort, Montana

why is whitefish mouintain resort allowed to keep their page protected? Why are they allowed to exagerate their elevation which is revealed by the USGS topographical maps as well as other sources? Why was a single pourpose account from the corporation allowed to edit by himself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.160.60.213 (talk) 15:07, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

• This is not the place to air grievances. The article on Whitefish Mountain Resort is semi-protected, not fully protected. Do read our note on what is meant by semi-protection. You'll be able to edit the page after you become autoconfirmed. If you believe any editor has a conflict of interest, the correct method would be to file this issue at the conflict of interest noticeboard. Do note that you should not file frivolous complaints. Hence, necessarily read the guidelines on what exactly is meant by having a conflict of interest. Write back if you need any help in using Wikipedia, which is what this Help Desk is all about. Warm regards. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 16:07, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Note - they won't be able to edit, they are an IP. IP, you can request changes to a semiprotected article on the article talkpage. Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:27, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Primary source related question

I've re-read every Wikipedia policy and guideline on source acceptability and still can't figure out what I should do, so came here.

Basically, the problem is this. An event happens that is poorly if at all covered in secondary sources, but is still deemed worthy of inclusion in the articles of the parties involved. So the articles resort to using those infamous primary sources - online forums, home pages etc. - but they happen to meet WP:RS in that case, so that's OK. Certainly not ideal, but acceptable and gets the event covered.

A similar event repeats a couple times, and the same always happens: they go into the articles using primary sources as references. Then a similar event occurs again, but with an added twist. Something controversial happens that is central to the event. Obviously, if that event goes into an article, the controversy should be mentioned, possibly even in detail.

Problem being that the controversy is still only covered by the parties involved, i.e. primary sources. And it's rather hard for a party to be involved in a controversy without making any claims about the other party. In fact, in all probability they'll do that a heap, in a way that's integral to the controversy. In the best case, they'll be saying things quite civilly but the other party is still a major part of what they say; in the worst case, we basically have a flame war that somehow manages to be worthy of a mention in our articles. A creative Wikipedian can edit out a lot of the claims about the opposite party and still get in most of what should be in, but at least some of the claims pretty much have to remain - those that explain why the controversy occurred at all - and this violates WP:SELFPUB point 2, even if almost everything's a direct quote and it's made clear that the claim isn't necessarily to be taken at face value. Worse, this could be just the sort of case that explains why WP:SELFPUB point 2 exists at all: those claims may be, well, controversial. So the only sources available can't be used, and the controversy can only be covered at all if it's pretty much reduced to "a controversy happened."

As far as I can see, we're left between the choice of an article that covers the event well but ignores all rules, and another that stays within the sourcing guidelines but omits important things that should be in and gives a lopsided, incomplete idea of what happened. What do you think should be done, or am I misunderstanding something somewhere? Sideways713 (talk) 19:36, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

If you have a specific article/incident/source in mind, would you care to give it? Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:25, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

The correspondence chess game between Natalia Pogonina and the website ChessGames.com. The website's team has previously played three World Correspondence Chess Champions and one grandmaster; all games are noted in the website's article, referenced to the website itself. Pogonina has previously played another website, and that's noted in her article, using pogonina.com as a reference.

This new game, still underway, featured an early controversy which had both parties blaming and accusing each other of various things and almost led to the game being aborted on move 2. Any good description of the game can hardly just omit that. The only sources available are the primary-source writings of ChessGames.com and its members on one hand, and Pogonina and her husband/manager on the other. Some of those can maybe go in, but many (I think) will fail WP:SELFPUB point 2. Sideways713 (talk) 09:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Article: Department of History and Philosophy of Science Cambridge

I would like an explanation as to why the article on Department of History and Philosophy of Science, Cambridge was deleted without consultation by Cameron Scott. This is a major academic department with several members having entries so it deserves an entry in its own right.LarkinToad2010 (talk) 22:43, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

BTW, it was Department of History and Philosophy of Science, Cambridge, and Cameron didn't delete it. He simply redirected it, probably on the grounds that it was either not notable or the claims of notability weren't backed up with reliable references. You really should bring this up with him to see what he has to say. Regards, Airplaneman ✈ 23:43, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

at the moment, it is back; there's a discussion on my talk page at [2]. Crusio asked me about it, and I replied that I thought it might quite possibly stand. It needs considerable work, including additional 3rd party sources, as indicated by me and Bongomatic in that discussion, and I have put an underconstruction tag on it. I'd suggest we see what can be done with it, and after that anyone who still wishes to challenge it should use AfD. DGG ( talk ) 04:28, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I redirected it because it's a bog standard academic department and the content and sources didn't indicate why it needed it's own entry. It still doesn't. --Cameron Scott (talk) 06:56, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Pieces of paper

what is the meaning of CELEBRATING WITH PIECES OF PAPER —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.206.226.254 (talk) 22:53, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

This page is for questions about using Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Language reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:37, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

September 6

Write an article

I'm trying to write an article. I have got some books about the topic that I going to use for sources here. Is it better to read through the whole book and then skim back to get facts/citations for the article, or just skim the relevant sections for information to put in the corresponding section. thanks you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.229.214.25 (talk) 00:41, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Please visit Wikipedia:Starting an article for more info. --Monterey Bay (talk) 05:03, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

And create an account as well! Only registered user can create articles. Minimac (talk) 05:17, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

And, piling on, consider using the article creation wizard. – ukexpat (talk) 18:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Iqbal_Theba

1. In the Iqbal_Theba article it should be noted that he is Muslim. He is Muslim accodring to this article:http://www.currybear.com/wordpress/?p=3566 please put in as a reference.

If you think that this is important information about him, and you have it referenced from a reliable source, feel free to add it. (Blogs are not usually considered reliable sources, but I don't know the status of this one). My own opinion is that nobody's religion (or lack of it) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia unless either the person themself has made it public that it is important to them, or it has been the subject of significant coverage in the media. --ColinFine (talk) 17:53, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

2. Would could someone clean up my references on The Seventh Coin page? Could you help to see which references should go under production and which references should under Reception? I have the references of production and Reception mixed up thanks! Neptunekh2 (talk) 01:40, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I've eliminated some repetition. It needs more references. --ColinFine (talk) 17:53, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Someone look at the Labor Day article, please

I don't have to time to dig into it right now but someone has vandalized the Labor Day article. It's a number of edits back though, so I don't have time to dig into it. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 03:20, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

It's semi-protected now. Next time when there's a lot of vandalism coming from many IPs you can try a request for page protection to alert an administrator about what's happening to the article at the moment. Minimac (talk) 05:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Now that I have time to look into it, it doesn't seem like the page itself was vandalized but one of the templates that it uses. I saw the page protection but the vandalism was there when it was protected. In my haste, I didn't put two and two together fast enough to realize it was a template and not the actual article. I didn't have a lot of time to try to find the exact page to enlist help, so I used this one. I'm sorry to have bothered you. Dismas|^(talk) 23:45, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

please add more information for General Mariano Trias

On the very last information regarding this Filipino Hero, you mentioned only one of his children as the decendant which eventually lead to Jazmine Trias. I felt insulted about the fact that you missed some important information regarding his oldest child, RAFAEL F. TRIAS. Please add the information regarding his oldest child, Rafael F. Trias, who has done a great deed to the province of Cavite. As a public servant, his oldest child RAFAEL WAS APPOINTED ACTING GOVERNOR BY PRESIDENT OSMENA SR. Please see below:

RAFAEL F. TRIAS, SR., the eldest son of General Mariano Trias, the first governor of Cavite (1901-1905) under the American regime, was ironically, also the first governor of Cavite (1945-1946) after the re-establishment of the Commonwealth government. He was appointment by President Sergio Osmeña, Sr., who succeeded president Manuel L. Quezon after the latter's death in exile at Saranac Lake, New York, on August 1, 1944.

While Trias was acting governor of Cavite he also served as concurrent mayor of Cavite City. Under Commonwealth Act No. 547 of May 28, 1940, the mayor of Cavite City “shall be appointed by the chief executive of the Philippines…and shall hold office at the pleasure of the President.” Trias was the fourth mayor of Cavite City.

Born on September 6, 1898 to General Mariano Trias and Maria C. Ferrer, of San Francisco de Malabon, Rafael, the eldest of six children, was graduated from the Philippine Normal School; he later obtained an A. B. degree from the University of the Philippines.

He was appointed government pensionado to the University of Chicago, 1920-1924, majoring in banking and finance. Returning to the Philippines, he worked for one year at the Manila Railboard Company, after which he became private secretary to then Senate President Manuel L. Quezon for more then five years. He served for some time at the Philippine National Bank, and then became assistant treasurer of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes, his last job before the outbreak of World War II.

After his stint as acting governor of Cavite and mayor ex-officio of Cavite City, Trias worked as assistant director of the rural banks department of the Central Bank of the Philippines until his retirement in 1962. He died on February 27, 1970.

RAFAEL TRIAS IS MARRIED TO CONCEPCION TRIAS. THEY HAVE FIVE CHILDREN, ALL BOYS. RAFAEL M. TRIAS FRANCISCO M. TRIAS GREGORY M. TRIAS ANTONIO M. TRIAS MANUEL M. TRIAS

Sources: (1) Biodata furnished by the widow, Mrs. Conception Magtibay Vda. De Trias; (2) “Profiles: Members of the Bench and Bar,” Lawyers ' Journal, August 31, 1960; and (3) Gregorio F. Zaide, Philippine Political and Cultural History , 2 vols. Manila, Philippine Education Company, rev. ed., 1957.] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.201.233.56 (talk) 07:03, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

This information does not belong in the article about Mariano Trias. If you feel that Rafael F. Trias is an appropriate subject for an encyclopaedia article in his own right, you are welcome to start one using the information above. Check first to see that he satisfies Wikipedia's notability criteria. It's good that you have sources for the material, but please note that the information from the subject's widow cannot be cited unless it has been published somewhere: see Wikipedia:Reliable sources. You can use the article wizard to help you. Alternatively, you can post your information and sources at Wikipedia:Articles for creation and ask someone else to create the article for you.

In the nicest possible way, can I suggest that it is unhelpful to proclaim yourself "insulted" because some information you personally view as important has not yet found its way into Wikipedia? All the entries in this enormous and growing project are created by volunteer participants, who write and edit on subjects that interest them and that they are prepared to research. There is no overarching schedule of work, and no conspiracy to include specific information or keep it out. If anyone feels that a subject has insufficient coverage here as yet, the solution is get involved and improve the encyclopaedia, not to take the omission personally. Karenjc 16:46, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I would also suggest that you work to insure that coverage of persons like this is as complete and accurate as possible in the wikis for other languages such as Pilipino, which are more desperately in need of contributors than this project. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

How to view Watch List

Can you advise on how to view the watchlist?

I know to click "My Watchlist" in the top-right corner, and I have read this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Watching_pages

Despite that, I have found no way to show all articles I am watching including those that have not been edited. The watchlist only seem to show edited entries, not all entries.

Thak you for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ianonline (talk • contribs) 07:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't your watchlist page have a "View and edit watchlist" link at the top as described at Help:Watching pages#Controlling which pages are watched? PrimeHunter (talk) 11:08, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Problem

Hi I am having a problem with user Cameron Scott who is making false claims which I take as hostile activity. He has already tried to delete an entry without discussion. How do I block him from my user page? Here's what he posted on it:

"== It's fairly clear who you are ==

Your edits make it fairly clear who you are - has anyone given you the lecture about Conflict of Interest or shall I do it? --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC)"

I am an anonymous lay person and have no 'conflict of interest' with my edits. This allegation is therefore false and should be withdrawn.LarkinToad2010 (talk) 07:24, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Speedy delete without the chance of correcting what is wrong

I'm trying to create a Wikipedia page about a charity called Counsel and Care. It will be encyclopedic in the sense that it will include the history of the charity, what they do, information about events they have held and other organisations working in partnership with them.

I created a page in a non-advertisement format and had a moderator come across it and the notes were:

"I had to reword the description of your image to prevent Conflict of Interest. I suggest you keep it that way to prevent yourself from getting hard-blocked from Wikipedia.

Also, your username is of concern, so if you can change it you may be able to add your article to Wikipedia with a few adjustments. mechamind90 06:11, 28 August 2010 (UTC)"

I am new to this and have been quite busy so haven't got round to changing the name yet. In fact I don't know how. This page has now ben speedily delted despite the comment above which I took to be positive that I was on the right track to creating an acceptable article.

Is there any way of recovering my article and getting some comments other than a simple delete. I'd be willing to make any changes necessary to make this article publishable.

Thanks

Philip —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccarewiki (talk • contribs) 09:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Do you have reliable, independent sources which can verify the information? Does it meet the general notability guidelines and the notability guidelines for organisations? -- PhantomSteve.alt/talk\^{[alternate account of Phantomsteve]} 11:15, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

See WP:REFUND and WP:USERFY. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 11:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Jumping in here I do not find the two responses above from Phantomsteve and Gadget850 helpful to a new editor but I do accept they are both technically correct. It is very clear to me that Ccarewiki is a new edit asking for help. The speedy deletion process itself is aggressive anyway and you two experienced editors plough in with lots of wikipedia technical talk which, to a new editor, I would suggest, also appears aggressive. I urge the experienced community to treat new editors with sympathy and understanding. --Senra (Talk) 12:07, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

With respect, Ccarewiki presumably knows enough to know that the underlined sections in my reply are links to pages with further information - if not, I apologise for this assumption, but in my experience, most new users of Wikipedia (not creators of articles, but readers) quickly learn that! I have asked very specific questions which would (depending on the reply) allow us to make further recommendations.

Ccarewiki: if you weren't aware, if you click on the underlined words/phrases in my response, it will link to the relevant policies and guidelines which Wikipedia has for reliable/independent sources, verifiability, the general notability guidelines and the notability guidelines specifically for organisations. Perhaps Senra would prefer me to treat you as if you have no common sense or understanding of Wikipedia - on the other hand, I prefer not to "simplify" what I say to people, unless their original questions leads me to understand that they have limited intellectual ability, which your query did not. The most important part of my response is the fact that the organisation needs to be notable as Wikipedia understands it: this is not the same as "noble" or "worthy" - there are many charities, organisations and companies who perform excellent services, such as C&C, but which do not meet the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. Wikipedia does not exist to publicise charities.

Regarding reliable and independent sources - none of the sources which you provided would meet the criteria, all of them being from the organisation itself, and so not independent. It may seem strange that an organisation cannot be counted as being "reliable", but the organisation's website will not be neutral - it exists to promote the organisation, after all! The best sources are national newspapers (such as the Times, the Telegraph, the Independent, the Guardian, etc) or sources like the BBC. I would have to disagree with Gandalf61 below, as I do not think that the BBC News link provided meets the "significant coverage" which is required - the whole mention is His call for a levy was supported by Counsel and Care, a charity for elderly people. Stephen Burke, chief executive of the charity, said: "With our ageing population, the care funding gap will continue to grow without radical reform and proper funding.". However, if further coverage could be found at reliable sources, then that would be great! Looking at Google News/Archive, there were no references to the charity (all the references were to "<name> council and CARE" meaning a council, and CARE (relief agency) - I presume). -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 16:27, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Dear Ccarewiki. I recommend you request a wikipedia administrator to copy the deleted article (this process is called WP:USERFY) to your own user area where you can work on it without rush; where you can seek community help; and where wikipedians such as myself can assist you to make this a great article. Good luck my friend --Senra (Talk) 12:07, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, you can only userfy to a point. A non-notable topic will remain non-notable no matter how long someone tries to work on an article dealing with that topic. In this case the topic appears to be squarely non-notable unless external sources are found to establish notability. Ccarewiki, you can work on it all you want but you're going to have to use sources other than the official website if you ever want it to stick. (google cache for those interested: 5 sources, 4 official website, 1 government document) Xenon54 (talk) 14:41, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

However, finding reliable independent sources should not be difficult, as Counsel and Care is a well-known national charity in the UK. Here is a mention in a BBC News report for starters. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:54, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I have found that often, new editors do not understand a word we are talking about here. However, constructive responses linking reliable sources such as the BBC news story above may be all a new editor needs to get going (plus gentle encouragement of course). Consider showing new editors existing articles on a similar topic; making a few constructive edits; or talking to them even! In this particular case, I am sad to see (a) not a single person has welcomed Ccarewiki (b) all the notcies on Ccarewiki's talk page are negative (c) nobody has took even a few seconds to to constructively address policy (or are these just guideline?) issues in the article now deleted. My point remains, please treat new editors sympathetically --Senra (Talk) 15:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

heads-up: Ccarewiki (talk · contribs) has a request pending to change name to Care4elderly (talk · contribs) --Senra (Talk) 17:47, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Reliable source: Counsel and care for the elderly

Counsel and care is the National Charity working with older people, their families and carers to get the best care and support. We provide personalised, in-depth advice and information, which informs our research and campaigning.

— Charity commission, http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/ ref:203429

It operates throughout England and Wales, has 17 employees and five volunteers. It is a UK registered charity, charity number 203429. A look through Councel + Care press releases may reveal some useful sources. See also BBC:Social care under-funded and rationed, say MPs--Senra (Talk) 18:08, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Picture deletion

Dear help Desk, Is there any way I can have all the pictures I have ever uploaded to Wikipedia deleted all in one go? Thankyou.-- Myosotis Scorpioides 12:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

You could post a request for assistance at the administrators' noticeboard, for administrators are able to delete images. However, I'm curious — why would you want to have all of your images deleted? Nyttend (talk) 13:13, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

No. In fact, there is not way for you to have the ones I looked at, all either in the public domain or licenses under CC-BY SA, deleted at all for sure. Once you upload an image under a free license or release it into the public domain, you no longer have control over it, except to the extent your license imposes certain attribution requirements. You can tag an image for deletion it it may be acted upon if the image is unused and unuseful, but there's no guarantees even then. Why would you want to do this anyway?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:20, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

We have a speedy deletion criterion permitting the deletion of material whose author requests it; however, I don't believe this to be applicable to an image that has been used by someone else. The point of the criterion is to be able to get rid of material that never should have been here in the first place; it's not meant to allow someone to revoke licensing. FYI, Fuhghettaboutit — I was simply trying to answer the "is it possible" question; thanks for starting the why-this-shouldn't-be-done discussion. Nyttend (talk) 14:20, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

One of the things about the internet is that it's sometimes difficult to gauge certain things about other's writing because we miss so much without the timing, tone, body language, facial expressions and gesture of real life interaction. For example, I may be wrong—I would know much better if we were not disembodied—but the tenor of your post makes me think you think I was correcting you in some way and are annoyed. Again I may be wrong, but if this is the case, note that I started and completed my post having never seen yours and didn't even get an edit conflict when I posted (not sure why, maybe because I skipped a line).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:09, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Hide User profile

My current user profile is searchable by google, I would like to make it so I am the only one who can see these pages, how do I go about doing that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daguilar (talk • contribs) 13:26, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

If you add {{NOINDEX}} to your userpage, it "may remove the page from some search engines" (according to the template documentation). TNXMan 13:40, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

If by "user profile" you mean the information on your user page, then Tnxman's info will help it become less visible on search engines. However, there is no way to keep your user page or user talk page entirely private to yourself - other users of the site will be able to visit them if they wish. Karenjc 16:23, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

If you want to ensure that most other users can not see your user page, you can add {{db-u1}} or {{db-userreq}} to the top of the user page to request that it be speedily deleted under criterion U1: User request (user pages only). -- Bk314159 (Talk to me and find out what I've done) 18:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I see you blanked your user page four days ago. Google will detect this the next time they visit the page (not controlled by Wikipedia) and update their search index which is currently from 30 August. If you don't add {{NOINDEX}} then the page will still appear in Google searches on the user name, but a blank page will not appear in searches for former content after the search index is updated. However, anybody can click the history tab to see the former content if you don't request deletion of the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

What's wrong with this coding?

Resolved

 – another editor has fixed it John of Reading (talk) 16:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Jeffrey Dahmer has a reference coding issue that I can't figure out. I tried to fix it, and one problem was solved, but it seems that all I did was exchange one problem for another. Nyttend (talk) 14:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Television Series - Number of Seasons

The infobox television template has a parameter called num_seasons. According to the documentation, for U.S. series, that means the "number of seasons ... produced." Practically speaking, what does "produced" mean? Let's take the real example of the show 90210. That series has played for two seasons. It has been renewed for a third with the season premiere coming up shortly. An editor changed the number of seasons in the infobox from 2 to 3. Is that correct, i.e., the number changes on confirmed renewal? Or should it wait until the premiere has aired? Or should the number change when the third season has completed? Or should it wait until we know (somehow) that all of the episodes for the third season have completed production ("produced")? I couldn't find any further information on this question.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:55, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Userboxes with a whole lot of parameters...

I made these three userboxes because there didn't seem to be anything like them and made them so that just about everything about them is customizable with heavy usage of {{{}}}, but how can instruct potential users how they can just change one or two parameters without the template assuming their adjustments are for the parameters in order from the first one? --I'ḏ♥One 16:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

You need to add names to the parameters. The help page is here - it looks pretty complicated... -- John of Reading (talk) 17:03, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I'll check that out, almost forgot to ask, how can I allow users to change the width? --I'ḏ♥One 17:07, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I think it is deliberate that {{Userbox}} does not allow the width to be changed. The idea is that user boxes should stack neatly. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Really? Weird, if anyone finds out if template widths can be altered please tell me, but I figured out how to alter the parameters. Thanks for the help, John. --I'ḏ♥One 20:12, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Reproducing signatures

Hi, I'd like to upload the signature of a living person to Wikimedia Commons, and then have it in that person's infobox on Wikipedia. Is this allowed under fair use, or is it considered a violation of copyright? ɳorɑfʈ ^Talk! 17:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Depends on who they are. There's guidance at WP:SLP. Karenjc 18:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

You can also check in with new admin Connormah at User talk:Connormah, who is quite knowledgeable about the subject.--SPhilbrickT 01:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Trying to find a tag

There's a BLP article tag for the recently dead that I know I've seen, but I can't remember what the actual syntax is. I'm trying to add it to Jefferson Thomas. SDY (talk) 18:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

{{Recent death}}? TNXMan 18:03, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

You may also want to change the {{WPBiography}} template to "no" and add {{blpo}} above the template. wiooiw (talk) 18:26, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Blocked on Japanese Wikipedia

I "vandalized" the sandbox by adding my signature a few hundred thousand times. Is a week's block fair? It seems far too long...Battleaxe9872 ^Talk 18:27, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

It's probably just a stricter wiki.... wiooiw (talk) 18:35, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Why did you add your signature "a few hundred thousand times"?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:40, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Japanese Sandbox Made the page really hard to edit. What was that about? Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 19:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it's fair. If you have an issue with the block, take it up with the ja.wp admin who blocked you. Asking here will not help at all. Xenon54 (talk) 19:31, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Whatever our opinions, English Wikipedia has no say over what the Japanese Wikipedia do - each Wikipedia is an autonomous entity. For what it's worth, I think it was fair. The block log shows: "00:32, 06 September 2010 till 00:32, 13 September 2010 by アイザール; Reason: 悪戯投稿はお止めください" (blocked by Aizaru, reason: "Please stop posting your prank"). I'd just accept the week block (but see whether your unblock request works!) - bear in mind that you increased the size of ja:Wikipedia:サンドボックス (Sandbox) from 302 bytes to 93,562 bytes to 434,475 bytes to 965,629 bytes over the space of 4 minutes in 3 edits... I think a lot of Wikipedias might assume that was vandalism! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 19:39, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Conflict with Admin

Resolved

 – Using User talk pages to discuss more..Moxy (talk) 02:21, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I realize that I had broken some copyright laws due to misunderstanding but I work on fixing the information everyday but an admin uses his powers to put the whole previous page back again by including a warning which he can also use against me later. It is to be Noted that the pages contain information about my people who are still largely living in poverty and largely kept illiterate. Therefore, it is easy for long-term existing administrators or coordinators to win the conflict. The previous pages about my people that I edited contained 90% incorrect and false information. Please help me in this issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BalochMedia (talk • contribs) 23:17, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

hello there...just so you know the Admin involved is only following guidelines set forth by the community. As for helping it would be best to bring this up on the articles talk page (here). When there would be best to simply show what you believe is wrong ..then show what you think the changes should be ..with a references ....Like

• "The total population of ethnic Baloch people is estimated to be around 9 million worldwide"
  

to..

• "The total population of ethnic Baloch people is estimated to be around 17 to 19 million worldwide" Baloch people and Balochistan
  

pls read Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Cite_sources and Wikipedia:References for more info on referencing...Moxy (talk) 00:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

September 7

Please review my article again

Could you please review my article again. It´s on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Gogogic

I have added the sources requested.

Many thanks, Jon —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonheidar (talk • contribs) 18:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia now incompatible with Firefox.

Dear Wikipedia people. Whet did you do to your page? In the past my Firefox and Wikipedia never had a problem. Nowadays you seem to run so much script that my Firefox browser always stalls. Please make your scrpt more simple so that my firefos doesnt always hang. I dont always want to use Internet Exploder to access your page.

Claudine —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.12.227 (talk) 01:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd suggest updating your browser to the newest released version of Firefox. I have not noticed any problems using the current release on a Macintosh. Mr. R00t ^Talk 01:13, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Please do not include contact details in your questions. We are unable to provide answers by any off-wiki medium and this page is highly visible across the internet. The details have been removed, but if you want them to be permanently removed from the page history, please email this address.

I am using the latest version of Firefox, 3.6.8, without any problems. What version of Firefox are you using, and on what page(s) of Wikipedia does Firefox hang for you? --Mysdaao ^talk 01:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Note i am also a user of FireFox (3.6.8,)..I have been using IE for a week or so because of the same problem...Have been here on wiki for 5 years first time this is a problem for me to. there is long hang times and protocol errors for the past 2 weeks. Moxy (talk) 02:24, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I use Firefox 3.6.8 on Windows Vista without problems. Maybe there is a conflict with an extension or something in your account. Does it help to log out? I know the OP was not logged in when the post was made. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

hi

Please can you write the list of the members of Pro lifedemocrats in the house and senate.

37 pro-life members of the caucus.Who are they ?

The two lists will NOT be identical, but you may want to see Blue Dog Coalition. --Jayron32 05:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

merging cells in a table

I can't figure out how to make a particular table. Starting with this table:

cell 1	cell 2
cell 3	cell 4
cell 5	cell 6

Then, I want to merge cells 1 and 3, and cells 4 and 6, so you end up with cell 1 and cell 4 taking up 2 rows and cell 2 and cell 5 taking up 1 row.

I would expect this code to work:

{|class="wikitable"
|-
|rowspan="2"|cell 1 
|cell 2
|-
|rowspan="2"|cell 4
|-
|cell 5
|}

but it doesn't. Can someone help? Thanks. Strange Quirk (talk) 02:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Needs line padding

These weird tables usually don't work without an empty cell at the end of each row. Take out the empty cells and it all breaks.

cell 1/3	cell 2
	cell 4/6
cell 5

{|class="wikitable"
|-
| rowspan="2"| cell 1/3
| cell 2
|  
|-
| rowspan="2"| cell 4/6
|  
|-
| cell 5 
|  
|}

DMahalko (talk) 04:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, thats pretty weird. Is there a way to make those extra cells invisible or something along those lines? The table looks weird with that extra space. Strange Quirk (talk) 05:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The technical problem is that row/column sizes are determined automatically by the sizes of their contents. In the original approach, there was nothing in "just row 2", so "height=0" is sufficient to hold it. The key with the dummy-column is that there is a cell in row 2, so the layout knows there actually needs to be a non-null/visible row there. Another solution is to use explicit row-heights to override the automatic "no row 2 space needed":

cell 1/3	cell 2
	cell 4/6
cell 5

{|class="wikitable"
|-style="height: 2em;"
|rowspan="2" |cell 1/3
|cell 2
|-style="height: 2em;"
|rowspan="2"|cell 4/6
|-style="height: 2em;"
|cell 5
|}

Crazy, eh? DMacks (talk) 06:18, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Labeling ISP ownership of not-logged-in address pools?

Is there any sort of desire to label not-logged-in talk pages to show what ISP owns the address pool? I know shared-proxy addresses get labeled.

I am using WildBlue today and reading wikipedia while not logged in, and it says I have new messages.. odd. Oh, it appears this address has been used to make edits by other WildBlue customers. Would it be useful to identify this address as a shared block from WildBlue?

• User talk:67.54.176.52

Is this a worthwhile template?

• Template:Wildblue ISP

Oh hey, that's only 32,768 address pool pages to label. Um, I'm not doing that by hand, so I guess a bot would have to do them all. I am not a bot programmer so I don't know how to proceed, or if this effort would be considered useful by others. DMahalko (talk) 04:22, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Probably not. There is Template:Whois and others of that family, however we do not generally proactively label IPs talk pages, even among active IPs. These labels are generally only used to tag problematic IP addresses for easy reference. --Jayron32 05:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Larkin 25 vandalism by DGG and Steve Quinn

I am having a problem with vandalism of the Larkin 25 article by Steve Quinn and DGG. They are acting in a high-handed and patronising fashion adding tags and disruptive edits to an article that has been through previous resolution processes and found to be fine. User Steve Quinn is adding gibberish about unreadable sentences and the pair are removing refences and making false claims about it being a 'fan site'. This is rubbish, it is neutral in tone and there is no 'fan' material. How do I report their concerted vandalism and get them blocked from this article?LarkinToad2010 (talk) 06:56, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

• As you have been told several times before, if you have an issue with the way other editors behave towards you, go to WP:ANI, not here. Go ahead, report respected editors like DGG and Steve Quinn as vandals to ANI and see how fast you'll find yourself blocked. But better would be to take a deep breath and sit back. Look at your talk page, look at all your interactions with other editors here. Almost all those interactions are antagonistic, with you accusing all these people of being unhelpful at best and of being vandals at worst. Perhaps you should start thinking about why this is so. --Crusio (talk) 07:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Auto numbering of figures

Are there any templates for use in auto-numbering figures/images? (I see how this can be done for equations: Template:NumBlk) Thanks! David Hollman (Talk) 07:47, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

That template does not appear to be "auto-numbering" in the sense of generating automatically sequential values (instead, the explicit number-string is passed). The key feature of {{NumBlk}} is that it puts the number at the right margin, which requires some special formatting games. Putting specific text in an image-caption doesn't seem to need any special magic. See WP:PICTURE for the syntax. DMacks (talk) 07:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

You're right, since I wasn't actually looking for numbered equations I just didn't read it carefully. But in any case, auto-numbering would still be useful (probably for equations too) if possible... thanks. David Hollman (Talk) 09:23, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't think such a template is possible with the current software and installed extensions. It would for example be possible with mw:Extension:VariablesExtension but bugzilla:7865 says it will not be installed. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:26, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks all for your responses. David Hollman (Talk) 10:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

change of the auther's name

I had uploaded a photo of the Shershah's rupee under the Indian rupee section. Now the authors name is seen changed to 'Saithilace'.The coin is in my collection and I have uploaded its picture. Hence my name may be substituted for that wrong name.I have uploaded other pictures also like coins of Balban,Ahasan Shah of Madura etc. Thank you. Dr.N.Sreedhar —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.64.180.192 (talk) 09:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

What is the name of the image and the account used to upload it? Did you add it to Indian rupee? PrimeHunter (talk) 10:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Is it File:Sher_shah's_rupee.jpg? If so, User:Rodhullandemu deleted it from Wikipedia at 20:24 on 22 August 2010, with the rationale F8: Media file available on Commons, and the image now appearing in Wikipedia articles is the Commons version, Commons:File:Sher_shah's_rupee.jpg. That image's file history indicates that it was uploaded there at 05:49 on 6 June 2010 by User:Saithilace, and the history suggests that s/he was also the original uploader, on 10/11/2006. I can't see the history of the deleted Wikipedia image, so I can't confirm whether it's the same one the OP uploaded, and whether it's also the one moved to Commons in June. However, Saithilace has no edit history on Commons or Wikipedia going back further than a couple of months, so is unlikely to be the original uploader or author. It's more likely that s/he has incorrectly claimed authorship when uploading the image to Commons, and it is probably the OP's original image. I'm not sure how to go about reattributing authorship, other than to get the image deleted for copyright problems and for the OP then to re-upload a correctly attributed version. PrimeHunter, you're an admin - can you help? Karenjc 11:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm an admin at the English Wikipedia but not at Commons and don't know their procedures. commons:File:Sher shah's rupee.jpg is the same image User:Drnsreedhar uploaded to the English Wikipedia. It was moved to Commons (so it can be used by other wikis) by User:Saithilace who copied the content of the English Wikipedia description page. The description by Drnsreedhar said "image from personal collection". Unfortunately the Commons version does not mention Drnsreedhar and makes it sound like "personal collection" refers to Saithilace. Is there a Commons editor who can help? Otherwise you can post to Commons:Help desk with a link to this section. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I've posted there; thanks, PrimeHunter. Karenjc 13:23, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

There should be no need for any Commons admin action here, or a re-upload. Simply edit the image description page on Commons to reflect the correct authorship. An en:wikipedia admin will have to view the original file to import the information correctly. Also admonish User:Saithilace to be more careful when transferring images to Commons (perhaps using CommonsHelper would make it easier). Powers ^T 14:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

This should, I hope, be fixed now. Please do let me know if it isn't. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:26, 7 September 2010 (UTC) P.S. Since the next image by Dr. S that I looked at had the wrong license tag, there's still more to do here. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism

Fort William College is being vandalised by a new user - Amritapritam. This needs to be handled by an administrator. Please look into it. - Chandan Guha (talk) 09:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

There is no need for admin intervention and the edits may be in good faith by a new user who doesn't know wiki formatting. Dismas has posted to User talk:Amritapritam. You can do the same if it continues but be careful about vandalism accusations. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, a cursory glance at the edits show that the user is deliberately trying to distort the page. Someone who does not know does not go about deleting categories. Thanks all the same for the note on the new users talk page. I will be happy if it works. - Chandan Guha (talk) 11:25, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

This is not vandalism - it's a content dispute with elements of WP:NPOV. User:Amritapritam appears to be attempting a complete rewrite; User:Chandan Guha seems to dislike the new version and regard it as biased. The first step is not to make accusations of vandalism at the Help desk, but to attempt to reach consensus over the proposed changes. Contact the other editor concerned, and take your discussions to the article's talk page. Karenjc 12:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Amritapritam shows the user has never edited before, and nobody had posted to User talk:Amritapritam when you came here. Many new users don't know how categories work. See Wikipedia:Assume good faith. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Signature removal

I sometimes do a bit of antivandalism fixing on talk pages. One thing I have noticed is a few IP editors seem to have some aversion to signbot adding signatures to their posts, and make efforts to revisit some talk pages and remove the signature. Should this be considered vandalism? Astronaut (talk) 11:17, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

If they're removing their own IP address, I don't think so. We allow knowledgeable posters to opt out of auto-signing; they're just achieving the same result. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

search a phrase in particula portal

Dear Sir,

pls let me know how to search a prase or a word in a portal ? e.g. i want to search a word "evolution" in a portal on wikiped. named "HINDUISM" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.5.136 (talk) 11:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Instead of searching, does the article Hindu views on evolution have the information you need? If it doesn't, the article may have links to the answers for which you are searching. TNXMan 11:44, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure you know what it means to search in a portal at Wikipedia. It means to search the pages starting with "Portal:Hinduism" like [3]. If you only want to search articles considered to belong to the portal then there is no way to do it. You can search articles containing both "evolution" and "Hinduism" by separating the words with a space in the search box like [4]. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:46, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect information continually posted about The Causeway Retreat

Dear Sirs

Despite editing the page on the Causeway Retreat ourselves, incorrect information continues to be posted about us by someone with malicious intent.

We are not under investigation by the Inland Revenue, we do not owe £4million pounds to them. This is entirely untrue.

Could you kindly tell me how we stop people putting this incorrect information about us onto your website?

Many thanks The Causeway Retreat —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.185.192 (talk) 12:00, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for posting here, rather than editing the page yourself. People with a conflict of interest are discouraged from editing on subjects with which they have a close connection, but incorrect, biased or poorly sourced information about individuals or organisations is not welcome on Wikipedia. There does seem to be a case for including the controversy about the retreat based on the two newspaper reports cited, since the material is potentially important to the subject. However, in my opinion the material in question violated WP:UNDUE, and I have rewritten the section to present a simpler summary of the two reports and their salient points. I have also removed the allegation about tax, which was not made in either report and has no other citation to substantiate it. I'm not sure the information was added maliciously - it might just have been over-zealousness - but I have added the page to my watchlist. I don't feel semi-protection is warranted at the moment, but if further uncited controversial material is added to the article, do not hesitate to ask for further assistance here. Karenjc 12:44, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Teach Myself Smarts

<advertisement redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.21.213.40 (talk) 12:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Wikipedia is not for advertising. Once your venture has expanded and has been written about in reliable, independent sources such as newspapers, someone will get round to writing about it here. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Providing information about new Master's in Human Behavior program

Can I provide a page that describes a new master's degree program that is not on your list? This is the Master's in Human Behavior (MHB) that is offered by USC. If so, it is not clear how it should be positioned in your list of master's degrees. Your extensive list are shown as "Master of XXXXX". and If one follows a strict alphabetical rule, it should go at the bottom of the list. However, many would look for it to be positioned on the basis of the name of the specialty area -- "Human Behavior." In your list of "masters degrees in North America" (which is not punctuated properly, because the first word should be possessive rather than pleural), I see that you have one entry -- 22 Master's Degrees in Administration (various) -- in the middle of the list, but I can't figure out the rule by which it was placed there.

Also, in your "List of master's degrees" you specify that there are "tagged degrees" in which the name of the specialty area is given. You provide a list of tagged bachelor's and doctoral degrees, but only have one master's degree listed -- Master of Science in Health Care Management. Not sure why this is the case.

I might note that the MHB® is also distinguished by having a trademark for the degree designation. As far as I know, this is the only degree program to be accorded trademarked status. I could include that information if it is appropriate to not only list the degree, but have it link to a page that describes the program. Egreeneatusc (talk) 12:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Welcome! Before beginning this article I recommend that you read, at least, WP:N, WP:RS and (especially in this case) WP:COI and WP:SOAP. A good introduction for editors thinking about creating a first article is Wikipedia:Your first article. To save yourself some headaches, you might also want to check out Wikipedia:Username policy. Yours, P.Oxy.2354 (talk) 12:56, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Also note that we don't permit the use of ® and similar marks in encyclopedia articles. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Now I'm confused about whether one can add a page that describes the MHB program. The comment above from Orangemike suggests that this can be done, and is not unwelcome. However, he has posted another comment under my username (unsure why there are two post locations) that says that it is inappropriate to write up a description of the program. Egreeneatusc (talk) 17:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The answer is that a page can be added, provided it meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability (one of the links that P.Oxy. pointed you at): few individual courses do meet these criteria. P.Oxy was also suspecting that you have a connection with the course: if so, then you should not be the one to write the article. --ColinFine (talk) 19:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Dear Egreene, sorry if I answered your first question (about an individual article) and overlooked your others (the lists). (Also sorry for basically pointing you toward policy discussions, but it's a tricky issue and one better approached once the practices of the community are understood by all involved.)

• First, about "tagged degrees", you caught an edit that didn't really respect the format of the list in question, nor did it take into account the content of the main list where that program could already be found. I've fixed this. Thanks! The reason that the program didn't belong there appears to be that, at some point, the editor(s) involved in maintaining the list realized that a great many master's degrees have or, at least, advertise themselves as having some aspect of specialization, and so maintaining a separate list would be both pointless and onerous.

• Now, as for listing this program of study on the general and North American lists, the same concerns apply to inclusion in these lists as do to the creation of a page. I believe, based upon the policies I pointed you toward in my first answer (WP:COI, WP:SOAP, WP:N, WP:RS), that you should pass on listing for now. The reasons:

• If a topic has not satisfied notability guidelines enough to warrant an article, then it probably doesn't belong on a list. This program, no matter how unique it is in your field, does not appear to meet notability. The program does not inherit notability from USC or anyone involved with the program. (A trademark doesn't contribute to notability.) Notability is somewhat related to the availability of reliable sources without which an article couldn't be written. The program's website is not a reliable source and, unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a truly reliable source.

• Beyond all this, these lists are for programs of study, not programs of study at a specific university or universities. If USC is the only school to offer this degree, then this fact alone appears, in my opinion, at least, to subtract from the notability of the program of study.

• What ColinFine writes about your involvement with an article also applies to your listing this program of study: if the apparent conflict of interest is real (and any editor will suspect it to be so) then you should not list this either. It should also be noted that in such a case, linking to the program's website would amount to WP:SPAM.

You'll probably see items in these lists as well as whole articles that you feel do not belong if this program of study does not. As an editor, you can discuss these issues on the talk pages of any page (the discussion tab at the top) and make appropriate edits. I'll watch the lists, at least, for your comments, because conflicts of interest are likely to show up here and such lists really are vulnerable to violations of the spirit of WP:SOAP. I hope this helps. P.Oxy.2354 (talk) 00:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

A big request

Hi, I have a big request so if somebody can help me I will be very grateful. I would like to be deleted something if somebody want to help me because I am totally upset. For start, I am for a long time in Wikipedia so I don't really need to somebody telling me that we are make a mistakes, I don't want that. I only want if somebody can delete View history of this file. I was there did a lot of stupid things but would not now to mention, so I would really be grateful if that would be removed. I have also one more request, that is if you could in my Upload log page to erase two files from that list. It was a File:Clash2010Soundtrack.jpg. It was the same file but it was sent twice so I would like to erase it completely from that list. Reason for deletion is that I have already sent that files under a different name and I do not want to be on list because it was a big mistake, and there is another reason but there is no need to be described here. Thank you in advance. - Corey.7.11.1992 (talk) 12:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

We cannot delete your history/upload log. Anyway, I see no "big mistake" here, just a bit of vandalism which you seem to have grown out of quickly enough. Astronaut (talk) 15:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Can't find my user page

User name ck07.

When I search for my page, sometimes I find it (plus the talk page--which as of yeserday had 5 messages from others--sometimes not. Today not. I do notice that the search seems to redirect "ck07" to "Ck07." Besides that I don't have an idea what is happening. No help in FAQ. Ck07 (talk) 13:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks.

I don't see any activity or deletions on your user or talk pages, other than the welcome I just left. You have made four edits since August 28. All user names begin with an upper case character, so lower case will redirect to upper. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 13:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Also, you have not edited your userpage yet. If you go to the page, add some text, and click "save page", you will have officially created your userpage. TNXMan 14:01, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Something is wrong here. I created a user page on/about 9/1/2010 and added one line of text to it. I also asked my students to leave messages on my talek pages as they created their accounts and five did. Yesterday 9/6/2010 I (and they) could find the page, but today neither I nor they can find it. This link http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ck07 successfully connects to the page, but searching "ck07" does not. Ck07 (talk) 16:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah, there is the problem. The page you just provided a link to is on the Wikimedia Outreach Wiki. It is not the same as Wikipedia. You'll have to create the userpage User:Ck07 on Wikipedia if you want to be able to find it through a search here. P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 17:32, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah. The talk page you link to is on the Wikimedia Outreach Wiki at http://outreach.wikimedia.org, but right now you're logged into the English Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org; same parent organization, but a different website. With Universal Login, an account on the English Wikipedia is automatically created for you when you visit this site, but it is a completely different site, with different user and talk pages. Just like you would have a different user and user talk page if you visited the Spanish Wikipedia. You will always see the correct page if you make sure to go to http://outreach.wikimedia.org first. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I guess P.D. Cook types faster than I do. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:37, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps, but I think your answer is a bit more helpful. P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 17:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Policy on name changes?

What is the policy on links where the entity had a different name when a conference occured than when it does today. For example: If there was a table of the meetings of the US Olympic Committee and the 1964 meeting was at East Hawaii State Teacher's College and today that school is East Hawaii University, should the link be (presuming a redirect exists)[[East Hawaii State Teacher's College]], [[East Hawaii University|East Hawaii State Teacher's College]] or simply [[East Hawaii University]]? Naraht (talk) 13:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The middle one, with the pipelink; this creates a format which respects the historical name without linking to a redirect or (worse yet) redlinking when the subject does have a valid article. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The signature textbox is too short to make a complex custom signature.

I am trying to customize my signature in the special preferences area, but the coding area for placing wiki markup signatures contains too few characters for me to possibly make my preferred signature. As a result, I have to make a fake signature and follow it with only a time stamp. So the thing is, can you make it so the custom signature textbox can have up to 1000 or 2000 characters, or maybe even unlimited characters? I would thank you dearly. Also, please note that the superscript "The Game" leads to my talk page, for future reference. Hyperhippy92 ^{The Game} 14:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Please note there is a reason for this. Per WP:CUSTOMSIG, excessive customization takes up a lot of room in the edit window. For example, your current signature takes up four lines already. Adding more to it would make it hard to follow along when editing discussions. TNXMan 15:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Wow! Four-lines! Mine only takes up, erm, less than 1 :) --Senra (Talk) 16:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

And I thought mine was annoying. It is barely more than 1 line long. -- kainaw™ 16:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

In terms of length on my low-rez screen, I think we're doing you a favor. How much longer can you possibly go?! I still cannot fathom what can possibly be gained by having a signature that's longer than some articles and more colorful than primary school artwork. Please consider using the default signature or at least one that's less complex. Thank goodness we don't allow pictures, transclusion, or substitution! Xenon54 (talk) 19:46, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

And would you please write lower case font color so your signature screams less in the edit window. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:35, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Suggestions

Is there a Wikipedia suggestion box anywhere? --Cheers, Mazeau (talk) 16:11, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

"Almost everywhere" actually. For suggestions about an article, every article has a talk-page (the "Discussion" tab above its title). For suggestions about other aspects of this site (layout, features, etc.) there are other specific places. Let us know what topic and hopefully someone will recognize where to post ideas about it. DMacks (talk) 16:19, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

There is also The Village Pump. You might wish to browse around there to see if others have suggested something along the lines of what you're thinking. If not, you could start a discussion about it. P. D. Cook ^{Talk to me!} 17:36, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

deletion of unwanted images/mistakes

How do I remove images uploaded which are in error?

I've just spent a somewhat frustrating time trying to get to grips with uploading images and sizing them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjeans (talk • contribs) 17:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

You can mark them with {{db-g7}} at the top of the page, which will flag them for an admin to delete. Or, you can list them here and I can delete them for you. TNXMan 17:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

sdorting out unwanted image uploads and problems

Thank you for your response about deletion and offer to resolve.

Marking them as you indicate at the top of the page means nothing to me at this time. I am drowning in information from help files and am brain dead!

The mess I have got into relates to a logo (which I have permission from the owner to use) and which I tried to upload. This has resulted into several versions apparently and some were not uploaded using the correct form apparently.

Thus am anxious that only one version exists and this is the version with the correct authority. The file name is gwtlogo.gif

Would be grateful if you could resolve and reassure me that this is now all valid and the logo I have put on the Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust page will not disappear.

I have not been able to get the coding instructions to reduce sizing from the default to work, and just gave up after a long time struggling. Part of my problem resulted from my pre-prepartion of the file, only to find the system took it up in size again and thus it became blurry.

I am a relatively experienced html coder and deal with image sizing all the time using the traditional tags. Thus now feel like an idiot! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjeans (talk • contribs) 18:39, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I've deleted one of the images you've uploaded, per your request here. I've also tagged File:Gwtlogo.gif with what is (I hope) the correct information. However, while the image issue is sorted, your article Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust still needs a lot of work. As it stands, it appears to be an advertisement for the group. I would read our guide to writing your first article for more assistance. TNXMan 18:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Question regarding figure use

I am a graduate student currently writing my doctoral thesis. I wanted to include a figure from your website ("Diagram of nucleosome assembly" from the Nucleosome Assembly In Vitro Section) and was looking to get permission to use it in my written document. I would of course site the figure. Please let me know if I have permission to use this figure and if so, if you have a preference for the way it is sited. Thanks! Tamara6580 (talk) 19:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome to re-use material from Wikipedia, provided it is cited correctly. The proper way to cite Wikipedia is outlined here. To re-use images, you'll need to peruse this guide at Wikimedia Commons. TNXMan 19:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

You can click an image to get to an image page like File:Nucleosome structure.png. If it says "This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. Information from its description page there is shown below" then click on "description page there" to get to commons:File:Nucleosome structure.png. It appears the image is originally by Zephyris so see User:Zephyris. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Zephyris/Archive 2 shows you are not the first to be interested in this image. Note that new posts to Zephyris should be made at User talk:Zephyris or by email. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

References

Don't abbreviate "Wikipedia" as "Wiki"! There are other wikis out there – Wikipedia is just one of them.

I am trying to validate References however the wiki regulation says "A reference must be accurate, i.e. it must prove the statement in the text" however what if the reference in on National Television and on the Official "STATION" website? Does this still count towards a Accurate Reference?

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.144.229.2 (talk) 21:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes it would be considered acceptable, however it must be ref'd as a website and not a video.  A p3rson ‽ 22:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Please sign your post by typing four tildes (~~~~) or clicking the signature button above the edit box which looks like this: . Do NOT sign in articles.

I'm not sure what you mean by "validate References". Are you trying to add a new reference or to check an existing reference made by somebody else? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Wiki language for deletion?

How do you nominate a Wiki language for deletion? Battleaxe9872 ^Talk 22:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean. Would you like to nominate an article for deletion? A category or template? Or some other section? TNXMan 22:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Or perhaps an entire project. Winston365 (talk) 22:14, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

DAF 600

On the daf 600 page the specification panel says the engine is an inline 2 it is actually a FLAT TWIN. I have spent the last hour trying to log/in or create an account and I am unable to do either. I am also unable to make any changes to the page. I have to stop wasting time on this and now dont care whether the page is changed or not --121.72.139.69 (talk) 22:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I see you figured out how to edit the infobox without logging in.[5] If it's a Flat-twin engine then you can write [[Flat-twin engine|Flat twin]] to create a piped link to the article like this: Flat twin. What happens when you try to create an account? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Flat twin redirects to Flat-twin engine so in this case it also works to simply write [[Flat twin]]. Note that Wikipedia doesn't capitalize all words when it wouldn't normally be done in running English text. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:53, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

If you cannot register for an account/login, one of 2 things may be happening:

Your browser may have cookies disabled. Make sure in your browser preferences under security/privacy that cookies are allowed from en.wikipedia.org.

Your IP may have been autoblocked, and account creation was turned on. In this case, you will need to contact an administrator to lift the block, or place the {{template:unblock}} template on your talk page (see Special:Mytalk)

Read more: WP:BLOCK

Otherwise, keep trying to create an account.  A p3rson ‽ 23:08, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Or you can use Wikipedia:Request an account. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:11, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

September 8

New testament entries vandalized

Hello, Although I've read the instuctions I cannot seem to revert a message, and report a vandal. It seems that the majority of wikipedia entries for the new testament books of the Bible have been vandalized (at least Matt, Mark, Luke, John and the epistles, I stopped checking at that point).

Could someone revert the article and report the vandal.

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.181.43.163 (talk) 01:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Please be more specific about the problem another time. After some searching I guess you refer to this edit to a template that is transcluded on many pages about the New Testament. It has been reverted, the template has been semi-protected and the vandal has been warned. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Linking a locator map image to a

I created an article last year, Canada–Mali relations.

It begins with the standard template:

Canada–Mali relations

Canada	Mali

This automatically displays the flags of the two nations in the upper right corner of the page, followed normally by a world map in which the locations of the two countries are shaded. However, I did not create such a map, and therefore it read at that point the text: "Map indicating location of Canada and Mali"

Only today did I create a Canada Mali Locator map, and uploaded it to WikiMedia Commons.

But it doesn't display on the page. What am I doing wrong?

IVX8O8XVI (talk) 01:45, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

I see on the page now. Perhaps there was some lag; there's not really much you can do about this, aside from purging the cache and waiting for a while. Intelligentsium 01:50, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

3rd Party insight on Arrow keys addition

I just noticed a earlier today that the leader of a game clan I am a part of has added a snippet of text to Arrow keys (it's supposedly the reason the group was founded), and I personally think that it needs some definite work (assuming it can be saved in the first place). Here's the specific diff for the text added (the rev before this one was his as well).The leader himself is a bit weird, but what he put into the page was even weirder. Call me on not having enough cajones if you want, but I don't want to edit it myself and PO the group leader, or get slammed here for putting in slanted information on the account of it being a COI. I would be willing to provide as much information as I can get ahold of to anyone willing to rewrite the snippet of text to be of Wikipedia-Quality. Hmmwhatsthisdo (talk) 03:18, 8 September 2010 (UTC)