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

January 27

Tom Joyce

I uploaded an image to the info box on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Joyce and the thumbnail has a border with description text "Portrait of Tom Joyce" at bottom. How to I crop to image, removing border and description text. I would also like to center image in the info box. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TJStudio (talk • contribs) 03:15, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

If you are Tom Joyce or someone connected with him, you shouldn't be contributing to the article at all. See WP:COI. In addition, the photo you added included a caption ("Portrait of Tom Joyce © Daniel Barsotti, 2012"). Barsotti cannot license the image for use here and simultaneously assert copyright. The caption has been removed. See also WP:CREDITS. General Ization ^Talk 03:20, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

New and need guidance...

I updated a friend's Wiki page to include his Philanthropy endeavors and nonprofit humanitarian work, but another user keeps deleting my updates, then flagged it as spam, added warning tags and finally added for page deletion. As a new user I did unknowingly break etiquette by undeleting their removals...and now that person has declared war on that Wiki page. I just wanted to contribute current info, and would greatly welcome any re-edits to help make my info compliant and relevant to Wiki. Could someone please help review my contributions as I don't know what I did wrong. Many Thanks. PDeditorial (talk) 03:48, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

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

PDeditorial: You are free to make an argument against deletion of the article at its deletion discussion page. If you make an argument, it must be based on Wikipedia policies, not your strictly personal feelings or analysis. Sometimes a Wikipedia article will exist for a considerable time, even years, before an editor carefully examines it and decides it does not merit inclusion in this online encyclopedia. I'm sure the current situation is frustrating for you.

To understand what has happened, please take some time and read Wikipedia policy about "notability." This is a fundamental concept for Wikipedia and the use of this policy determines what can and cannot be included as an article. Here is the main policy: WP:Notability. Here is a supplementary page with more policy guidance relevant to this particular article: WP:Notability_(sports). Another very important policy page to read is called: WP:What Wikipedia is not. These policy pages will help you understand the recent editing events for this article. Because you referred to the subject of this article as a friend, another policy that might be relevant to you is: WP:Conflict of interest. DonFB (talk) 07:17, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Duchess of Cambridge

I have added 8 new verifiable references to this page. The caption up the top should now be removed. Thanks. 101.182.188.199 (talk) 05:43, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi 101.182.188.199. If you truly believe you reasons the maintainence template was added, then you may remove the template yourself as explained in Help:Maintenance template removal. If you want to discuss whether the citations you've added are enough the remove the tag, then you can post something on the article's talk page. One thing you might want to do before you add any more references to articles is to make sure there is a "References" section as explained in Help:Referencing for beginners#Before you start. If not, just create one before adding the citations. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:50, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Please check that I have done everything correctly. Thanks so much 101.182.188.199 (talk) 06:20, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Removing a maintenance template itself simply involves deleting it in the editing window, so you did that fine. Whether a template should be removed in the first place is sometimes subject to debate. You were bold which is fine. If by chance another editor re-adds it or adds a different template, then don't take it personally and just revert the edit off-hand (unless of course it's a case of obvious vandalism or WP:DRIVEBY). Instead follow WP:BRD and try to figure out why they added it and what it's going to take to remove it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:07, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

One thing wrong with the reference citations you added is the thing which you have persistently got wrong despite being told numerous times (under your user name and various IPs), i.e. your use of the "|publisher" parameter. Why do you find it impossible to grasp that if you use the publisher parameter in a citation it should be for the purpose shown at Template:Cite web#Publisher, that is the name of the publisher. Things like the copyright symbol and like "Bio and the Bio logo are registered trademarks of ..." don't belong in the citation. The place for the date is not in the publisher parameter, but in a parameter which has been provided specifically for that purpose, namely the "|date" parameter. Perhaps another editor can explain it to you in a language which you can understand? --David Biddulph (talk) 10:12, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Biography

Hallo I am Adam kassim Napa and would kindly want edit ma biography information and add pictures. [contact info redacted].thanx a lot — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam kassim ug (talk • contribs) 09:48, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, Adam kassim ug. The name Kassim Napa Adam (also: Adam Kassim Napa) is mentioned in the Wikipedia articles Uganda_at_the_2000_Summer_Olympics and Boxing at the 2000 Summer Olympics – Featherweight and Boxing at the 1999 All-Africa Games. However, he (or you) is not the subject of "multiple published non-trivial secondary sources which are reliable," which is the requirement for a person to have a standalone article under the Wikipedia notability policy. His (or your) participation in the All-Africa Games and the Olympics is significant, but not sufficient by itself to warrant an article in the absence of multiple non-trivial sources as stated above. If you are that person, please also note that, "Autobiography and self-promotion are not the routes to having an encyclopaedia article." DonFB (talk) 12:20, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

my edits no longer appear

I made a number of edits yesterday to this listing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearst_Television

I saved the edits, then checked the page subsequently and the edits appeared.

Today, all the edits are gone. What step did I miss? Or are the edits first subject to a review?

Full disclosure: I would qualify under the “conflict of interest” guidelines (I checked this belatedly after I made my edits). I am a paid representative of this company.

That said, many of the entries on the page were outdated and/or inaccurate, and I was simply correcting them.

What do I do? Please help.

Thank you.

Tom

```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcampo123 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

• Hi @Tcampo123: your edits were reverted here: [1] by user: Mrschimpf. Although Mrschimpf did not specify in their edit summary or leave word with you on your talk page (or the article's talk page); it would have aided in your understanding of the situation. Hoping that by pinging you both here, this will start the correct conversation on the matter. Best. Maineartists (talk) 18:22, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

The issue I had with the edits was they changed so much text without even an advisory edit summary, and the edit read as overly promotional, and I also suspected a conflict of interest. I did re-add the information about Litton as that did indeed need an update but the remainder of the edits had a tone inappropriate for the encyclopedia; please ensure your writing is neutral in the future. Nate • (chatter) 19:23, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I just wanted to use one of the sentences that was removed as an example so that Tcampo123 might better understand:

"Hearst Television is recognized as one of the industry's premier companies, and has been honored with numerous awards for distinguished journalism, industry innovation, and community service."

This is very promotional in its tone. It is also not backed up by any references whatsoever. †dismas†|<sup>(talk)</sup> 19:40, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, so much for the help in Help Desk. @Tcampo123: Thank you for disclosing your WP:COI. Although WP discourages it, that does not mean you cannot edit articles; even those with which you are associated. If you disclose this information on the article's Talk Page and keep your point of view neutral WP:NPOV without a promotional agenda as previously stated, you are more than welcome to contribute; just as long as your edits and contributions are cited with well sourced references: Referencing for Beginners. This ensures that your contributions are not reverted or challenged. If at any time you need assistance, feel free to ask questions on the article's talk page, here at the Help Desk, or at Tea House. A WP editor or admin will be happy to help out! Best. Maineartists (talk) 20:41, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback on my edits to this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearst_Television

I'm fine with having any language I inserted removed if it appeared promotional. My apologies.

Althought there remain a number of statements which are long outdated or are inaccurate, which I had attempted to address, including:

- "It holds joint ventures in television production with NBCUniversal Television Distribution (although most of the stations it owns are affiliated with ABC)." (No longer true in either case)

- "Hearst is the largest group owner of ABC-affiliated stations after the E. W. Scripps Company and Sinclair Broadcast Group, and the second-largest group owner of NBC affiliates.[citation needed]" (This is now outdated due to recent industry consolidation.)

- "Currently, Hearst owns a total of 32 television stations: twelve NBC affiliates, fourteen ABC affiliates, two CBS affiliates, two CW affiliates, one MyNetworkTV affiliate, and one independent station." (Hearst TV uses a different definition of its actual number of TV stations, and counts them as 30.)

- "All Hearst-owned stations uses "Project Economy" during most business segments." - "In addition, all Hearst-owned stations also use the "Commitment" banner for all political news coverage leading up to the local, national, and statewide elections in lieu of a localized version of the network's political segment." - "Operation High School" is Hearst's branding in most markets for coverage of local high school sports."

(The "Project Economy" and "Operation High School" banners have not been used for years. The DC bureau does not do political reports "in lieu of" local political reports by the stations; they supplement the stations' own local reports.)

I'm the "PR guy" for Hearst Television and I simply want to ensure the page is as accurate as possible. Happy to engage directly with the appropriate editor on this. As you've gleaned, I'm a "newbie" and still learning the most efficient way to correspond here....

Tom ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tcampo123 (talk • contribs) 21:06, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Tom. The recommended way for you to proceed is to post suggestions on Talk:Hearst Television. Be as specific as you can (eg "Replace XXX with YYY"), and give a reliable published reference for any information you are looking to add - preferably, one independent of Hearst TV. You can add {{edit request}} (with the double curly brackets) to your suggestion, to get it put on a list of requests waiting. In time, a n uninvolved editor will look at your request and decide what to do with it. But before you do that, you must declare your status as a paid contributor according to WP:PAID. --ColinFine (talk) 23:04, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I did remove what you requested was out of date and edit as guided, though I have seen that "Operation High School" remains in use on many Hearst stations (WISN-TV, for instance]]), so I tweaked that as I know other non-Hearst stations also use OHS branding. Here for station count we go by number of stations even if they're semi-satellites (which does bring it down to the 30), so I will re-edit that within our standards. Nate • (chatter) 18:14, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Deleted draft

I wrote a draft for an article more than one year ago, but it seems to have been deleted. How can I recover it? I can't get anything back from the deletion log. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mijily (talk • contribs) 22:44, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

It appears from [2] to be about fr:User:Mijily/Brouillon. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:33, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Problems with biography of Dave Carley

Dave Carley may or may not be a successful playwright, but his biography has a few problems. It has no sources at all, just a link to his own site. It reads like an advert, which is not surprising since it may (or may not) have been copied directly from his site. The first two paragraphs come from here and third paragraph seems to be from here. I have no idea how to deal with this. Any advice? World's Lamest Critic (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:16, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

I would say he minimally meets the standard for WP:Notability_(people)#Creative_professionals. A google search provides a modicum of sources to support content in the article. But the article needs revision to eliminate promotional tone and any copyright violations, while assuring it complies with biography of living persons. History shows several contributions by an editor with his name; article can be tagged with {{BLP sources}}, which I've done. DonFB (talk) 00:40, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

January 28

contents of wikiproject "articles by quality and importance" tables

I'm interested in WikiProject Genetics and WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology. Both of these have articles rated by importance = Top High Mid Low NA ???

I guess I'm being way too logical, but if there is a mid there should be a BOTTOM in "symmetry" with TOP. I've been using the gadget "rater" to review what were 2044 unassessed articles in the genetics project, and rater allows me to assign a well-deserved bottom importance to articles. Is there some way to modify the table to include Bot? Specifically, the importance =, IMHO, should be

Top High Mid Low Bottom NA ???

Can you please tell me how to do this, or who to ask to do this? I look at the code in the edit screen that generates that table and I'm clueless. Thanks, DennisPietras (talk) 02:12, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

This is a project-wide thing; see WP:1.0#Statistics. It's not something that could be changed by just one project, and it's used so widely that the mere act of changing things might provoke enough problems that people would oppose on that issue alone. If you want to suggest that we add a new level, I'd suggest going to WP:VP/PR, a space specifically meant for making proposals. Nyttend (talk) 02:41, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. If it can't be done for just one project, I'll give up on the idea. DennisPietras (talk) 02:57, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Language in interface messages

Some time ago, I set English as my preferred language at it:wp, so if I go to a nonexistent page like it:Bfesougbsougrsohbroh, I get a message of "There is currently no text in this page..." instead of whatever the normal Italian version is. However, there are two weird spots on the left side: just above the community label, I see "sportello informazioni", and the middle item in the toolbox is "Carica su Commons". I can understand seeing English on another site if they just forgot to update something (i.e. the system uses the English default text), but how am I getting Italian instead of English? Unlike other sections, e.g. the gadgets (whose descriptions are all in Italian), we can't just write entire new MW-space pages and get them to show up in prominent places, so I doubt that these is something created specifically in Italian. Because the gadget descriptions are in Italian, I can't be sure, but I didn't see anything in Preferences comparable to the en:wp gadget that lets you see the interface message names, so I can't identify the MW-space pages that are relevant in this situation. Nyttend (talk) 02:36, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

If you "navigate to a nonexistent page like it:Bfesougbsougrsohbroh", you are navigating to a non-existent page in the Italian Wikipedia (hence the it: prefix), not the English Wikipedia. The Italian Wikipedia may or may not respect your language preferences here at the English Wikipedia for all of the elements in the sidebar. General Ization <sup>Talk</sup> 02:41, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Understood, but I'm not talking about my en:wp preferences. As I said above, "Some time ago, I set English as my preferred language at it:wp". Nyttend (talk) 02:43, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I missed that. General Ization <sup>Talk</sup> 02:43, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

• it:MediaWiki:Sidebar, it:MediaWiki:Common.js might provide a clue. Lourdes 06:32, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, wikis can customize their sidebar. The Italian Wikipedia chose the label "Sportello informazioni" in it:MediaWiki:Sidebar. They could have given an English translation at it:MediaWiki:Sportello informazioni/en but wikis usually don't translate their own messages so you only get translations for messages which are part of MediaWiki itself. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:57, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the help. Clearly the important piece of information is the fact that these lists can get extra content — I thought that the list of items in the toolbox was hard and fixed, modifiable only by the sysadmins or developers, or someone else with database access beyond what either admins or stewards can do. Nyttend (talk) 05:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

The Absinthe Drinkers (film)

Why does the film The Absinthe Drinkers go to this page: The Absinthe Drinkers ? Maineartists (talk) 03:03, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Goes to the director's page apparently. See the external links there, and history at redirected page here; (PRODed 22 September 2013 and redirected thereafter). Eagleash (talk) 03:12, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

That's what I thought. But is that really what WP is about? I happened upon it when I was perusing the films of John Hurt and clicked on the film. It directed me to John Jopson. The External Link to a Website is really not a WP article and should not be linked as such: The Absinthe Drinkers Correct? It is not an article. Maineartists (talk) 03:22, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not sure what you are saying...the external link is in that section and is not an article but a link to an external website. I'm not sure whether this film (or miniseries according to the EL) actually exists or is still in development. Is John Hurt supposed to be in this film as his IMDb page does not seem to include the title. Eagleash (talk) 03:40, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

If you check the Prod from 2013, the film was noted as 'non-notable upcoming'. Googling does not reveal anything to indicate that it has ever been completed or released. Eagleash (talk) 03:45, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

• Then why is this film linked and in the search database on WP? i.e. there is a film in John Hurt's filmography that is highlighted as a linked WP article page named "The Absinthe Drinkers" (not an external link like John Jopson). When you click on it, it does not take you to the page for which it should: the film "The Absinthe Drinkers" - which if you look under the edit template table it views as such The Absinthe Drinkers (film)|The Absinthe Drinkers. If you type "The Absinthe Drinkers" in WP search as any regular film, it displays all the relevant findings with this: "The Absinthe Drinkers (film), a forthcoming 2015 film". When you click on it, instead of bringing you to an article page for a normal film, it brings you to John Jopson. Regardless of an External Link for the film in question, it shouldn't link you to John Jopson. It should link you to an article on the fim: The Absinthe Drinkers. If there is no article on WP, this film should not be linked to anything; especially a separate subject that you have to search for an external link. One cannot simply link a subject (film) to a singular website on WP and call it done. Maineartists (talk) 04:09, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

The Absinthe Drinkers is a disambiguation page that lists (and links to) several different thing with that name. One of those is The Absinthe Drinkers (film), which is a redirect to John Jopson#Films and television. As Eagleash says, there used to be an article about the film, but it was deleted as not notable in 2013 and the redirect created instead. That's standard procedure here, although it would help if there was more than the external link about the film on the Jopson page. As usual around here, if you find something that you think is incorrect or misleading you're free to fix it. Options are: Write a new article; Add something to the Jopson article; Ask for the redirect to be deleted. The first two would depend on sufficient reliable sources being found. Rojomoke (talk) 06:10, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

I am fully aware of these procedures. I am questioning the original intent of the editor in question for those who are inexperienced with WP and how it works. Sometimes we editors get so caught up with what we know, we sometimes forget how to construct things on here for those who don't know how to use WP. For the average user, typing a film in search, one does not expect to pull up a page on a different subject, that does not list the film, but forces you to scan the entire article looking for a single linked website that may or may not be a reliable source. I'm not questioning procedure, I'm questioning content and user-friendly understanding. I knew what I was going to do from the beginning. I just wanted another set of experienced eyes to agree that this film should not be re-directed in its present state. The re-direct should be removed. The website is not a reliable source. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 12:54, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Where do I find the discussion regarding the deletion of an article after it has been deleted?

An acquaintance of mine is bemoaning the deletion of an article. I'd like to look into that for him, see if there was good reason for its deletion, and ascertain what the chances are of resurrecting it.

I searched for "deleted articles" without any success.

Where do I begin? (And how could I have found out by drilling down from a top-level menu and not having to post this here?)

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frappyjohn (talk • contribs) 06:05, January 28, 2017 (UTC)

@Frappyjohn: The deletion reason will be in the deletion logs. Or you can tell us the name of the article and we can help you further. --Majora (talk) 06:10, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

@Frappyjohn: Wikipedia is a big place which can be difficult to navigate for new users. One way to find information would be the "Wikipedia help pages" box near the top of this page. You may have to click "[show]" to see the contents of the box. One of the links is "Article deletion". Our search box is primarily for readers of the encyclopedia so it only searches "mainspace" (where articles are) by default. Information about Wikipedia processes is in the "Wikipedia" namespace which can be selected on the search results page. There is a shortcut for this: Add wp: or wikipedia: in front of a search to search the Wikipedia namespace instead of mainspace. The search wp:deleted articles has Wikipedia:Why was the page I created deleted? on the first page. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:48, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Diane Larsen-Freeman article

Draft:Diane Larsen-Freeman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Dear Robert McClenon

I am just wondering how the article I submitted on Diane Larsen-Freeman is progressing

Is there anything I need to do

Many thanks, Carol Carolgriffiths5 (talk) 09:59, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, it is up to you to improve the draft and resolve the issues highlighted at review. You can obtain advice in this respect by clicking on the links provided on your talk page and leaving an appropriate message at the pages linked to. For future reference, if you wish to contact an individual editor, it is best done at their talk page. (Click on 'talk' at the end of any messages from them). Please sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 11:10, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Transliteration category

Does someone know why Mount Erciyes is categorized in Category:Articles containing unknown ISO 639 language template? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:54, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

{{lang|tl-Latn|Tuz Gölü}} and {{lang|tr-Lant|Kızıl Tepe}} both cause the category. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:04, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

What is the correct lang code, then? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:28, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

No idea. I only used Special:ExpandTemplates and searched the category name in the result to see where it was generated. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:27, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Minute to Win It (Philippine game show)

Reference help requested.

Thanks, Hayley.booo (talk) 15:42, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Author's blog as a source

In cleaning up references at Penelope Farmer, I noticed that the entire second paragraph under 'Life' came from the author's blog; the source of the blog is confirmed by the Guardian, here. I haven't done much editing of biographies, so I am wondering (1) can this blog be used as a source for anything? and (2) is there any reason that I shouldn't delete the entire paragraph as unencylopedic (sp?) and poorly sourced? Leschnei (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

And third! What would be a better heading than 'Life'? Leschnei (talk) 17:24, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, @Leschnei: most of this is covered by WP:SELFPUB, which talks about when self-published material can be used in limited amounts. I won't reproduce it all here, but basically (1) it can be used to support straightforward, impartical, non-controversial facts. They do not contribute to the subject's notability. (2) rather than deleting the whole thing, fix what you can then consider the above and decide whether there are some parts of it that are so egregious that they need to be removed. (3) I don't much care for "Life" but I have not seen any alternatives that really grab me either: some use "Biography" or "Personal life". Use your judgement. --Gronk Oz (talk) 06:55, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Now that I take a closer look at that blog, there is nothing there to indicate that it relates to the subject at all. So I'm not even sure that it can be counted as "self-published". Might need to tag it as {{citation needed}}. I have removed the lengthy, unsourced quotation which was unencyclopedic anyway. --Gronk Oz (talk) 07:00, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Great, thanks for your help. Leschnei (talk) 13:29, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

COI question

Greetings, I recently submitted an article on my great grandfather who, as the Publisher of a local newspaper, was an influential figure in politics and local affairs during much of the 20th century. (Article title: Hulbert Taft). He was noteworthy enough for the article to have been accepted, but the article still needs further development.

I included the appropriate tags on the Talk page of the article, as well as on my user page as I wish to provide full disclosure as to any conflict of interest I may have. My question: Is this this COI disclosure strictly for informational purposes for editors, or might this fact somehow interfere with the article's "publication"?

KenMahler (talk) 17:59, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

No, it will not interfere with the article "publication" (although we do not actually publish articles). Ruslik_Zero 18:31, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

How to experiment with edit filters?

Hello!

Is there any way for me to test out edit filters? I have noticed that some edits that trigger edit filters may cause a tag to be applied to the edit's entry in the edit history. I have tried replicating similar edits on the sandbox page but they did not trigger the edit filter and cause the tag to be applied. Is there any page where I can experiment with these matters?

Thanks for your advice, <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 20:57, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

@Some Gadget Geek: Some filters test the edit count or permissions of the user making the edit, so you won't be able to trigger them when logged in to your usual account. You could try logging out, or perhaps register a separate test account following the advice at WP:SOCKLEGIT. Do you have a particular tag in mind? The list at Special:Tags has links to the triggering code, though some of the coding can only be seen by edit filter managers. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:48, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Edit filters can also test the namespace. Wikipedia:Edit filter#Tools and resources mentions an external tool which may be difficult to apply to Wikipedia scenarios, and Special:AbuseFilter/test which can only be accessed by edit filter managers. Even my admin account doesn't work there. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:24, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Business Efficacy

You don't have a definition of page about this., — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:598B:C500:8DBE:1A2B:5405:2563 (talk) 21:41, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

@2A02:C7D:598B:C500:8DBE:1A2B:5405:2563: Great, there's a project for you! Every article here has been written by a volunteer like you, so if you think that subject is notable and it is supported by enough reliable sources then feel free to go ahead and write it. If you need help, feel free to ask. --Gronk Oz (talk) 10:25, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Page heading spelling mistake

Resolved

Both pages have been deleted. Eagleash (talk) 21:27, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

I created a page and made a spelling mistake in the search word heading. How do I edit it? The editor just lets me into the content — Preceding unsigned comment added by ERollo (talk • contribs) 23:01, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Does this refer to Holosophy? If so what is the correct spelling? Page names can only be changed by 'moving' a page to a new location (title). This facility (obtained via the 'more' tab at the top of the page) will not be available to you until your account is at least four days old with a minimum of 10 valid edits. Please sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes thank you. The title should read Holosopholy. I have tried to create a new article with title Holosopholy but it is now saying that that article already exists. Now I am really confused. I thought I had made a spelling mistake but I couldn't have because Holosopholy points to the incorrect Holosophy. I seem to be trapped. ERollo (talk) 23:40, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Googling 'Holosopholy' reveals no hits, whereas 'Holosophy' does so there may be a problem in establishing which is correct and additionally whether a Wiki article is justified. Further at 04.42 (UTC) on 28 January HapHaxion moved page Holosopholy to Holosophy. In theory that should solve the spelling problem but is in the wrong direction per your spelling. However if you enter Holosopholy in the search box it redirects you to Holosophy and says it is redirected from Holosopholy. There is a redirect here in the wrong direction if your spelling is correct and an article with 'incorrect' spelling here. It looks as if notability issues not withstanding the redirect has been wrongly created. This has confused me somewhat, so hoping an editor who can follow the histories can at least get that part sorted. Eagleash (talk) 00:12, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @ERollo: The page history [3] shows you did create it with the name Holosopholy but User:HapHaxion moved it to Holosophy, maybe because there are no Google hits on "Holosopholy". This automatically creates a redirect from the old name. Did you invent the word? There are a few Google hits on "Holosophy" but apparently no common meaning of that word. It sounds like many occurrences were made up by the authors with different intended meanings. Note WP:NOTNEO. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:14, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying that I did not make a spelling mistake. That puts my mind at rest. The word 'Holosophy' has been registered as a trade mark by an organisation who seem to be promoting 'well being' in a manner that deviates from the root words Holo and Soph points to Whole Wisdom/Knowledge. I have been asked by Change Managers to put the word Holosopholy on Wiki as it is meaningful to them and would like it described more fully so that the concept may be shared. Holosophy sounds like a branch of Philosophy but in contrast Holosopholy is concerned not only with thinking internally but also thinking with the hand. I would also add that a Holosopholist is not a Polymath ie a person who has a wide range of deep knowledge. A Holosopholist is someone who has the knowledge and know-how to connect knowledgable people. Indeed if Wiki was a person he/she would be described as a type of Holosopholist. I do hope I am allowed to continue with this project. 88.210.179.54 (talk) 09:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Could I enquire please: who are "Change Managers"? Personally, I would regard the words holosophy, holosophology and holosopholist as neologisms undeserving of a place in Wikipedia, but I'd be happy to be proved wrong if you can find WP:Reliable sources for some or all of the terms. Dbfirs 10:03, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. Change Managers are professionals who are employed by governments, corporations or businesses to identify routes through the complexity that modern globalisation has delivered. There is a general consensus that connecting people has merit and that learning to bridge the gap between those of opposing views is advantageous to global stability. In the old paradigm, the word Diplomat was used to describe part of this function, but it has become archaic in the sense that it has become highly stereotyped and closed. There needs to be a new way to express "the whole work of those who strive to connect" because a holosopholist is not necessarily always diplomatic. I quote: "Neologisms represent the evolving nature of the English language. Holosopholy is indeed a neologism as is Google and Crowdsourcing. Holosopholy represents the embodiment of an evolving "Diplomacy", a word which is no longer able to contribute in concept to the whole needs of globalisation. I can understand why you have to protect the integrity of the encyclopedia and that Neologisms must be tried, tested and in common use. My question is- Does it make sense to you? Do you know intuitively that this word has merit and should be shared universally now, or do I share it with a small group of reliable sources who may take 10 years to release its value publicly. I leave that up to you. Sorry forgot to sign. ERollo (talk) 12:06, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

On the contrary, both Google and crowdsourcing have had entries in dictionaries for years and so are new words but no longer neologisms. I'm afraid you must ask your mysterious Change Managers to publish their original research elsewhere. Wikipedia is not the place to publish new concepts. They must have been written about in WP:Reliable sources first. Dbfirs 13:21, 29 January 2017 (UTC) Sorry to disappoint you. Dbfirs 13:21, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. I am not in the slightest bit disappointed. In fact I am highly amused that Wiki considers that an attempt to connect the world is a new concept. Please ensure that you delete all reference to Holosophy as well as this is a trade mark and the organisation may sue you. Cheers ERollo (talk) 15:57, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

The attempt isn't new, but the word is. I agree that both articles should be deleted. I'm still puzzled about who these "Change Managers" are. Dbfirs 16:10, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

As I said before, change managers are professionals who are employed to advise organisations on how to implement changes when these changes are very complex. The world has become too complicated for most organisations to use the old tried and tested management techniques successfully. In many ways our language will need to evolve quickly to accommodate the changes that are going on in the world with the new capacity for communication. I expect many more new words will come your way as the world adapts to the effects that the internet has brought upon us. It is people like mysel,f who think out of the box, who are in a position to assist with this process of adaption. I hope this answers your question. 88.210.179.54 (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I still wonder which London organisation you work for, but please note that neither Wikipedia nor Wiktionary is the place to publicise newly-invented words. You need to think even further out of the box. Dbfirs 08:36, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Look Wiki, I got the message very early on in this conversation that Neologisms aren't allowed. I am sorry, I accept your reasoning and I apologise. I am somewhat concerned about your joint continued facetious questioning about my connections? In light of my rejection, that is absolutely none of your business and why should you care anyway? If you had really wanted to know about these "London Organisations" then you should have let the article run. But Rules are Rules. This conversation has ended and my public flogging, for being a bad person, is complete. Let it go. ERollo (talk) 10:36, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to upset you. No public flogging or facetiousness was intended. It was your statement the "I have been asked by Change Managers to put the word Holosopholy on Wiki" that flagged "promotional" in my mind. I'm always curious about behind-the-scenes influences anywhere in life, not just in Wikipedia. I'll drop the subject now that both entries have been deleted as you requested. Best wishes, and I look forward to the word appearing in dictionaries in the future. Dbfirs 11:23, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Vile attack on President Trump at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Trump (under list of children)

Vandalism reverted, and OP blocked for making legal threats. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 22:40, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
You have allow a vile and despicable attack on President Trump to be posted and not allow an edit from his father's page under list of his children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Trump I am contacting the Secret Service to complain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2C51:D930:F8C7:68EF:C386:173A (talk) 23:25, 28 January 2017 (UTC) I doubt the Secret Service will do much, though you are of course within your rights to contact them. People are keeping an eye on the current vandalism to the article, and if the perpetrator(s) do not stop soon, they are liable to be reported to the admins which may result in them being prevented from editing. Regards, --Money money tickle parsnip (talk) 23:29, 28 January 2017 (UTC) Good luck. I tend to think the focus of the Secret Service is on keeping President Trump alive, rather than on preventing people from saying mean things about him. General Ization Talk 23:47, 28 January 2017 (UTC) The page history [4] shows the recent vandalism was reverted within minutes and before your post was saved. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:56, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

January 29

Edward Marjoribanks, 2nd Baron Tweedmouth

Reference number 1 looks wrong. I did not do this reference. Thanks 101.182.188.199 (talk) 08:44, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

 Done Eagleash (talk) 12:35, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Ishbel Hamilton-Gordon, Marchioness of Aberdeen and Temair

section - "see also" on this page looks really bad. I did not do this mess. Please fix if able. Thanks and I hope I am being helpful! 101.182.188.199 (talk) 08:47, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

 Done Eagleash (talk) 12:35, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Twinkle

Hello, I am fighting against vandalism, and I activated the Twinkle, but the undo button doesn't appear. What is happening? Thanks! --Gambler1478 (talk) 10:37, 29 January 2017 (UT

@Gambler1478: I'm not sure! I see you've managed to set your Twinkle preferences, so at least that part of it must be working for you. Do any of the issues at Wikipedia:Twinkle/doc#Troubleshooting installation apply to you? What are you looking at when the undo button doesn't appear? Could you post a full URL? -- John of Reading (talk) 12:27, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Only the undo button isn't working. I am looking the diffs, and the history, while the tab twinkle, next to view history tab is working; undo button isn't working. --Gambler1478 (talk) 15:54, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

@Gambler1478: Since you haven't posted a full URL, try this one: JoR sandbox diff. When I view that, I see four links added by Twinkle - "Restore this version" at the left, and "Rollback (AGF)", "Rollback" and "Rollback (Vandal}" at the right. Do you see those? In addition there is an "(Undo)" link at the right, which is from the core software, not from Twinkle. Feel free to experiment with my sandbox, if you like. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:30, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

No, those button doesn't appear, I am using other script, but the button just appear on the history page. --Gambler1478 (talk) 16:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

@Gambler1478: In the Twinkle preferences, look for "Show rollback links on these pages". I don't think you've ticked anything there. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

All of them are ticked and nothing else happens yet... --Gambler1478 (talk) 17:05, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

@Gambler1478: Yes, I see you've ticked them now. I'm stuck, sorry. I suggest you ask at Wikipedia talk:Twinkle, giving the full URL of a diff page where you are failing to see the Twinkle rollback links. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:17, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for help me! Twinkle wasn't working due to a other script which I had installed, but now it is working. Gambler1478 (talk) 21:08, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Edward Marjoribanks

Please helpme with malformations. I have been reprimanded by an editor david bidfulph whom I respect enormously. I am too embarked to state that I don't know how to formatting in the way he wants. Please see my request above. Thanks so much. 101.182.188.199 (talk) 11:31, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Please see #Duchess of Cambridge above, and User talk:101.182.188.199. This editor's misuse of the publisher parameter was pointed out by DES at User talk:Srbernadette#citation format on 23 September 2015, and on countless occasions in numerous places since then. Can someone with more patience than I have please explain it in words of one syllable that this editor will understand? If some thinks that the description at Template:Cite web#Publisher can be made clearer, please do so. Regulars here at the help desk will know this editor's propensity for expecting other users to sort out errors in referencing, instead of learning to do it for himself with the help of the endless advice which he has been given; see numerous comments at User talk:Srbernadette. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:46, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

In the short-term, I suppose, one piece of advice might be "If you don't understand what ought to go into the publisher parameter, then don't use it". We may have said so before, but there's no harm in saying so again. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:56, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello, @101.182.188.199: You are obviously willing to learn, and that is what we value here, so stick with it - references are notoriously difficult for newcomers to get to grips with. I can offer a couple of suggestions. Firstly, as David Biddulph suggests, only use the "|publisher=" field for the actual name of the publisher, or leave it blank. Nothing else goes there. Secondly, it helps to use the "Preview" tool when making edits, to ensure they are just right before you save them. Or try them out on your Sandbox until you are happy with them. Thirdly, you could try the Wikipedia Adventure to build your skills and confidence. I hope this helps. --Gronk Oz (talk) 13:02, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Mahira Khan

Hi! There's an edit war going on the article, what should be done? Also I have got a warning message, and I think there's no my mistake. Hope for kind response, Thanks! M. Billoo 13:13, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

M.Billoo2000 My advice would be to avoid any further edits to the article and instead put your case objectively on the article talk page, notifying the other editor as you do so. Hopefully the issues can be resolved there: if not, there is a dispute resolution procedure laid down (this Help Desk isn't really part of that). The other thing is to try not to seem combative in edit summaries: being extended-confirmed or an admin doesn't give you an advantage in editing disputes, which are assessed purely on the merits of the case: Noyster (talk), 14:38, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Radio Tatras International

Re https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FRadio_Tatras_International

Would someone care to comment as to WHY Radio Tatras Interenational has been deleted. It is a fully functional UK license radio station. Do I detect some sour grapes?

RTI is on air 24/7 which will soon be joined by RTI Gold. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.253.186.10 (talk) 14:47, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Deleted for lack of reliable sources, see WP:Articles for deletion/Radio Tatras International (2nd nomination). --David Biddulph (talk) 15:08, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

stamp cancellation date

Am looking for anyone else who has an envelop with cancellation date of Oct. 32, 1964, Kwajalien Islands. This is a very rare cancellation date authenticated by the U.S. Postal Dept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.104.50.46 (talk) 16:55, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, this is the 'help desk' for assistance in editing Wikipedia. Suggest you try any of the on-line philately forums or the Wikipedia reference desk may be able to suggest something. Eagleash (talk) 19:02, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Your search may be easier if you spell "Kwajalein" correctly. Maproom (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Article: Lahore; Education

Please add a Public institution, "Pakistan Institute Of Fashion and Design" in the "Fashion" part of the article "Lahore". This is a very renowned University of fashion and creative studies in Pakistan and has produced many Pakistan's famous Fashion Designers: Maria B., Hassan Sheheryar Yasin, Kamiar Rokni, Maheen Kardar, Mehdi, Sehr Atif, Nomi Ansari and Saman Arif. PIFD is affiliated with the world famous Art Schools: Ecole de la Chambre Syndicale de la Couture Parisienn, Mod' Spe' Paris, Swedish College of Textile & Sciences in Borås, Sweden since 2007 for student exchange and curriculum development; and Asian Institute of Gemological Sciences, Thailand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FaadiFashion (talk • contribs) 17:56, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Why can't you add it yourself? —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 18:46, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

a word with "crunchyroll" in it?

yeah? so? uh, I was looking at a few articles? and a number of them had 'crunchyroll' in it, at the 'license by?' but in some pages or just call it articles? use to have that, and as the link part mostly came here [5]? to most of the same title err page(s) upon here? then a few articles was saved back to the studio place or company that licenses it? which, awhile after, the word crunchyroll doesn't have a link to it? and if some other articles that still has it?

then, is it still kept there or not? is what I'm a bit confused on? Tainted-wingsz (talk) 18:33, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

It's not clear what your question is. Is link getting added inappropraitely to some articles? RudolfRed (talk) 20:28, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

yes, like to this part [6],[7], [8] and someone correctly fixed it on this, [9] then the article is just o.k. and I would point at every part of different articles that would have this? before someone kept adding it? when it was earlier? or so? Tainted-wingsz (talk) 21:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

My book is mentioned but not cited

In an article "Layoff" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Layoff My Book, Healing the Wounds: Overcoming the Trauma of Layoffs and Revitalizing Downsized Organizatins is mentioned in the article but is not cited. The correct citation is David M. Noer, Overcoming the Trauma of Layoffs and Revitalizing Downsized Organizations, Jossey-Bass: San Francisco 2009 (Revised Edition).

I tried to point this out in the "talk" section but was baffled by the content and inability to find a space to enter my comments.

Thanks for the help,

David Noer [redacted email] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:837D:8EF0:55FB:64D2:BD7B:AD45 (talk) 18:50, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Link to the section where the book is mentioned Layoff#Effects of Layoffs in 2nd paragraph 'Effects of layoffs in the workplace'. Eagleash (talk) 20:58, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

 Done - Guy Macon has added the citation. --Gronk Oz (talk) 21:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

I added the citation. David, please check it for errors and post any corrections needed here. Also, do you have a preferred URL where it can be accessed? (We prefer free but pay sites are OK).

Related question for the other help desk regulars; should I create a page for David M. Noer? Should our Center for Creative Leadership#Notable People Associated with CCL page list him? (See[10]). --Guy Macon (talk) 21:47, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Article only using self-hosted references

The article Goodiepal seems to be only using references hosted by the subject himself, and seems to be very comercial. I can't place a speedy deletion template on it due to the captcha, which I can't read. What can I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.132.78.134 (talk) 21:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Several reference links are non-functioning, but the subject of the article appears to meet the notability standard for Wikipedia. The article does not meet criteria for speedy deletion (see the policy), but its referencing needs attention and cleanup. DonFB (talk) 22:43, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

January 30

Referencing errors on Squanto

Reference help requested.

I got a message saying that there is an "unsupported parameter error" on an edit I performed in Squanto. I do not see what the error is. Since there were several reference changes in that edit, could you explain what the bot is pointing to? AnthroMimus (talk) 00:39, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

I think I just resolved it. Sorry for jumping the gun. AnthroMimus (talk) 00:53, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, AnthroMimus (talk) 00:39, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

No such parameter called |piblisher=.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 01:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Make images larger?

At User:Bubba73#Historic_places, how can I make the three images of the state of Georgia larger, but side by side? Bubba73 <sup>You talkin' to me?</sup> 00:50, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Help:Gallery tag#Attributes and values says:

• widths= Image widths in pixels (has no effect if mode is set to packed, packed-overlay, packed-hover, or slideshow)

You can combine mode=packed with heights= instead of widths=. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:28, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Bubba73: For example, you could add: heights="250px" as another "mode" parameter inside the "gallery" tags. More gory details at: WP:Picture_tutorial. DonFB (talk) 02:44, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I think I got it now. Bubba73 <sup>You talkin' to me?</sup> 02:52, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Resolved

Referencing errors on Gurbani Judge

Reference help requested. I was told that there is a format error in a reference I had cited. I don't see the error and would like some help. This is the sixth reference on the Gurbani Judge wiki. Please help. Varunr (talk) 06:57, 30 January 2017 (UTC) Thanks, Varunr (talk) 06:57, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

@Varunr: I've fixed it by adding the missing "http://" at the start of the URL. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:06, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

1932

"This article and its editors are subject to Wikipedia's general sanctions: All edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, are placed under discretionary sanctions. Any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an arbitration enforcement action on users editing in this topic area, after an initial warning."

Why 1932?

Benjamin (talk) 09:38, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

The question is asked and answered at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/American politics 2#1932. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:49, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Benjamin (talk) 10:07, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

changing logo & editing content

Hello,

I would like to edit this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandinavian_Tobacco_Group by adding my company*s new logo and changing the text. I have added text in the back end and for some reason not all the changes have been applied when publish. Please advise.

Many thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreayoung (talk • contribs) 10:28, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

The first thing you need to do is to read about conflict of interest and paid editing. I notice also that many of the references which you have recently added are to the company website. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject has to say about itself; instead, Wikipedia relies on published reliable sources independent of the subject. Where you say "not all the changes have been applied when publish", are you referring to where you have tried to use parameters which don't exist in the relevant infobox template, such as "Traded as" (which is shown as a warning in page preview when you are editing the [page)? You need to remember that in general, page names and parameters in Wikipedia are case sensitive. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:41, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! any advice on changing the logo? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andreayoung (talk • contribs) 12:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi Andreayoung. If the new version you which to upload is in the same file format and essentially the same as File:Scandinavian Tobacco Group logo.jpg, except smaller in size, cropped, of straightened, etc., then you can simply upload it by going to the file's page and clicking "Upload a new version of this file". If, however, it is significantly different such as different in design, color, file format, etc., then you should upload the new version as a completely new file. You can do this by using Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. If you're not sure how to do this, you can ask for help at WP:MCQ or WP:FFU. As long as you provide a url for the file so that it can be downloaded and it's copyright status can be verified, then someone at either of those noticeboards should be able to help you or do it for you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:30, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Updating the logo is the kind of uncontroversial action that you are probably OK doing even with your COI Andreayoung (but you need to make that declaration before you do anything else). Please see WP:LOGOS to understand the background of using non-free logos, and WP:UPI#Updating existing image for the mechanics. You won't be able to do this until your are AUTOCONFIRMED, but that should happen in about nineteen hours.

 --ColinFine (talk) 13:33, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

What is inappropriate about "pinging"?

One editor does not take kindly to being "pinged," as he/she calls it. Every time I discuss something with another editor, i make sure I include his name in full style, i.e User:such-and-such in brackets. It's a standard practice of mine aimed to simply facilitate the reader. My question is, whether this is considered bona fide "pinging" and, if so, whether this would be considered inappropriate or offensive or a type of stalking, harassment, etc. Although, I've been an editor here for a number of years, this is the first time I encounter such a complaint. Thanks in advance. -The Gnome (talk) 12:10, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Actually, when somebody is having an active conservation with someone on some talk page or so they usually watchlist it so that any changes/addition /alteration automatically pops up in front of their eyes.Now, many editors don't like being repeatedly pinged every time one post a reply or opinion in a particular discussion since it clutters the notification box without doing any real good.Also pinging other editors at random without any proper reason can be sometimes considered as disruptive. The best way out is obviouly to not ping the concerned editor any more in that particular discussion. Hope, this satisfies you. Winged Blades <sup>Godric</sup> 13:04, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

W.r.t to the chain of events that led you here, pinging an user three times or so in a single reply esp. when there are multiple active content disputes between you and the user, could be deemed as disruptive.Winged Blades <sup>Godric</sup> 13:43, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

• If someone says they don't want to be pinged, don't ping them, it's that simple. If they later fail to answer a question asked on a page where they have posted afterwards, see WP:SILENCE. Tigraan<sup>Click here to contact me</sup> 13:27, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Also if you want to link names without pinging someone you can use the {{Noping}} template. - GB fan 15:28, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

How to go from Draft to published?

I have an entry that is in the draft stage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:John_Raymond_Snell How do I get it approved for regular viewing? Dale Dailey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dale Dailey (talk • contribs) 13:15, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Hey Dale Dailey. You can submit your draft for review by a volunteer with our Articles for Creation project, by pasting {{AFC submission}} to the top of the page. This will add the draft to a list of submissions pending review.

However, in its current state, your draft seems unlikely to be accepted because it is almost entirely referenced to the individuals autobiography. In order to show that a subject meets Wikipedia's standards for notability, you need to demonstrate that the subject has received in-depth coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Since an autobiography is written by the subject themselves, it doesn't count as independent. It's still fine to use that as a source for information, but other sources are needed to demonstrate that the subject received sufficient outside attention to qualify for their own article. TimothyJosephWood 13:21, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

I have taken the liberty of tweaking the headings and some layout anomalies more in line with MoS. Now it just needs better referencing as noted by TJW above. Eagleash (talk) 13:31, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Problem with Yotsuya Kaidan page

Someone has gone through the page about Yutsuda Kaidan and changed character names to "lemon." I don't know the story, so I don't know which characters they are supposed to be. Sorry if I am submitting this information in the wrong way, but I can't find the right way to report it. Thanks! --— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.76.14.229 (talk • contribs)

Thanks for pointing this out, IP user. It confused me and (from the history) several other editors. The character's name is "Iemon", starting with a capital "I"! So there's nothing wrong with the article. For future reference, the best place to point out problems in a particular article is on that article's talk page: in this case, Talk:Yotsuya Kaidan. --ColinFine (talk) 13:44, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)I thought at first that it was vandalism by a recent couple of IP edits (and undid them). However the page was created a decade ago with the name Lemon. Google reveals this page where the name is also shown as Lemon. (I have undone my edit!). But thanks for pointing this out. Eagleash (talk) 13:46, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

@Eagleash: If you re-read the page to which you gave the link, you'll see that the text of the page has "Iemon", it's in the comments where a number of readers of the page commented that they had misread it as "Lemon". --David Biddulph (talk) 13:58, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

See Yotsuya Kaidan#endnote iemon. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:51, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes. I spotted that just too late. Eagleash (talk) 13:56, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Reminds me of how Loituma's song "Ievan polkka" (the first word being the genitive case of a local form of Eva) is sometimes listed as "Levan's polka". —Tamfang (talk) 19:16, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Comic Relief

I submitted a correction to the Comic Relief page yesterday, more accurately reflecting the origins of Comic Relief. All the facts contained therein can be verified. The correction has today been taken down and some inaccurate changes have been made to the existing copy reflecting truer dates, but not those involved, as notified in my submission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bramwell47 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

The article Comic Relief has not been edited since January 19th. You added a section to its talk page yesterday; what you added is still there. If you want to make an addition to the article itself, you should include references. Maproom (talk) 14:28, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Problem with the Armenian language code?

According to ISO 3166-1#Current codes, the code for Armenia is 'am' but when used in {{am icon}}, it comes up as 'Amharic', which Google tells me is the official language of Ethiopia. Should I be using some other list for language codes, as opposed to country codes? Thanks, Leschnei (talk) 14:36, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

The header in Category:Language icon templates gives a link to List of ISO 639-2 codes, and the notes on the category page confirm that the codes are not always the same as country codes. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:44, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Ah ha! - that it explains it. Following a few links from Category:Language icon templates led to this, {{link language|arm}}, which works. Thanks for your help, Leschnei (talk) 14:57, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

If you want the equivalent to {{am icon}}, it would be {{hy icon}}. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:05, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

More choices - thanks again Leschnei (talk) 15:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Magic link ISBNs

Hi, I'm trying to get to grips with the ISBN magic link & it just does not seem to work for me. I'm typing ISBN[space]978[hyphen]then the rest of the 13 digit code. This does not convert to magic link on saving. Please help - I'm wasting other people's time tidying my work! JasperWare (talk) 16:17, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

It works without the hyphen... ISBN 9783895610349. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:21, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Magic Links will *eventually* go away. Please use the ISBN template like {{ISBN|193151447X}} which is much superior (and checks your ISBN to make sure that the check digit is valid. See https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Future_of_magic_links as well. Naraht (talk) 16:23, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

@JasperWare: At Burkhard Spinnen the magic links are not working because they are enclosed in <nowiki>...</nowiki> tags. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:32, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Marking an article as not notable

Hello, how do I mark an article as "not notable"? The article in question is this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pickle_(Python) GBMorris (talk) 19:01, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Hey GBMorris. I believe what you are referring to is Template:Notability. TimothyJosephWood 19:18, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

GBMorris One way to solve the problem is to carry out the proposed merge. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:42, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia page for Thomas B. Sheridan

Please add my latest book to my book publication list:

Models of Human-System Interaction: Philosophical and Methodological Consideratons, with Examples, Hoboken NJ, John Wiley, 2017.

Thanks you.

T. Sheridan