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

July 3

Citing letters

I found a letter in an article online that has information pertinent to the article I am editing. How do you cite it using the ref tags?SciGal (talk) 00:04, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@SciGal: Please be more specific and include a link to the article with the letter. Maybe {{Cite letter}} or {{Cite web}} can be used. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Here's the link to the article and here's the link to the letter.SciGal (talk) 00:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@SciGal: Cite the article rather than the letter because the letter is a primary source while the article is secondary. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:33, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll do that.SciGal (talk) 20:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Abusive editor

Hello,

Is there a way to report a verbally-abusive editor? I created a page recently, and it's being discussed for possible deletion. I can understand if the page is deleted, but one of the editors posted a disparaging remark that is inappropriate. The talk page is located at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/David_Barak

The comment was made by user Sionk, and is disparaging the subject of the article who played no part in creating the article. If anyone should be "blamed" for creating the article, it should be me, not the subject of the article. The comment in question, posted by Sionk, is:

• Delete, there are no claims of any significance, the biographical information is unsourced and the (unclear) contributions to non-notable works don't tell us much either. I can't see anything significant online about him, which suggests he must only be a california wannabe that hasn't made it yet.

Again, if the page is determined to be of no value, that's fine (although I'd beg to differ), but the attitude that Sionk has taken is unacceptable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hauntedsandiego (talk • contribs) 01:04, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

That's not abusive. Please assume good faith, instead of assuming the absolute worst, as you have in this case. At no point did he comment on you, he merely pointed out that the article does not provide any independent reliable sources as our guidelines require and is unlikely to have any any time soon. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:16, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I must respectfully disagree Ian.thomson. "california wannabe" is not abusive towards me, and I should have been clearer, but it IS rude (abusive was a poor choice of words) towards the subject of the article. Another user commented on the deletion discussion page (pardon my inexperience with some of the terms and customs here, I'm a bit new), and I maintained that the comment in question was inappropriate. I'll quote my comment here (without Wiki markup):

Do you feel "california wannabe" is appropriate for Wikipedia, Orangemike? I never said that Sionk called me names, but he or she was denigrating the subject of the article, who had nothing to do with its creation or maintenance. It's my contention that comments such as that are uncalled for. If discussion regarding the merits of this article is to take place in an honest and unbiased fashion, it seems to me those taking part in the discussion should maintain some decorum. In that spirit, I am modifying my previous statement to be a little more professional. Personally, I believe Sionk should consider an apology, not for the vote but for the way in which it was cast.

I contend that Sionk's comment, as written, was inappropriate. I would appreciate it if someone with a bit more "Wiki substance" than myself would counsel him or her on the finer points of common courtesy. Hauntedsandiego (talk) 02:12, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I agree that the choice of language was less civil and "slangier" than would have been desirable, but it hardly rises to the level of blockability. I will note that we have somewhat looser standards as to what is properly encyclopedic language in talk pages, and an AFD discussion is a talk page, than we do in article pages. Article pages are written as the voice of Wikipedia, while talk pages are written as the voices of editors. If you think that an editor's choice of language is inappropriate, you may discuss it on the user's talk page.

In looking over the OP's own comments at the deletion talk page, I see that the subject editor's language is a little harsh, but so is the OP's. Deletion discussions have a way of getting editors unnecessarily worked up. Neither deletion nor retention of an article is the end of the world. The Sun running out of hydrogen really is the end of the world, but that won't happen for a few billion years. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Well to be completely honest, this whole experience has really soured the participatory aspect of Wikipedia for me. I spent a fair amount of time putting the article together, learning some Wiki markup to make it as seamless as my skills would allow, and to see the editors' discourteous commentary was disheartening. It's true what's often said about the Internet (and rush hour traffic), that people will behave online in ways they would never behave in the real world. I have no doubt that some of the editors would have no problem flipping the bird at some old lady for driving 10 miles an hour under the speed limit.

That article was my first, and it will be my last. I've begun looking into the options for closing my account, and I'm going to ask for the "courtesy vanishing" once I see how things shake out with the article (it's a sure indication that I harbor some self-destructive masochistic tendencies in my DNA). My faith in the Wikipedia community has been destroyed. Hauntedsandiego (talk) 02:59, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

EDIT: I see the "Grammar Problem" post below, which isn't part of this one. Did I mistakenly delete some markup that kept it separate? If so, I apologize. Hauntedsandiego (talk) 02:14, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

The only thing you have to do to close your account is to stop editing. Also since a) you have voted to delete the article and b) you have chosen to make far more inappropriate comment than anything written by Sionk it is time to drop the WP:DROPTHESTICK. MarnetteD|Talk 03:12, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

It seems there are quicker, more definitive ways to close my account, so I'll follow up on those methods. As for Sionk, well... Hauntedsandiego (talk) 03:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Just so you know there isn't a quicker way to close the account - see Wikipedia:Username policy#Deleting and merging accounts. As to the rest I see that you chose not to read WP:DROPTHESTICK. MarnetteD|Talk 04:18, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

No, I read WP:DROPTHESTICK. The stick is being dropped. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hauntedsandiego (talk • contribs) 04:40, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Apologies of the choice of language caused offence. To be honest, I only realised after I had made the comment that the subject was in his 50's, while "wannabe" is more appropriate for someone starting out in their trade. The lack of achievements of the person convinced me in my mind he was much younger.

I can understand the frustration when time is spent writing an article and then someone else thinks it isn't suitable. If Hauntedsandiego wants to add verifiable proof of significant achievements or recognition (and change their "delete" comment) I will be delighted, of course. Sionk (talk) 17:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Grammar Problem

Could you please put a comma in (after the words "flight dispatcher") in the section titled Early Life on the page Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. Also, a fullstop needs to be added in the same section after the words 30 million (pounds) Cheerio form Pete  Done - You could have edited the article, since this is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, and minor edits are welcome, although in this specific case adding the punctuation required precision because each time the mark had to put after multiple references. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi again, RE my previous request for help; Could you please put a comma in (after the words "flight dispatcher") in the section titled Early Life on the page Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. Also, a fullstop needs to be added in the same section after the words 30 million (pounds

You have done this BUT - I think the punctuation you have done is not done correctly. The comma should be immedialtely after the words flight dispatcher. The full stop should be immediately after the words 30 million plus.

I am reluctant to change it myself in case I get it wrong Thanks again — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.149.113.236 (talk) 02:52, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

If somebody else has done it wrong and you think you know what you want to do, why don't you change it yourself? I am not sure why the comma is needed, and because the phrasing is quite complicated, I don't really get which of the two Middletons is referred to by the words "flight dispatcher" and "flight attendant". The Average Wikipedian (talk) 08:23, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

AfD question

If you add the AfD tag to an article, like I have just done on Steve Badger (poker player), but the article has previously been nominated for deletion, the link that shows up to create the discussion cannot be used to create a new discussion page (because one is already there). So what do you do? Start a discussion above the old one? Or create a new page? If so, how? Thanks. Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 02:59, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Handpolk in such a case you add "(2nd nomination)" (or 3rd or whatever) to the name of the discussion page. I have done this and he discussion is now at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Badger (poker player) (2nd nomination). Please edit that page and provide your reasons why you belive the article should be deleted. DES ^(talk) 03:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

All set, thanks! Handpolk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 04:16, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Grammar problem continued correct placing of full stop and comma

Hi again, RE my previous request for help; Could you please put a comma in (after the words "flight dispatcher") in the section titled Early Life on the page Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. Also, a full stop needs to be added in the same section after the words 30 million (pounds

You have done this BUT - I think the punctuation you have done is not done correctly. The comma should be immediately after the words flight dispatcher. The full stop should be immediately after the words 30 million plus.

I am reluctant to change it myself in case I get it wrong Thanks again — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.149.113.236 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 2 July 2015‎

There is no need to make this request three times, 110.149.113.236. We saw it the first time. Nor does it make editors, all of whom are unpaid volunteers, more inclined to assit. DES ^(talk) 03:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Margaret Thatcher

You talk about the people who celebrated Thatcher's death BUT you leave out any mention of the HUGE crowds that lined her funeral procession. I find this miss leading and a distortion of history. I no longer trust your history. This is not political but your history of her seems skewed. Even Labor Party PMs have continued much of her economic policy which has made England one of the riches countries in the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.83.83.91 (talk) 03:39, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

You forgot to mention...Whist increasing chid poverty. Taking from the poor in order to give to the rich. Figure 1. Child poverty: 1979-2004/05 . So what is your question?--Aspro (talk) 10:44, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

If you have a problem with the page Margaret Thatcher, you can suggest any changes on Talk:Margaret Thatcher. Bear in mind that Wikipedia cannot contain every piece of information that exists, that facts need to be verifiable (by being sourced to reliable references) and that due weight needs to be considered. Death and funeral of Margaret Thatcher gives more information on Thatcher's death. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 08:23, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

The article mentions "mixed reactions" in all sections which touch upon the celebration of her death. To quote, "Reactions to the news of Thatcher's death were mixed in the UK, ranging from tributes lauding her as Britain's greatest-ever peacetime Prime Minister to public celebrations of her death and expressions of personalised vitriol." The Average Wikipedian (talk) 08:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

List of pages transcluding a navbox but not linked by it

What is the quickest way to get a list of all the articles that transclude a certain template but is not linked from it? Specifically, I want a list of all articles that have {{Allan Dwan}} in them, but are not included in the films listed by that template. I suspect part of the answer is using WP:Catscan, but I can't seem to figure out the right parameters to use (the "linked from" option doesn't seem to work at the moment). Gabbe (talk) 04:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@Gabbe: Catscan wasn't working for me at all, the last time I tried to use it. But AutoWikiBrowser's "List comparer" can do this job. Eight articles use the template but are not mentioned in it: The Lamb, the Woman, the Wolf, The Unlawful Trade, A Modern Musketeer, The Wild Blue Yonder (1951 film), Trail of the Vigilantes, Rendezvous with Annie, While Paris Sleeps (1932 film), Human Cargo (film). Conversely, three pages are mentioned in the template but don't transclude it: Hold Back the Night (film), Human Cargo, Wild Blue Yonder (film).

If you are doing checks like this regularly, you might like to download AWB and try out the "List comparer" on its "Tools" menu. You don't need to apply for permission to use AWB if you are only using this tool; the program doesn't even ask you to log in. -- John of Reading (talk) 06:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! Gabbe (talk) 06:44, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Is there a way to redirect an image file?

I created a vector image to replace a .png file, but have discovered that quite a number of non-English Wikipedia pages are still linked to the original .png image. Is there a way to create a mass redirect from the .png file to the .svg one? Should this question be asked at Wikimedia Commons?

• New image: [1]
• Deprecated image: [2]

--One Salient Oversight (talk) 07:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

See commons:Help:File redirect. --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 08:38, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

PS: You can't replace the file page with #REDIRECT. Each file whether svg or png has its own use. You will have to replace all the instances of png manually/automatically but it is not a good idea to redirect the png version to svg. --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 09:20, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Articles rating

We know that Good Articles, Featured articles are nominated and then they get the tag. There are other ratings as B-class and C-class. Are they rated automatically?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Expanded/People

--Silver Samurai 07:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

No. WP:ASSESS lists the various classes and their criteria (e.g. Start: "An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete. It might or might not cite adequate reliable sources."), but editors are needed to make these judgements and rate the article. With GA and FA, the processes are more formal (and FA requires more than one person's involvement), but anyone can classify any other article with whatever they think is appropriate (and update the class if the article has been through major improvements). It's best not to rate an article you've created and/or significantly contributed to (and I wouldn't recommend rating articles until you're pretty familiar with the class system and have looked through ratings for other articles), but I don't think there are any specific rules other than that. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:16, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@Bilorv: How can i rate an article as start class b-class and c-class or b+ . Is there any tool?--Silver Samurai 09:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Go to the talk page of the article (for instance, picking a random article, Talk:Science) and find the bit at the top that lists the Wikiprojects. Edit the talk page and you'll find some bits like this: {{WikiProject Science|class=|importance=}}. In the |class= parameter, add the rating (e.g. start, C, B). Make sure you make the changes to every one of these Wikiprojects and save the page. If the page doesn't have any one of these banners (or doesn't even exist), then you need to find some relevant Wikiprojects and add these banners to the talk page before giving a rating. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:45, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@Bilorv: Chiming in with an additional two-cents worth. If the article's talk page has a number of Wikiprojects, it is OK to add the Bannershell wrapper. See example at Talk:Claude Dagens article. Secondly, if the article is a Biography, the WP Bio. should go first. I don't recall the exact reason, but I think it has to do with correct flagging of the following WPs. Third, after doing hundreds of article assessments (mostly for WP Catholicism) there are articles where the Class= (assessment quality) does not match up with the articles content quality. Every editor is free to change this class code to reflect the article's level of development. This is just my opinion, but I think some editors are making good-faith article upgrades and forget (or don't know about) the Talk page upgrades. Lastly, it is completely okay to upgrade or downgrade the Class= based on the article current status. Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 01:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Changing the title of a draft

How can one change the title of a draft wiki article in editing after it has been submitted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MoreMusicThan1 (talk • contribs) 11:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

See HELP:MOVE. To rename a page, you "move" it to the preffered title. --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 12:00, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@Fauzan and MoreMusicThan1: To move a page, your account needs to be autoconfirmed, which means 4 days old and have 10 edit, which User:MoreMusicThan1 isn't. @MoreMusicThan1: I guess you're referring to Draft:Blurred Vision Music, do you want it moved to Draft:Blurred Vision by any chance? Joseph2302 (talk) 12:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Joseph2302 yes, that is exactly what I wish to do. Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by MoreMusicThan1 (talk • contribs) 11:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC) Sorry, @Joseph2302 - I'm not sure if I respond here with your handle but fully my message came through. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MoreMusicThan1 (talk • contribs) 11:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Help needed

Hi, It seems I cannot edit the electric motors and generators section of 3D Printing. I want this to be reverted for the following reasons: 1) I was the original author of this section and I am an expert in 3d printing of electric machines (i.e., electric motor and generators). 2) There was a later entry by United Technologies research in 3D printers of electric machines but in order to add value, I wanted to add competitive information about other 3d printers of electric machines (with real patent numbers as a substantial reference that is vetted by at least the United States Patent Office). 3) I am also an 40 year (UC Berkeley) electric machine expert and started the article about "doubly-fed" electric machines, which now has popular following. The reviewers seemed to suggest I violated Wikipedia (by adding competitive information) and it seems the reviewer unfairly removed me from editing. If you see my history in this subject, you should agree with me that I should be re-instated and my last article addition be entered. I admit, I do not have the experience (or even know how) to express my views to the reviewers. There should be a means to "directly" contact the reviewer. Instead there seems (to me perhaps) to be a lot of indirection and confusion when trying to express my views. And now that I am locked out, I can do almost nothing. I graciously ask that you please send me details and your opinion to "<redacted>." A personal contact would be greatly appreciated. Best Regards, Fklatt (talk) 13:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)Frederick W. Klatt

Seems like you're already in a discussion/argument about content at your talkpage, I don't see how posting about it here is going to solve anything. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@Fklatt: The basis you seem to be staking for your position are invalid. Reading WP:OWN and WP:OR may help clarify the situation for you.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:55, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Fklatt, You are not blocked, or in any way "locked out". You have been notified that other editors consider your edits promotional and disruptive. They may be mistaken. Persistant diruptive editing can lead to an account being blocked, either for a limited time, or indefinately. Please read the links that others have provided on your user talk page. Then feel free to discuss the mater on the relevant article talk pages, where anyone intersted in the article can see and join the discussion, or if you feel you must, on the user talk pages of the editors who have raised concern about your edits. DES ^(talk) 14:00, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Now at ANI: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Fklatt adding promotional material

OED online template

Is there a template for referencing the online OED (Oxford English Dictionary)? I can find one for the OED third edition but I don't think that's the same thing as the online OED. Clivemacd (talk) 13:11, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Clivemacd, {{OED}} genereates a cite to the OED 3rd edition, which is entirely online, see Oxford English Dictionary#Third_edition. The templates {{OED1}} and {{OED2}} can be used to cite the (printed) 1st and 2nd editions, and perhaps could be used for online versions of those editions. DES ^(talk) 13:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@Clivemacd: DES ^(talk) 13:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

How to add links?

I was searching trough wiki when i found a mistake and wanted to correct it. I thought people may not know the meaning so i wanted to add a link but i don't know how... Help? 3shyammenon (talk) 13:35, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

3shyammenon, what article did you want to post to, and what link did you wan tto add? In genral it i9s best to post such sugestiosn to teh talk page of the article if you are not sure how to make them in the article itself. DES ^(talk) 13:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

@3shyammenon: DES ^(talk) 13:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

3shyammenon, to add a link to a page you need to enclose the link in a pair of square brackets, so [[cake]] (for example) will produce cake. If you want the link to go to a different page to the text entered, you need to pipe the text like this: [[page link|text displayed]], so [[cake|text]] will produce text. For more information on wikitext, see Help:Cheatsheet. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 13:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

How do I see a list of one specific editor's contributions/edits, all in one place?

How do I see a list of one specific editor's contributions/edits, all in one place? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:14, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Your contributions page can be found at Special:Contributions/Joseph A. Spadaro, and just replace your username with the targeted user's name (or IP address) to get their list of contributions. Usually, though, it's easier to just click the "User contributions" button on the left-hand side of the screen, under "Tools", which appears when you are on a user or user talk page. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 16:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't mean to cause offense, but considering that you registered your account in February 2007 and have over 52,000 edits, I'd be surprised to learn that you were unaware of Special:Contributions. Perhaps you meant something else? Clarify maybe? Thanks. Dustin (talk) 16:55, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. No offense taken. OK, let me clarify. Way up at the top right-hand side of my Wikipedia page, I have 5 or 6 options listed. Specifically, it says: Joseph A. Spadaro 0 Talk Sandbox Preferences Beta Watchlist Contributions Log out. When I click the "Contributions" link, it has a list of every edit that I ever made in reverse chronological order. So, what I am asking is: how do I see that same exact page, but for another user, not for me? Since I became a Wikipedia editor in 2007, I have never had any need or any interest to do this task (until now). How's it done? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:22, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

As another user said, a link to "User contributions" should be on the left side of the screen under "tools". You can also just go to Special:Contributions and type in the name of the user you want to see the contributions of. Dustin (talk) 20:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

"User contributions" is under "Tools" anywhere in a user's userspace. Page histories, recent changes and watchlists have a "contribs" link to the right of the listed users. Most of the {{Userspace linking templates}} also include a "contribs" link. Some users have a customized signature with a contributions link, often saying "c". PrimeHunter (talk) 21:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Or, if you're like me, you can change the URL. Instead of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Joseph_A._Spadaro, go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nyttend or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jimbo_Wales. Note the different options on the page; for example, you can get it to restrict by namespace (giving only pages that are articles, only pages that are Mediawiki talk:, all pages that aren't Education Program:, etc.) and you can get it to give results for different dates by changing the "from year (and earlier)" option and the adjacent thing for months. Nyttend (talk) 03:12, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

FWIW, it always seems a bit odd to me that the "User contributions" link is tucked away in the Tools menu rather than being, say, another tab next to "User page" and "Talk". AndrewWTaylor (talk) 20:20, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, all. I tried the above suggestions. They all worked. Thanks! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 14:48, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

X!'s Tools

What's happened to X!'s tools? I haven't used it for months, and just now tried to find out some page statistics. Firstly the UI has changed, but it doesn't actually seem to pull back any results at all for me? Chaheel Riens (talk) 17:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I used them earlier today and they semed to be working. There is sometimes a delay as info is gathered. DES ^(talk) 17:33, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Hm, Am I doing something wrong then? To my knowledge I'm not doing anything different to what I used to do: Page History -> External tools: Revision history statistics and that used to take me to X!'s tools which would list all sorts of information about edits etc. Now it just gives me a blank page - if I populate the field with a page name it just returns "No revisions found" Chaheel Riens (talk) 19:19, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Chaheel Riens for the last few weeks (at least) X!'s tools has been going through some kind of overhaul. It works some days and not on others - or even some hours and not others. I don't know the details but I do know that there has been more than one thread about this at the Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) though I don't know if there is a current one. Mostly we just have to be patient and try it again every so often to see if it is working again. MarnetteD|Talk 19:39, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks - I can live with that. I'll have a gander over at the Pump. Chaheel Riens (talk) 20:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Lt. General Premindra Singh Bhagat PVSM VC

Could the editors of Wikipedia please add a new book that has been published by Pearson on Gen Bhagat, entitled The Victoria Cross: A Love Story by Ashali Varma. The book is available on both Amazon.in and Kindle and reviews can be found on ashalivarma.com and on Google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.180.144.154 (talk) 17:31, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia can be edited by anyone; everyone here is a volunteer. If you want an article to be created, you can create an account and write the article yourself (see Wikipedia:Your first article). Our main criterion for inclusion of books, found at WP:NBOOK, is that the book has received two or more reviews by reliable sources independent of the subject itself; if "The Victoria Cross: A Love Story" meets this criteria, you can write an article on it. If you need any more help, please ask. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 17:54, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I believe the OP is actually asking for the book to be added to the "Further reading" list at Premindra Singh Bhagat - I have just done so. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:38, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Are legal filings accepted as references in Wiki?

I am in a debate about the use of legal filings to support my contention that an edit I made was valid. The page in question is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tom_Horne

and the discussion is about the Colorado City Suit at the bottom of the page. ThanxMwinog2777 (talk) 17:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

No, Mwinog2777, don't use them. WP:BLPPRIMARY (part of the WP:BLP policy page) says "Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person. Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses."

But, there is a second paragraph to WP:BLPPRIMARY and it states: "Where primary-source material has been discussed by a reliable secondary source, it may be acceptable to rely on it to augment the secondary source, subject to the restrictions of this policy, no original research, and the other sourcing policies." It appears that this is not totally forbidden under certain circumstances. Or am I still wrong??Mwinog2777 (talk) 23:51, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Mwinog2777, that is true for primary source content in general. I would be very cautious about using court records and legal filings directly, and i would never do so unless there had been significant analysis 'of those specific documents by a reliable secondary source. DES ^(talk) 00:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I am using the primary resources only to identify that Horne remained an interventor. No more than that.Mwinog2777 (talk) 06:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

If your point is merely to state that Horne, as attorney general, represented the state in lawsuit X (where the lawsuit's notability can be established by secondary sources), then I have no problem citing the court documents for that. If your intent is to discuss Horne's legal arguments or other actions during the case, then I think it would be necessary to show that secondary sources have also discussed those aspects of his role in the case. Dragons flight (talk) 00:23, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

even "If your point is merely to state that Horne, as attorney general, represented the state in lawsuit X (where the lawsuit's notability can be established by secondary sources)" is a very iffy scenario. If other reliable sources have not reported on Horne presenting a certain case, why are we? . -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Quote from a movie review refers to SEALs as soldiers (incorrectly, I suspect)

The quote, from USA Today, is in the third paragraph here.

1. Can someone verify that U.S. Navy SEALs are called sailors (or whatever) and not soldiers?
2. What is Wikipedia's policy on inserting "[sic]" in a quote?
3. If "[sic]" is fine, can a footnote be added to explain why it was inserted?

Thanks in advance. Dyspeptic skeptic (talk) 20:40, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

My own take would be that isn't worth inserting sic. In the United States, the term "soldiers" is normally used to refer to members of the United States Army, and members of the United States Navy, including special forces, are still called sailors, but I don't think it is worth inserting sic. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't think we ought to use [sic] here, even though it should definitely be used elsewhere. "Soldiers" is definitely wrong, but it's not likely to be a mistake by us; I think we should use [sic] when someone might otherwise think we made the mistake. Had Claudia said "sailors" and we reported her as saying "soldiers", it would be an egregious mistake by us (how could we read one word from her writing and type the other?), so unlike when there's a little mistake (e.g. a mondegreen or a simple typo), the reader will presumably understand here that we just reproduced a wrong statement by her. Of course, if questions start arising (e.g. talk page comments or people "fixing" the quote), that will demonstrate that I was wrong and that [sic] is needed. Nyttend (talk) 22:33, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Considering that quotations are overused in that paragraph (see WP:QUOTATIONS), one could reasonably bypass the issue by eliminating the quotation and paraphrasing using "sailors". We have no obligation to match a source when we know it to be incorrect. You could also consider removing the one-person's-opinion entirely; that comment doesn't seem particularly noteworthy to me. Perhaps the writer has something else to say that could be substituted. ―Mandruss ☎ 23:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

July 4

Translation

What about translating an article to English? Do I need the Content Translation beta feature? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.160.12.133 (talk) 00:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

see WP:TRANSLATE and be aware that English Wikipedia has far stricter content and sourcing policies than some of the other languages and so merely "translating" may be insufficient for it to be accepted at English Wikipedia. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:04, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Why is Wikipedia text formatted this way?

In Wikipedia, when a person types a blank space followed by some text, it appears as follows:

Hello.  This text appears oddly formatted to me.  It appears in a boxed-off gray area.

Why on earth is the Wikipedia text formatted in such an odd way? Is there any reason for it, that it not obvious? Or is it just some computer glitch? To me, it seems like I see this odd format when someone makes an error (that is, they type a "blank space" by mistake). Which, by the way, is a very easy and a very common error to make. I can't imagine that someone intentionally wants their text to appear that way and, thus, adds in the extra blank space on purpose. Any insight into this oddity? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

That's why there is a Show preview button below the editing box and why the Wikipedia notes on editing advise using it. (Yes, I know it's a comment rather than an answer. I don't know why on earth this feature exists in Wikipedia, but I found it useful multiple times, e.g. for presenting code snippets in programming: Quicksort#Algorithm or examples in Wikipedia formatting—although there are other, more flexible methods.) --CiaPan (talk) 09:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes — it's just one of the bits of wikitext you've got to accept. I've used it by accident too, and it doesn't seem to be a particularly intuitive piece of markup; then again, neither is the colon I used at the beginning of this post or the four tildes I use to sign it. Most of the times I've seen it, it's used to show programming markup (or possibly a replacement for <code></code> tags). — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:10, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

It's an intentional feature; to explain why: In ordinary wikicode multiple spaces are compressed to one space, and lines separated by single newlines are combined. This is ordinary behavior of html, and usually it is desirable. But it makes it difficult to control the exact layout of text where an editor actually wants to have multiple spaces and/or forced line breaks. So as a special feature if a line begins with a space, the html generator keeps the spacing, and it uses a monospaced font. —teb728 t c 09:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@teb728, you've actually explained the "what" rather than the "why" of this "feature". I can see how it might have a legitimate use if only it would line wrap properly. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:00, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

As I said, the "why" is to make it easy "to control the exact layout of text where an editor actually wants to have multiple spaces and/or forced line breaks." Like other wikicode it is easier to remember than the html. The problem, of course is that it is too easy to do unintentionally. As for wrapping, it is not supposed to wrap: The editor is supposed to make the lines short enough that wrapping is not needed. Or if the lines need to be longer than the width of the screen, the reader has to scroll the screen; it would be used then to avoid having the format destroyed by wrapping. —teb728 t c 10:32, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

If only it would line wrap properly...? But it does wrap properly. The proper wrapping for this mode is do not wrap at all. If the author needs a full control of the text layout, down to individual characters alignment (something like a teletype printout), then the software must not wrap lines because wrapping may insert the line tail between the line beginning and the next line beginning. Such wrapping is especially annoying in case of 'wrapped' tables... --CiaPan (talk) 07:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I didn't catch it the first time I read it. See if this helps:

Suppose you were discussing an issue involving several spaces in an entry. Compare these two:

1. Test line with spaces
2. Test line with spaces

contrast that to:

1 Test line with spaces
2 Test    line    with   spaces

See the difference?

Follow up

The whole thing seems bizarre to me. So, a few more questions, if anyone knows. (1) Why does the text appear in a gray box? (2) Why in a different font? (3) Why did "they" make the code so easy to type in error (i.e., a single space)? Whenever I have seen that odd format in Wikipedia, I'd say that 95% of the time, it is an error (a typo with an unintentional extra space) and 5% legitimate/intentional. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:26, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

On the second question, the font used is a proportional font (aka monospaced or typewriter font), where all the characters (including spaces) have the same width, and so columns line up:

so I easily can make     this
line up exactly with     this.

AndrewWTaylor (talk) 16:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Pedantic answers: (1) to make it easy to distinguish from normal text, (2) to make it easy to distinguish from normal text, (3) to make it easy to type, while not using any "bandwidth" that has a sensible purpose. Possibly more helpful answer: this same use of a leading space was (and maybe still is) used on bulletin boards for discussion of computer programming, so that contributors can easily type both normal English and pieces of computer language while making them easy to distinguish. Maproom (talk) 16:28, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I think, but could be mistaken, that it was origianlly intended for the display of computer code, where pecise spacing can be important, and also where wrapping is often not desired. I have seen it used for display of verse, although more recently there are other ways prefered for verse. In both of these cases it is desireable that the code or verse be marked off from more ordinary text, which the bavkground color does quite effectivly. In any case, that is how the software works, and it is not likely to be changed.It actually has the same effect as the HTML <pre> tag, I belive. DES ^(talk) 20:41, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 14:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Article Creation and Article Redirect

I recently went to the articles creation page to create the character Imperator Furiosa. However, under my contributions, for my article creation page, it doesn't come up as an article I've created. I don't understand the reason for this. The page did not exist previously and after creating it I realized that all that would come up before I created it was a redirect to Mad Max: Fury Road. After I made the article, the redirect disappeared and became its own article. Why is the article not showing up as one of my created articles, and how can I get it to show up as such under my contributions? I worked very hard on the article and created the entire page, so I would like to know any way that I can get it under my articles created page. Thanks. Kinfoll1993 (talk) 05:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

This is not a reply to the above, just another question. I had never known that the "Articles created" option existed (it's under "Contributions"). Now that I look at it, I find the articles I created are all in the namespace "일반 문서". Why the Hangul name, and what does it mean? Maproom (talk) 07:42, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I assume that's just a bug, and it either means "Article" or "(Main)". xTools has a lot of issues currently, but as the page currently reads: "The new xTools environment is being set up now. We estimate uptime in about 1 week." — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 08:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@Kinfoll1993 You may have written the article but you did not create the page, the page already existed before you wrote the article. It was originally created as a redirect. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:04, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) (In response to Kinfoll1993) Unfortunately, there isn't a way you can do that. Technically speaking, you didn't create the page. The page was created when someone made the redirect — you've just changed what type of page it is (and even then, it's still in the same namespace). I understand that you want to show off your creations and made the bulk of the article's content: in the way of attribution, any edits to the page you made will be found at Special:Contributions/Kinfoll1993, and if you want you could mention on your userpage that you created the article. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 08:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, well is there any rule against putting the article back as it was (as a redirect) and recreating the article in another page under a different namespace so I can have my work show up as my created page? For example, if I put the Imperator Furiosa page as a redirect to a newly created page under another name (ex: Furiosa or Furiosa (Mad Max) and move my information that I added from Imperator Furiosa to my newly created page, am I allowed to do so under Wikipedia policy? Kinfoll1993 (talk) 08:40, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

There's a specific rule against moving a page to somewhere with an obscure or strange title: WP:COMMONNAME. Leave Imperator Furiosa at that location. What you're suggesting also seems to violate common sense and perhaps Wikipedia:Gaming the system (don't thwart the intention of the tool you're using). Tools are designed for specific purposes and the tool you're looking at is meant to show how many pages in the main namespace you've created. It is not meant to provide attribution or give you credit or list your achievements. You can do that on your user page. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

What might work in this case would be to create the new article as a draft and then move that draft on top of the redirect. If the redirect has not been edited since creation, the move would be possible (a feature to facilitate reverting a move). —teb728 t c 09:42, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Kinfoll1993, TEB728, that would not work. If anyone else has ever edited the article, that would deny those editors the proper attribution for their work, and thus be a copyvio. Therefore, no admin would perform the move deleting the existing page, or else s/he would do a history merge afterwards, putting you right back where you are now. In any case Xi's tools are not the main way for someone to find a list of pages you have created in the less technical sense, So I suggest you not worry about the matter. DES ^(talk) 20:47, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I see that you have done a cut & paste move to Furiosa (Mad Max). I have undone it and restored the history. Doing that denies other editors proper attribution for their contributions (however small) to the article, and makes a mess for an admin to clean up. Fotunately i got this one before other edits could complicate the situation. Also, we don't use disambiguated article titles, with a parenthetical modifier, unless the natural title is in fact ambiguious, and would apply to more than one article. Furiosa (Mad Max) is now a redirect to Imperator Furiosa. Please don't do this again. DES ^(talk) 21:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC) (@Kinfoll1993: previous ping was incorrect and won't have triggered a notification. DES ^(talk) 21:10, 4 July 2015 (UTC))

Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems

I just created a page for this journal. Is it possible to upload a cover image from the journals home page to the article? ThanksGomach (talk) 11:55, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

It would be technically possible, Gomach. You would need to download the image from the site to your computer, and then upload it to Wikipedia. See Help:Introduction to uploading images for detailed instructions.

However, as I presume the cover would be protected by copyright, the iamge would need to pass all the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria which is often tricky. In particular, #8 "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding. might not apply here. DES ^(talk) 21:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

We routinely supply cover images for serials; see the infoboxes for The Washington Times and American Antiquity for some examples. Cover images are quite useful for identification, providing readers with a sense of "what does this look like". Nyttend (talk) 03:59, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Lupton family page

I cannot work out what I have done wrong with references number 11 and 86 on this page. Please help me if you can. I removed number 3 reference because it was not relevant at all to Arthur Lupton and replaced it with a reference that is. But I am not sure what I have done wrong. Thanks so much Ted — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.149.113.236 (talk) 12:42, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

The error message was "Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)" with the help in blue indicating it is a link - if you had clicked that it would have taken you to the explanation page.
Fundamentally, the problem was your date format "July 4 2015" Wikipedia accepts several date formats, but not that, so I changed it to the English dmy format 4 July 2015 and the error message goes away. - Arjayay (talk) 13:01, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Hacked page

The Christian Science page has been hacked, and I can't revert the changes. Can someone have a look at it? Cotopaxi5897 (talk) 14:15, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

A template and module was vandalised. It has been fixed. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:29, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter:, Looks like a bigger problem here. At article Ecumenical council, which is on my Watchlist, the page came up orange background with words NICE MIME in large black letters. Here is the edit history 12:07, 4 July 2015‎ The Quixotic Potato (talk | contribs)‎ . . (51,039 bytes) and my un-do14:16, 4 July 2015‎ JoeHebda (talk | contribs)‎ . . (51,038 bytes) (-1)‎ . . (Undid revision 669908909 by The Quixotic Potato (talk) Undo, edit error.). After the undo, most of the sidebar links to Jesus or Bible also had the same error. My "solution" I logged out of WP, completely closed my web browser, logged back in & changed my password, logged out & back in, and now previous issue with Ecumenical council sidebar-links is gone. Thinking someone has hacked into user accounts? This is totally beyond me & first experience, should need expert help! Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 14:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@JoeHebda: The template vandalism affected some tens of thousands of articles, so it may take a while for the software to rebuild them all. If you see a damaged article, a purge should fix it. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Metadata

I uploaded a file which contains metadata which could put my privacy at risk. Is there any way to remove the Metadata? I don't know what to do 69.36.188.24 (talk) 14:42, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

The whole file must be deleted and a new version uploaded if you still want the file here. See Wikipedia:Requests for oversight if it was uploaded to the English Wikipedia, and commons:Commons:Oversight if it was uploaded to Commons. If you want tips on removing metadata without revealing the file then you can post to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. Mention your operating system and the file type. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Copyright query

Hi there, I need some guidance about copyright issues from editors experienced in copyright issues. In this edit at Looney Tunes a user added in good faith a link to a collection of Looney Tunes cartoons on YouTube. I removed it because it seemed promotional to me—we're directing traffic to one person's channel and they are clearly not a sanctioned Warner Bros channel. But I have other issues with the link because there's no indication at the YouTube compilation that all of the cartoons in the 4.5 hour compilation are in the public domain. Improper licensing makes it difficult to determine whether or not we're dealing with a copyright violation, and I know that we do not link to copyright violations. I also notice in the video description the statement, "All episodes have been digitally remastered & restored." Well, that's vague. Who performed the remastering and restoration?

Anyhow, I'm thinking that even if these cartoons are in the public domain, if someone remastered and restored them, that this might constitute a derivative work. Anyone have any learned thoughts about this? It seems counter-intuitive to me that if someone spent money to restore public domain content that the restored version would now be in the public domain, free to upload, and free to link to. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:28, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

It may seem counter-intuitive, Cyphoidbomb, but under US copyright law some origininality is required for a new copyright on a derivitive work. This is why new photos of PD paintings, for example are not protected by copyright. The "sweat of the brow" theory of copyright in which significant effort is protected by copyright is explicitly rejected by US copyright law, although it applies in the law of some other countries. However, your concern that some of the content may not be public domain mighyt well be valid. That would need to be cwecked for each title in the compilation. If they are public domain, I see no problem with linking to a legit copy, whether it is an "authorized outlet" or not. Public domain means something is free for anyone in the public to use, after all, just like stuff under a free license. Of course if there is a non-profit source we might pefer to link there. DES ^(talk) 21:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

DESiegel That was a fantastic, eye-opening response. Thank you. I agree that if it is in the public domain, we don't have to link to WB. My concerns were multiple, and one of them was the if they are not in the public domain, we should only link to an authorized source. Shall I assume that if even one of them are not in the PD, we should avoid linking to it? Danke, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:52, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb that is a judgement call. It would perhaps be safer not to. Under fair use the compiler can use small amounts of a copyrighted work, in proportion to the overall work, without infringing. We wouldn't decline to link to a work because it quoted another published work without permisison. But including an entire separate work that is under copyright withotu permisison would probably be too much. Of course, they might have permission -- no, from WB this is unlikely.

I am glad my resposne was helpful. I ave long been interested in copyright issues. i did some volunteer work for Distributed Proofreaders some years ago, which involved checking copyright clearences. I think I know US copyright law about as well as most non-lawyers. And I did some editing on sweat of the brow several years ago. DES ^(talk) 22:05, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Here's the list of cartoons, taken from the uploader's description:

Extended content

A Corny Concerto (Bugs Bunny, Elmer Fudd & Porky Pig) (1943) A Tale of Two Kitties (1942) Bosko, the Talk Ink Kid (pilot) (1929) Case of the Missing Hare (Bugs Bunny) (1942) Confusions of a Nutzy Spy (Porky Pig) (1943) Congo Jazz (Bosko) (1930) Daffy Duck and the Dinosaur (Daffy Duck) (1939) Daffy The Commando (Daffy Duck) (1943) Eatin' on the Cuff or, The Moth Who Came to Dinner (1942) Falling Hare (Bugs Bunny) (1943) Farm Frolics (1941) Foney Fables (1942) Have You Got Any Castles (1938) Hollywood Capers (Beans the Cat) (1935) Hop and Go (1943) I Love a Parade (1932) It's Got Me Again! (1932) Meet John Doughboy (Porky Pig) (1941) Pigs in a Polka (1943) Porky Pig's Feat (Porky Pig) (1943) Porky's Pooch (Porky Pig) (1941) Porky's Preview (Porky Pig) (1941) Porky's Railroad (Porky Pig) (1937) Puss n' Booty (1943) Scrap Happy Daffy (Daffy Duck) (1943) Sinkin' in the Bathtub (Bosko) (1930) Smile, Darn Ya, Smile! (Foxy) (1931) The Booze Hangs High (Bosko) (1930) The Dover Boys at Pimento University (1942) The Fifth Column Mouse (1943) The Wabbit Who Came to Supper (Bugs Bunny) (1942) The Wacky Wabbit (Bugs Bunny) (1942) To Duck or Not To Duck (Daffy Duck) (1943) Wackiki Wabbit (Bugs Bunny) (1943) Wacky Blackout (1942) Yankee Doodle Daffy (Daffy Duck) (1943) You Don't Know What You're Doin'! (Piggy) (1931)

If all of those are PD, there's nothing wrong here, but yes it's a problem if any are still under copyright. Nyttend (talk) 15:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Those are all old enouh that copyright renewal was needed under US law. The list of copyright renewals is published, and i belive that there is a copy online at project gutenberg. If none of the titles is listed, then they are all public domain. Works published after 1963 were automatically renewed, and are still in copyright unless published with a faulty copyright notice, or lost copyright in some other way, which is rare for commercial films. DES ^(talk) 19:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Table in infobox

Can a table be inserted in infobox? Is this right? --Fauzan^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 21:55, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

...
data1 =
{|
 |-
 | {{{1}}} || {{{2}}}
 |-
 | Label 1 || Label 2
 |}
...

It may be that you could do this, Fauzan, but I doubt that it would be a good idea. we have {{Plainlist}}, {{unbulleted list}}, {{flatlist}}, {{hlist}}, {{ordered list}}, and {{unordered list}} for such purposes. If the data is more complex than any of those can handle, I doubt if it belongs in an infobox anyway. Infoboxes are supposed to be summaries of the article, not replacements for article text. They are already tricky enough for many editors, adding table syntax is likely to be over the top. Of course, all this is without knowing what data you plan to add to what article. DES ^(talk) 22:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

See also Category:List formatting and function templates. DES ^(talk) 22:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Lupton family

Please help me place an accent over the word "nee" in the second paragraph (form the top) of this page. also in the section titled Francis Martineau and descendants - there is a need for an accent over the word "Pathe". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.149.113.236 (talk) 22:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Both done. Maproom (talk) 22:36, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Why do I keep getting my page deleted?

I've had my page deleted twice and don't understand why. I need a lawyer to understand the terms and phrases and a degree in Wiki to figure this out. RobbyTheElf (talk) 22:35, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

The question above is the only contribution you have ever made to Wikipedia using your RobbyTheElf account, so it is hard for us to guess what you mean by "my page". Maproom (talk) 22:37, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

This seems to have been about Robby The Elf, which was created User:RobbyTheElf, speedy deleted, and created and speedy deleted again, all in a fairly short timeframe. (not that this doesn't show up unless one looks at "deleted contributions", Maproom.) It seems to have been an article about a fictional character created by the drafter of the article. There is no indication that any work featuring this character has ever been published aside from self-publication, much less that the character is notable. That is the main reason why such an article is not appropriate here: Wikipedia is a tertiary work, and only covers subjects that have already been discussed in published, secondary, reliable sources that are independant of the subject and the subject's creator. Also, attempting to add an article about one's own creation is promotionalism, and violates the very strong advice in our conflict of interest guideline. In short, and in plain words, Don't write about your own work on Wikipedia, and Don't write about any subject on Wikipedia unless others have already published discussion of it. Does that spare you the lawyeer and the degree in Wiki, RobbyTheElf? DES ^(talk) 22:55, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

A slight error, the original creator was User:Nocompromise16, who was notified when the page was tagged for speedy deletion. User:RobbyTheElf then editied to add content to the article. Perhaps these are friends. In any case I think both of them should read our Writing about fiction page. DES ^(talk) 23:04, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

July 5

Referencing errors on John Saxby

Reference help requested. I have had error messages from the references for my edits for John Saxby and Crawley railway station because the publication concerned has two ISSNs {one for the printed version one for the online). I am not sure how to deal with this - please can you help.

Thanks, Das48 (talk) 10:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done. Das48 the issn parameter must be exactly 8 digits separatedby a hyphen, such as 1234-5678. If it is not in that format, an error message is displayed. Multple issns cannot be displayed with that parameter. Also that ref had the page number outside the cite template instead of using the pages= parameter, and had an improperly formatted edition= parameter. I hav fixed all these. DES ^(talk) 12:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Trying to help a new user but can't make talk page

Hi. There is a new user called LOGGERHEAD who is making new articles about existing subjects in what looks like confused good faith. I want to warn them of this before they waste too much of their time but I can't create their talkpage. When I try to create it it says "The title "User talk:LOGGERHEAD" has been banned from creation. It matches the following blacklist entry: .*GGER.* <casesensitive>". Am I right in guessing that this is some filter to stop people putting the "N word" in their usernames? If so, it seems over-broad as it is also affecting LOGGERHEAD and also applied in the wrong place. A user who really does have the N word in their username should not be created at all, rather than just being unable to have a talk page. Anyway, "LOGGERHEAD" is not obviously a bad username (as far as I can tell) and I don't see why I should not be able to make a talk page for them and try to guide them away from making unnecessary new articles before they get discouraged by the speedy deletion tags and go away. --DanielRigal (talk) 10:53, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Talk Page has now been created. It might still be worth looking at that blacklist rule but the immediate problem is resolved. --DanielRigal (talk) 11:45, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I think it's meant to stop the guy whose activities are detailed at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/JarlaxleArtemis; he routinely creates pages (including sock usernames) with some form of "HAGGER", almost always in all caps. Nyttend (talk) 15:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining that. It makes more sense than my theory. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Cleaning up my sandboxes

I want to delete some sandboxes, but I'm unsure how to delete them, or if I'm even able to do it without an Admin. Those I want to get rid of are: User:Lou Sander/Sandbox2, User:Lou Sander/Sandbox4, and User:Lou Sander/Sandbox3, which is a redirect to another sandbox. I only want to get rid of the redirect, not the article to which it redirects. What do I need to do to accomplish all this? Lou Sander (talk) 15:14, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Lou Sander, I'll do it, it's an admin task Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC) OK, done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:20, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

In the future, just edit the redirect and place {{db-user}} on top of the page, before the #REDIRECT text. Click on the link to the sandbox page, and while this redirects you to the article, you'll see "Redirected from User:Lou Sander/Sandboxnumber" in small type just below the article title. Click the "Redirected from..." link, and you'll be at the redirect itself; from here you can edit the page. Nyttend (talk) 15:25, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Google Maps Feedback

Google Maps sometimes provide the Wikipedia article of the city/Town/Village I click. However, sometimes it does not display; is it because the coordinates are wrong (sometimes they are way off), how long does it take for Google to reindex Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sewerload (talk • contribs) 17:42, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

That would be something on their end and in their control, not ours. Unless Google has publicly released that information, I suspect that Wikipedia won't be the best place to get that answer. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:53, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I was told on Google Products Forum that I should correct Wikipedia coordinates, which I did, but it doesn't show the Wikipedia article. I ll just wait and see in a couple of months if the correct information is going to appear. PS in Bosnia we have Cities with a mayor but people also call much smaller places cities. Would it be correct to say Simin Han is a village in the City of Tuzla? Tuzla is a city in the City of Tuzla? Thanks for your answers. Sewerload (talk) 18:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject for climate sections?

Hello!

Sorry if this is the incorrect place for posting such requests.

I have some concerns about some descriptions in climate sections of city articles not following the rules laid out in WP:NPOV (namely, the use of words such as 'cold', 'mild', 'hot', and other subjective language), and I want to post something relating to this on a project page relating to climate sections. However, the only one that I could find had been marked as inactive.

Could someone please show me where I could post a message relating to the aforementioned concerns? -- Bad Weather 2014 ^{My work • What's wrong?} 18:51, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

This is a fine page to ask the question. I would suggest that you check out Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities . -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:56, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much, TheRedPenOfDoom! Bad Weather 2014 ^{My work • What's wrong?} 12:06, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Complicated disambiguation of "VA-16" and "VA 16"

I think I know what needs to be done here, but my skills at handling disambiguation don't seem to be up to the task.

The various disambiguations and cross references of these terms are now confusing. The goal is to come up with a complete, harmonious, and useful way of disambiguating the things that might be referred to by the two abbreviations.

At the moment, these are the pages that are involved. None of them would seem to be a "primary topic":

• VA-16 (U.S. Navy), an Attack Squadron of U.S. Navy aircraft (a page which does not mention any other pages)
• Virginia's 16th congressional district, an obsolete U.S. congressional district (a page the top of which also mentions other VA-16 pages)
• Virginia State Route 16, a state highway in Virginia (a page the top of which also mentions other VA-16 pages)
• State_Route_16_(Virginia_1918-1940)#SR_27, a former state highway in Virginia (note that this is a Section of List of former state highways in Virginia)
• VA 16, a redirect to Virginia State Route 16, above
• VA-16, a redirect to Virginia's 16th congressional district, above.

(Note how VA-16 and VA 16 redirect to different pages.)

A proper disambiguation page might look like this, and be reached from either VA-16 or VA 16 (but I'm no expert):

VA-16 or VA 16 may refer to:

• VA-16 (U.S. Navy), an Attack Squadron of U.S. Navy aircraft
• Virginia's 16th congressional district, an obsolete U.S. congressional district
• Virginia State Route 16, a state highway in Virginia
• State Route 16 (Virginia 1918-1940), a former state highway in Virginia

I don't know how the individual pages should refer to the others. Probably the two state highways should cross-reference one another, but I don't know about the rest. I'm hoping that someone with greater skills than mine might take up this challenge. Lou Sander (talk) 20:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

I think your proposal sounds appropriate. I would probably use the one without the dash as the DAB page itself. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref

Article: Tommy McDonald (American Football) Difficulty getting reference entered properly.

Attempted to clarify that Tommy McDonald was not the painter of portraits done and sold/auctioned by Tommy McDonald Enterprises, but rather this was a company he owned and had 2 people painting the portraits.

Reference this was based on was an interview conducted by ESPN with McDonald and published on February 19, 2003

http://espn.go.com/classic/s/Where_now_mcdonald_tommy.html.

Actual title of the article was "Classic Catches up with Tommy McDonald" by Philip Lee for ESPN Classic

 Done. However other refs on that page need metadata badly. for reference: Tommy McDonald (American football) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) DES ^(talk) 22:49, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Mike Bingham

I wish to take legal action against malicious remarks posted on Wikipedia by Wee Curry Monster on 2nd June 2015, attacking my education and scientific reputation in the article 'Mike Bingham' - URL https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Mike_Bingham&oldid=665241031

Amongst the false information were included a few facts that could only have come from a Falkland Islands official, because the article contained confidential government information not in the public domain. I have nearly 2 million Facebook likes on my web pages www.seabirds.org and www.falklands.net, and my penguin research is entirely funded by a penguin adoption programme, which relies on my good reputation to maintain that financial income. That funding has now been damaged as a result of these malicious and untruthful remarks, and I wish to know how I go about taking legal action against Wikipedia and/or the editor responsible. I have the full backing of the Argentine government in pursuing this matter.

Mike Bingham190.178.230.223 (talk) 21:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

If you "wish to know how I go about taking legal action ...", you should consult a lawyer. Wikipedia does not give specific legal advice. Making legal threats is likely to get you banned from editing Wikipedia. This issue is already being discussed at the BLP noticeboard. Maproom (talk) 22:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Mr Bingham this page cannot and will not provide legal advice. You will no doubt want to consult a legal professional. However, Wikipedia does have a policy no legal threats. Accordingly I am blocking the address from which you posted this message. As long as you are persuing such legal action, you must not post to Wikipedia. DES ^(talk) 22:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Kaso disambiguation

Hello, I think it's a good idea to create the page Kaso (only administrators can do that atm):

---

Kaso may refer to:

• KASO, a radio station broadcasting a Classic Hits format
• Kasō, the twelfth single by L'Arc-en-Ciel
• Kásó, a village and municipality in south-eastern Slovakia

See also

• Kaso River (disambiguation)
• Kasos

---

(I'm in a disambiguation page creation frenzy) —  Ark25  (talk) 21:58, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Normally, anyone can create a disambiguation page. But "This page is protected from creation, so only administrators can create it." So admin help is indeed needed here. Maproom (talk) 22:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done --NeilN ^{talk to me} 22:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Book Creator Down?

I am trying to create a printed version of the Apple Inc. book, but I keep seeing the following error message:

Rendering failed

Generation of the document file has failed.

Status: Bundling process died with non zero code: 1

The first time I tried this, it hung for some minutes at "Creating attribution page" before failing; the second time, it got to about 12% before it failed; now, it fails in this way immediately. Does anyone know what is going on here? Thanks! SupremeUmanu (talk) 23:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Conversion_to_PDF where that problem was reported, and resolved. If it still fails, you might contribute to the bug report.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

July 6

MP3 to ogg converter

Can anyone recommend a (freeware) converter to convert an MP3 file to ogg format for upload to Wikimedia Commons? Clivemacd (talk) 00:03, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Image Question

I am seeking to provide a new logo to the Ramboll Environ page. I went to the Upload File section under Tools, completed the information and uploaded the new file but it does not appear on the page. The prior logo is out of date and should be replaced to reflect a December 2014 acquisition. Please advise if you can post this based on what was provided and/or what steps I should take.

Thank you.

ChurchillTKU — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChurchillTKU (talk • contribs) 00:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

 Done. The logo= parameter in the infobox needed to be updated, ChurchillTKU. see this edit DES ^(talk) 02:11, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I have an auto block 4 year ban on my computer about wikipedia but not on other computers

What gives? Venustar84 (talk) 01:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

The block/ban applies to the person, not the computer. Some of the technical implementations of blocks have collateral impact / cannot immediately catch a evasion. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:33, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

According to your talk page, you have misused sock puppet accounts in the past, which were all blocked from editing at some point. There are other discussions in there indicating that you have continued to misuse sock puppets. Is it possible that your computer is automatically logging into one of those past sock puppet accounts? When you say "other computers", are they other computers on the same network (under the same external public IP), or on different networks? If they are on different networks, your IP could have potentially been blocked. If they are on the same network and you are using the same user, try using a different browser first. Note: I am not an administrator and do not have detailed knowledge of how they block/ban accounts, these are just common-sense guesses as to possible causes for your issue. Garzfoth (talk) 01:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Women at the Naval Academy

Why does almost the whole piece on women at the Naval Academy focus on sexual harassment and alcohol abuse? Really? Is that all that can be printed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:140:C100:36AE:D8AD:3FD:6ABF:2F72 (talk) 03:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

You should raise this sort of concern at the article talk page, not here. DES ^(talk) 03:35, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Problem with floating images

There is a problem on the Italian cuisine article. See the link on my talk page User talk:Mimarx to a screen shot, the floating image in the sardinia subsection floats below that section and gets overlayed on the following table, as do images on the right. It happens when you have a wide browser window, so the height of the article text is shorter than the stack of images. Is there a way to fix an image to a subsection, and/or is this a bug, either in wiki or in Firefox (38.0.5 on Win7/64) as it doesn't happen if I use IE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mimarx (talk • contribs) 07:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

It also doesn't appear to happen in Chrome, although the images get floated to a rather odd position in the following section. One thing you can do is insert some {{clear}} statements near the section boundaries - that will prevent images from flowing into adjacent sections. For example, you could add one just before the "Sardinia" and "Meal structure" headings. On the flip side, if the text is not long enough (which is obviously more likely if the display is wide), you'll get empty areas. Template:stack might be of use too. Rwessel (talk) 08:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

making a subcategory

I created the category "Jesuits in Belize" but cannot find help on how to make this a subcategory of "Jesuits by country". Help please.jzsj 09:04, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

There is no such category as "Jesuits by country". I believe you may want to make "Jesuits in Belize" a subcategory of "Category:Jesuits by nationality". However, according to the style usually used in the category, the category should be named as "Belizean Jesuits". The Average Wikipedian (talk) 09:14, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Place [[Category:Jesuits by nationality]] (or [[Category:Jesuits by nationality|Belizean]] to sort it correctly) on Category:Jesuits in Belize to make it a subcategory. But yes, Category:Belizean Jesuits would follow the convention in both Category:Jesuits by nationality and Category:Belizean people by religion. Jzsj, a move of a category is usually a bureaucratic process requiring discussion but if the author of a recently created category agrees with the move then it can be done swiftly. Do you agree with it? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:54, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the prompt replies. I see now my mistake, that photo categories are different from article categories. I located this properly placed in "Commons".jzsj 13:02, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Oh, you created both Category:Jesuits in Belize and commons:Category:Jesuits in Belize. Commons edits are not shown at Special:Contributions/Jzsj so I didn't see it. Commons and Wikipedia have different conventions but everything we said still applies to the Wikipedia Category:Jesuits in Belize. The Commons category should also be added to commons:Category:People of Belize or one of its subcategories (they don't have as many categories as Wikipedia). By the way, your signature should include a link to a page for your account, usually User:Jzsj. The easiest way to do that is to remove the checkmark at "Treat the above as wiki markup" at Special:Preferences. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks.jzsj (talk) 13:35, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

User subpage deletion request

User:Lou Sander/Canadian Troops is no longer needed. Would some kindly Administrator please delete it. Lou Sander (talk) 09:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm not an administrator so I can't delete the page, but the best way to get an admin's attention to delete a user page is to nominate it for speedy deletion under criterion U1. This automatically lists the page in a category where admins can easily find it. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 09:40, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

sitting

Acorrding to the American Journal of Epidemiology, the average American Spend —————————% of their waking time, totaling ————————————— hours, in sedentary behaviors such as sitting === — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CF5A:C130:54E9:6A7B:4CD8:CDF1 (talk) 13:50, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

That may well be so, but do you have a question about editing or using Wikipedia?--ukexpat (talk) 14:23, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Create Page

I was trying to create a page, however according to the editor it require reliable references. She gave some link to information on how to create references but I was need more simple explanation and straight to the point. So what what kind of reliable reference is need it to backup the page that I have created. Here is the link to the page on the sandbox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:PT._Sosial_Teknologi_Teknologi I'm really still confuse about this reliable references thing. Hopefully somebody can help me with a clear and straight to the point explanation.

Many thanks --Marthatcastro (talk) 15:40, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the rules we have are fairly complex but this page is designed to simplify things as much as possible. In my own words, what you need for that article is three or four references which discuss Socmedtech in detail, and were not written by Socmedtech or any company or person associated with it. The references should also be "reliable": this means that they were written by some kind of professional. For instance, an online newspaper article or book is usually reliable, while a blog or forum is not. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 15:55, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

@Marthatcastro: You need to show readers where you learned the information in the article; where they can verify that what the article says is true, and not made up out of your head or exaggerated. You cannot do that by citing information the company has generated, like their website or press releases, because companies have a tendency to exaggerate their achievements and importance. Instead you need to use secondary sources, such as news articles written by independent journalists. You can cite your sources using citation templates. In the little bar above where you type there's a dropdown menu called Templates; and several common ones are there. They'll pop up a box which you fill in with as much information as you can, like who wrote the book or article, what date it was written, where it appeared, etc. Let me know if you need help.~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Renaming an article title by "moving" the page

Let's say that some editor renames an article title by "moving" the page (from the "old article title" to a "new article title"). Let's say that I then want to revert that edit, so that the "old article title" is restored. Can I simply check "undo" on their edit? Or do I have to actually "move" the page again a second time (back to the "old article title")? I tried hitting "undo". I get a red message that says "It seems that this edit has already been undone." But, then, nothing changes. It doesn't seem to me that the edit "has already been undone". The article title still stays at the "new" title, and does not restore back to the "old" title (as I had desired). The article in question is: Dismissal of U.S. attorneys in 2006. When I click "undo" on the most recent edit, I get a red message that says "The edit appears to have already been undone." But, it hasn't been undone. And it does not get "undone" by my clicking "undo". What gives? And how do I "undo" that last edit? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:03, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Joseph A. Spadaro, I believe that you actually have to use the move tool again to move it back. If there were no other edits to the redir left behind you can do this without admin rights. If there is any additional edit history to the redir you would be moving over, and admin would need to do the move back. However you might want to start a move discussion as described at requested moves and WP:MOVE. Move wars are even worse than edit wars. DES ^(talk) 17:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

The "undo" option only works to change the content of a page, e.g. this edit. It can't do anything that's more fundamental, such as pagemoves or protections; all of those are non-content edits that (as far as I can tell) are added to the page history simply to ensure that the action is obvious and isn't lost in a log somewhere. Are you talking about moving it back to Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy? That's technically possible for you, because as DESiegel notes, it's not been edited other than the act of creating the redirect via the pagemove. Nyttend (talk) 18:25, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

It's confusing that moves have an "undo" link in page histories. "undo" tries to revert changes to the page content but there are no changes to revert so the software thinks it has already been done. phab:T6433 and phab:T88680 are about it. Moves actually do have a well-hidden revert link in the page logs of the old title: 1) Click the old title in the edit summary for the move. 2) Click "Redirected from [old title]". 3) Click "View history". 4) Click "View logs for this page". 5) Click the "revert" link at the move. 6) Now you finally get a filled out move form where you can just click "Save move" if the defaults are OK. Phew! Most users probably don't know this, and those who do know it probably prefer to just make a new move and manually fill out the move form. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:33, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Links in quotes

I seem to recall a guideline that we do not insert wiki-links into attributed quotations. But I can't find this in Wikipedia:Quotations, nor in Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Quotations. Is it somewhere else? Or has it been changed? Or perhaps is my memory incorrect? The issue is this edit to Mahler on the Couch which has recently been undone during copy edits. I want to reinstate it, but would prefer to be able to quote relevant guidance when doing so. DES ^(talk) 17:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

It's at Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Linking, near the end of Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Quotations. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:10, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Changing main image.

Hi Admin,

I want to learn how to edit main article picture as there are many old pictures for Celebrities in my Country, so I think updating pictures might improve wikipedia more.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bilalwikier (talk • contribs) 17:15, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

First, if you are referring to pictures you have found on the internet, they are almost certainly copyright and therefore inappropriate to be uploaded. If you have images which are clearly public domain, to which you own the copyright, or which the copyright owner has given clear permission to reuse for all purposes, please follow these instructions:

• If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must determine the proper license of the image (or whether it is in the public domain). If you know the image is public domain or copyrighted but under a suitable free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure of the licensing status, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy.
• If you want to add an image that has already been uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, add [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information. I hope this helps.Template:Z40--ukexpat (talk) 17:28, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I want to be a Wikipedia editorWilliam239 (talk) 18:25, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Hello,

My name is Sam (or my Wikipedia name William239). For several years and continuing today, I have had a very big interest in Wikipedia. For a while now, one of my favorite things to do in my spare time would be to go to the portals directory on Wikipedia and click on one after another, browsing, skimming, and learning new interesting facts about the world we live in. A couple of weeks ago, I thought it would be a good idea, since I love Wikipedia and adore it for the vast amount of information it contains, that I would start joining some Wikiprojects and take some of my time to work to make Wikipedia a better place for research. I have always gotten sad when I heard people tell me that Wikipedia is not a reliable source and I hope to change Wikipedia so that the number of people who don't trust Wikipedia drops dramatically. Would anybody be willing to give me a little introduction on editing Wikipedia, tell me how I can help improve articles, and provide me with some useful links for learning how to be a good Wikipedia contributor?

Your Fellow Wikipedian, Sam (William239)

A welcome message with multiple links to Wikipedia policies has been posted to your talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:49, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

How do I find the assessment summary page for any given article so I know what I can do to help if I go to an article and I want to improve itWilliam239 (talk) 18:57, 6 July 2015 (UTC)