Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2014 January 18

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

January 18

UN geoscheme overuse (abuse)

There have been many controversies regarding the use of the UN geoscheme ( Talk:United Nations geoscheme ), mainly because it is rather arbitrary, in some cases untraditional (UK in Northern Europe, Poland in Eastern Europe and Slovenia in Southern Europe), it makes more difficult to see the whole picture (continent) and the UN statistical division did not imply any universal use of it (if so-to the reverse): http://unstats.un.org/unsd/methods/m49/m49.htm . Meanwhile, there are articles emerging on the basis of the United Nations geoscheme such as: Talk:List of political parties by United Nations geoscheme. What is the stance of the Admins?--89.128.236.143 (talk) 00:23, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

admins are merely editors with WP:MOPS who can make technical changes reflecting the will of all editors. their opinions on content matters carry no more weight for them being admins than any other user's opinions . -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Requested move

Hello there. Please can someone move my completed sandbox to Vincent Elegba. The latter is a redirect link I created last year.Rain the 1 00:56, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Done. Another time you can use {{db-move}}. You were the only contributor to the sandbox so in this case you were also allowed to edit the redirect and copy-paste your text without breaking our license rules for crediting authors. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:28, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I will next time. I used to use it originally but have long since forgot about it.Rain the 1 01:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

What to do with user scrubbing his bad-faith uncivil comments on article Talk page

This may not be the correct place to ask this, but: A user keeps attempting to scrub his bad-faith and uncivil comments on Talk:Red Eye w/Greg Gutfeld here and here using 'minor edit' summary tag as a dishonest deception, according to 'Talk page guidelines'. When I warned him on his Talk page, he dishonestly claimed I was "double posting his comments" and called me a troll again. As he well knows, he was much more explicit in his insults toward me in the comments he keeps trying to scrub, calling me an "Islamophobic bigot", "internet troll", as well as other detailed unfounded bad-faith insults he has dreamed up to dishonor my wiki editing. This editor began this with a 3RR edit war here, here, and here without any comment in his edit summaries and with bad-faith insults on my Talk page from his first post there, which I moved to the article Talk page because I had asked him nicely not to post any more on my Talk page. Those are the comments he is attempting to scrub. This scrubbing to make himself look better on the article's Talk page is disruptive to the discussion flow on Talk:Red Eye w/Greg Gutfeld page because I had referenced his insults in my latter comments there. If he is now allowed to scrub his comments, it makes it look like I made stuff up about him. Please direct me to the correct place to ask for help.--63.3.5.132 (talk) 02:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

If someone makes an inappropriate comment and later removes it, we usually thank them. It's true that removing such a comment when there is a reply is a problem, but Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy and the solution is to insert some wording to clarify what has happened. The bottom line is that if an editor should not have made a comment, another editor should not make the same comment by posting it again—what is the purpose of that other than to say got'ya? Where the comment was removed, a new comment could be inserted saying something like "Comment posted and removed by User:X". That makes it clear what's going on. Article talk pages should not be used to establish whether a particular editor is in breach of some policy, and there should not be any attempt to continue other than perhaps to make a finishing-off clarification concerning a removed comment. Johnuniq (talk) 02:38, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying that. I'm not in high school anymore and not interested in playing any games or winning popularity contests on here. The anon and I had a sharp disagreement about the usage of a misnomer I strongly disliked due to how it's been used. We argued. I felt he baited me and I lost my temper and he spent time trying to play admin in response. The edit in question was resolved by a third party to our satisfaction and I'm done with our spat. Shabeki (talk) 04:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

The edit record clearly shows I did not bait you, but just the opposite and I didn't bite. But the issue has been resolved apparently to your satisfaction.--63.3.5.132 (talk) 00:44, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Confused article name and talk pages

The article Freud and Psychoanalysis has some problems that are beyond my capability to fix. First, its talk page somehow is now improperly redirected to the talk page for The Collected Works of C.G. Jung. Second, its name needs to be changed to "Freud & Psychoanalysis" (note the ampersand), to conform with the styling of the name in the Princeton University Press version of the book. Third, its talk page needs to point to Talk:Freud & Psychoanalysis (note the ampersand), a page which already exists and has content. It would be good if "Freud and Psychoanalysis" could also be redirected to the renamed "Freud & Psychoanalysis". The confusion arose because two publishers style the name differently, and a semi-knowledgeable editor (me) didn't figure that out until the damage was done. Lou Sander (talk) 03:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

The talk page and article are now under Freud & Psychoanalysis (see MOS:AMP) and Freud and Psychoanalysis redirects to Freud & Psychoanalysis. -- Jreferee (talk) 15:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Cannot edit or login from Chrome

For the last couple of days, every time I try to edit a page via Google Chrome it returns me to the edit screen with ALL changes lost -- no error messages, no nothing. When I tried to log out and log back in, I got the same problem with the login screen so I can't log back in with Chrome. Javascript is enabled; I also tried clearing the cache to no avail. I know the issue is browser-specific because I can still edit in Firefox. How can I fix this issue? --RBBrittain (talk) 04:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I have no problems editing with Chrome. My guess is that two days ago, you accidentally changed some setting in Chrome. One solution might be to uninstall and reinstall Chrome – but then you would lose any other changes that you had deliberately made to its settings. Maproom (talk) 08:53, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

The question is what setting? I don't want to just lumber thru the settings without knowing where to look, and I certainly don't want to jeopardize my other settings; maintaining settings across browsers is one reason why I switched to Chrome. (Yes it can be done with Firefox but it's not as easy as Chrome, and Firefox seems to have picked up some of the corruption that made me abandon IE.) It's also possible that the change is older but I just now noticed it. --RBBrittain (talk) 13:24, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Our radio network page was deleted and I want to know why

Our page dedicated and about HazzardAyre Radio/DixieDiesel radio was deleted. Only because we included our secondary network Dixie Diesel Trucker Radio. Everything in our article is accurate and true without being at all self serving. HazzardAyre Radio page was live for nearly a year. I demand to know why our page was deleted? HazzardAyre Radio has been and IS on the air through syndication. The full site goes fully LIVE in April. Along with a broadcast station that will go over the air . No reason was given as to the reason for deletion, nor was I able to create a talk page to the person that deleted it. the search term goes HazzardAyre Radio. Our group requests our page be put back up. Of course we can get even, by telling all 28,million listeners to our program to boycott and protest Wikipedia. Your choice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DixieWolfIdaho (talk • contribs) 04:41, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

According to [1], it was deleted for being a hoax. The deleting admin was User:Fram. You can contact the user on their talk page. Wikipedia does not respond to threats. RudolfRed (talk) 04:53, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, DixieWolfIdaho. Even if it was not a hoax, the criterion for Wikipedia having an article about your enterprise is that the subject is notable in the special Wikipedia sense: that multiple reliable sources, independent of the subject, have written about it. Until that is the case, don't waste your time trying to create an article. (You should probably read about Conflict of interest as well). --ColinFine (talk) 10:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I first deleted Dixie Diesel Trucker Radio, which had contents like "Dixie Diesel Trucker Radio has gained 3 Emmy Awards, 2 CMA awards, and two Oscar awards." I think we can all safely agree that that pure nonsense and not really matches the above "Everything in our article is accurate and true without being at all self serving.". Noticing that the same people were behind the article HazzardAyre Radio, I became dubious. Sure enough, "Currently HazzardAyre Radio brings in about 28,million listeners nightly." and "HazzardAyre is distributed in recorded form to 2,000 Mountain West radio stations". In fact, it looks to be an Internet Radio with perhaps local on-air presence only[2]. There is no evidence at all that it has 28 million or even 2.8 million listeners every night, and the total lack of any reliable source for it, and the hoax aspect of the other article, indicated to me that there was no reason at all to trust the contents of that article or to keep it. Fram (talk) 11:48, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

adding photos to articles without them

I've been on a lot of glaciers. I used the site for research and found i have pictures of moving perennial ice that you don't - as in mine could be the only photos of that mountain or glacier, in an article with no photos. In this time, when they are disappearing, I thought it would be good to share some, with the dates they were taken for comparison and use by others. Unfortunately, this is like most computer related things. Wikipedia has made it a techie circle jerk to do what you say is the purpose here and share knowledge. I tried to do this same thing a few years ago and it has actually gotten worse. I can only get to a point where it says that i can't do anything till I've done it 10 times first. Kind of a conundrum there: How to get past the smart assed system admin who is pretending to protect the system but really just insulting people with good data to add to it? BTW: these are all photos that I took. Some are from a canon digital but most would be digitized Kodachromes I took way beck when. Can anyone guide me in English? thanks -db — Preceding unsigned comment added by Den belillo (talk • contribs) 06:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

It's true, Wikipedia, like a lot of new technology, can be hard to work with. That's why we have this page. Unfortunately, uploading images to Wikipedia is restricted to "autoconfirmed" users (accounts at least four days old and that have made at least ten edits). Since you took the photos yourself, you can and should upload them to Wikimedia Commons. Commons has no "autoconfirmation" requirement, and uploading to Commons means that they can be used on all languages of Wikipedia as well as other affiliated sites. The above link goes directly to an easy-to-use process for uploading to Commons. Reply here if you need any more help. --Anon126 (talk - contribs) 06:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I sympathise with Den belillo. And I encourage him to upload his pictures to Wikipedia Commons, so that they can be used not just here on English Wikipedia, but also on the French, Spanish, Russian etc. Wikipedias. However I would not describe the Commons upload process as "easy-to-use". It can be used, but it takes some commitment and determination. Maproom (talk) 09:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Article untrue

My article "Taya Rayden" was made without me knowing or verifying information. I'd like all the information deleted as most of it is misleading and false.

How do I make this happen?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:4C40:EA00:E6CE:8FFF:FE1B:7CB0 (talk) 06:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Question: The article Taya Rayden doesn't seem to exist, nor does it seem to have ever existed. Are you referring to User:Taya Rayden? --Anon126 (talk - contribs) 06:11, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I'd say that since User:Taya Rayden is clearly a WP:FAKEARTICLE, and an entirely unsourced biography, it should be blanked - in fact I'll do it myself right now. AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

citing of sources.

Noel Shaw (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Today I posted a biography of Noel James Shaw. A noted natural history writer who died in melbourne today. In the body of this article and under a heading sources / references at the end of it I added clearly some 9 sources of information. with author, date of publication and publisher. These were all mainstream published books by recognised publishers and government agencies. Later to day an editor has gone through and proposed deletion of this article. Given that , authors name, date of publication and publisher is clearly visible under references and sources per your publication policyI am surprised a published book by the person in question is not acceptable. can you tell me what a " reliable source " would be ? Rowe street — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rowe street (talk • contribs) 07:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

There are a number of useful links in the tag on your article, and on your user talk page, so you ought to read those. Reliable sources need to be published sources independent of the subject. If and when you find such sources, the way of referencing them can be found at WP:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I have got rid of the red error message in the article, by moving the {{reflist}} to abovebelow the references. But the real problem is that each reference needs to be moved up into the body of the article, to immediately after the statement which it supports. Maproom (talk) 09:24, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Also, the references you have supplied are all to books written by Noel Shaw himself; whereas Wikipedia values independent references. An obituary published in a reputable newspaper would be an acceptable reference. Maproom (talk) 09:44, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Infobox Help

Please help improve my page. Can you remove it in my page -

   [[Image:|200px| A picture of 3MB.|alt=]]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikhtiar Hossain (talk • contribs) 07:34, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

 Done The proper syntax for this varies from article to article, unfortunately; see Help:Infobox picture. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:14, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

i dont know whats the answer can you help meee!!

there is a Table but we dont know where to sit, it should be arrange, there is me, will, marry, you. Now where should they sit! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.145.56.207 (talk) 08:06, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Are you asking about the seating arrangements at a wedding reception? This help desk is for help with using and finding your way around Wikipedia; a general knowledge question like this might get a better answer if you ask it at our reference desk. But if you search the Internet for "wedding top table layout" you will find lots of places, such as this page from Debrett's, with information on the subject. - Karenjc (talk) 09:18, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps sit in the order of either "Will you marry me?" or "You will marry me." -- Jreferee (talk) 14:37, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Hart's Island

The NYC Department of Welfare' Men'Homeless Shelter located on the Bowery, used Hart's Island to house a small cadre of men, with the intent to provide rehabilitation and recovery for Alcohol abuse. I, Ervin P.Dixon was an employee of the Department. One of my duties was to operate a small canteen that provided candies and cigarettes. What happened to that Program and the MEN? Hope this adds to the picture! epdixon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.20.152.163 (talk) 10:16, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Added a title Rojomoke (talk) 11:16, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Without knowing the name of the program or name or address of the Men's Homeless Shelter, it is difficult to find information. This is more of a question for the Wikipedia:Reference desk and you may get more information there. However, you might find some information in Hart Island, New York or Morris Chase. A January 1994 article by Richard Kopperdahl notes that sometime between 1967 to 1971 in the Bowery -"I see bottle gangs ritualizing the winning of a bottle by spilling the first few drops onto the pavement, an offering to all the drunks at rest in Harts Island's potter's field."mentions SOAPBOX article -- Jreferee (talk) 14:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Lungfish

There is some wrong in formating at Taxonomy. I want to translate this clade into czech wiki. Can you help me? Thank you--Ramon de L (talk) 11:45, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

At Lungfish#Taxonomy, there were two images placed where (depending on browser width) they could overlap with the phyletic tree. I have moved them upwards to avoid the overlap. I don't know if this is relevant to your question. Maproom (talk) 11:54, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunatelly no. I think the images is not problem. The phyletic tree is look like this in IE and also in M Firefox. I mean there are some missing html or wiki code.

, --Family Diabolichthyidae (extinct)

|, --Family Uranolophidae (extinct)
| |  __,--Family Speonesydrionidae (extinct)
'-|-|  '--Family Dipnorhynchidae (extinct)
    |, --Family Stomiahykidae (extinct)
    '----|___, --Family Chirodipteridae (extinct)
          |      '-|--Family Holodontidae (extinct)
          |------Family Dipteridae (extinct)
          |  __,--Family Fleurantiidae (extinct)
          '-|  '--Family Rhynchodipteridae (extinct)
              '--Family Phaneropleuridae (extinct)
                     |, --Family Ctenodontidae (extinct)
                       '-|, --Family Sagenodontidae (extinct)
                          '-|--Family Gnathorhizidae (extinct)
                             '--Order Ceratodontiformes
                                  |--family Asiatoceratodontidae (extinct)
                                  |--Family Ptychoceratodontidae (extinct)
                                  |--Family Ceratodontidae
                                  |  '--Genus Ceratodus (extinct)
                                  |  '--Genus Metaceratodus (extinct)
                                   '--Family Neoceratodontidae
                                        | '--Genus Mioceratodus (extinct)
                                        | '--Genus Neoceratodus - Queensland lungfish
                                        '--Order Lepidosireniformes
                                               '--Family Lepidosirenidae - South American lungfish 
                                               '--Family Protopteridae - African lungfish

--Ramon de L (talk) 22:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I see. If you look at Vertebrate#Phylogenetic_relationships, you will see a better way of providing a cladogram in Wikipedia (or at least, in English Wikipedia). It starts

{{{{clade| style=font-size:85%;line-height:70%

|label1=Vertebrata

|1={{clade

|1=Hyperoartia (lampreys)

To use this, you will need to rewrite the cladogram in the lungfish article, and may need to copy the "clade" template to Czech Wikipedia. Maproom (talk) 09:15, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Maproom. Yes, I know clade style. Its look, that this part of Taxonomy is not in clade style inaf and is not possible to improve it only by adding missing code. --Ramon de L (talk) 12:51, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

No author to cite book help please

I'm wanting to use a book that has no author on an article that requires sfn but I can't since there is no author, what should I do?--Windows66 (talk) 13:21, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure how a book doesn't have an author. Does it have an editor or editors listed instead? RJFJR (talk) 13:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Please post a URL to the source or the title, etc. of the source that you have for the citation. -- Jreferee (talk) 13:49, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals Under Control Council Law No. 10.--Windows66 (talk) 14:06, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

The volumes of the Trials of War Criminals before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals contains briefs, documents, testimony, etc.[3] Depending on what you cite inside the compilation, the author would change. There are some options on what to do listed at Help:Shortened footnotes:No author. -- Jreferee (talk) 14:21, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

So do I just put | first = Anonymous | last = Anonymous--Windows66 (talk) 16:04, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Why aren't my articles published?

Hi I wrote about two new terms I created E2B (employer 2 business) but i can't find them here? BR Lotte Aagaard — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.145.179.143 (talk) 14:49, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Articles about new terms that you created are not suitable for Wikipedia. Our policies prohibit Original research. We only cover notable things that others have written about in published reliable sources. DES ^(talk) 15:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

More specifically, please read Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary#Neologisms which explains why we do not allow such words.Arjayay (talk) 15:56, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

entry for surname ...Mumma.

The entry for Mumma has names of individuals who have been in political office and for other accomplishments contributing to history and the arts. I wondered if I may request another name to be added in this entry. Martin Van Buren Mumma was one of the two men who founded the town Gideon Anderson Missouri. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:28FF:1EF0:0:0:0:3A (talk) 15:16, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Do you have a source for the information? This article mentions a Martin Mumma and Gideon, Missouri, but nothing about connecting the two. Martin Van Buren Mumma mentions Gidion, Missouri], but not Gideon Anderson, Missouri, and would not be considered a Wikipedia Reliable Source.- Jreferee (talk) 15:50, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict)

Hi, I suppose you are first referring to this disambiguation page for Mumma, and are requesting that the name "Martin Van Buren Mumma" (that took a few minutes for my brain to process) be added to the disambiguation list? Presently there is no article on Martin Van Buren Mumma, which would be of particular help in a disambiguation page. However, it's not unheard of to add links to non-existent articles, to encourage other editors to start one. I would add the link if I could find some solid information about Mumma being (as you say) "one of the two men who founded the town". Although I can find a few references online to an M. V. Mumma as it pertains to Gideon, I haven't found one that asserts him as half of a founding duo, rather as an early settler. If you have the inclination and access to solid sources, I'd encourage you to create an article on Mumma, assuming that he is in fact notable, which he may or may not be. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:55, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

A disambiguation page is an index of articles and each entry must have one "blue-link" connecting to an article. Usually these are to an article with that specific title, but links can be to articles which refer to that name at some length. Currently, however, there is no mention of "Martin Van Buren Mumma" in Wikipedia whatsoever, so there is no page to link to. A Google search for "Martin Van Buren Mumma" yields only 10 results, all of which appear trivial, although maybe he was not always referred to by his full name? Unless you can find something substantial, in a reliable source there is not even enough to add him to an article, let alone justify inclusion on a disambiguation page. Arjayay (talk) 16:20, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

@Arjayay: That's what I get for following WP:REDNOT. "Red links are frequently present in lists and sometimes in disambiguation pages..." :) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:36, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Bizarrely WP:D barely mentions red-links, but WP:DDD is rather more specific, and requires a redlink to already exist in an article, which, as Martin Van Buren Mumma is not mentioned at all, we cannot have. - Arjayay (talk) 19:04, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

@Arjayay: Unwilling to endure this humiliation in the future (kidding) I boldly changed WP:REDNOT to not include a mention of disambiguation pages. I expect the community to rally around me and defend that edit to the death. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

It looks like someone M V Mumma is frequently mentioned in reference to Gidion and Anderson with activities in Missouri. [4] So a little bit of history digging might come up with something.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

It looks like he was one of the first settlers of the area, [5]. it seems like it was a company town of the Gidion Anderson Lumber company. Mumma at some point was the company treasurer [6] and represented the county in some capacity at some point [7] Local libraries may have more detailed information about what the representation was, but from what I see, he doesnt appear to have actually done anything noteworthy. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:26, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

submitting article for creation

Before when I submitted my article, it was clear on how to submit it. After waiting three weeks it was denied, so I edited it even more. Now I can't seem to figure out how I submitted it for review the last time. Help would be much appreciated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swiftagency13 (talk • contribs) 15:56, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

(Article in question is here and apparently here too?)

Hi, @Swiftagency13:, at some point you deleted the Articles for Creation decline notice at the top of the page, which has a button for resubmissions. I've replaced the notice so when you feel the article is ready, you can resubmit it. I will tell you that a quick look at the article tells me it's not ready yet. The article was declined because an editor felt you did not properly assert the subject's notability. I still don't see that you've done that. Fan projects are typically not notable, and the general guideline rule for establishing notability, is that the subject needs to receive "significant coverage from independent reliable sources". That is, independent reliable sources have to speak ABOUT the subject and its importance. Another good rule of thumb is, if you have to write about your own thing, it's probably not notable. If you read the banner that has been replaced at the top of the article, you'll notice that the declining editor indicated that you should "Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject." Further, articles need to be written in proper encyclopedic tone. So cutesy phrases like "What to say about Maya?" aren't going to make the cut, and frankly, the article is coming off as unambiguous advertising, a quality that will get it deleted speedily. Hope that helps. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:06, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

other clean up that will need to be done - remove all of the external links that are in the body of the article. In general, we only link to sites outside of Wikipedia when the link is inside a citation/reference so that a user can verify the source of the content; or to the home page of the subject in the "External links" section. see WP:EL for more details. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much and for your advice, I'll take all of what you said into consideration when I'm editing everything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swiftagency13 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

List is nothing but external links

While looking through maintenance categories, I found List of American feminist literature which is nothing but a brief lead, infoboxes, and hundreds of external links. I'm not sure what to do with it. I suppose some wikiprojects could be tagged on the talk page but after that, I'm not sure. Any help or direction? Dismas|^(talk) 16:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

'TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom' cleaned up the article. -- Jreferee (talk) 15:26, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

So they did! Thanks for pointing that out! Dismas|^(talk) 18:45, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Lists of lists

Hello. I'd like to know if it is appropriate to create an article that is simply a list of other Wikipedia lists? Can someone direct me to any policies, guidelines, etc., about this? I don't want to expend all the effort to create such an article, just to have it later deleted. If there are any other such articles already here in Wikipedia, can someone offer some links? I am pretty sure that I had seen some in the past, but now I cannot seem to locate any. Any input is appreciated. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:06, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Something along the lines of this, perhaps: Index of Connecticut-related articles. Please note that I am referring to the creation of a separate, stand-alone article (that would simply be a list of lists); I am not referring to the creation of a category. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Lists of lists has lots, including List of lists of lists which competes with Disambiguation (disambiguation) for greatest Wikipedia page name. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:11, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I scanned that very quickly. But, those seem to be all about "lists of some item or topic". For example, lists of magazines or list of documentary films. I want to create a list-article, that would simply list other lists. Specifically, "List of Academy Award-related lists", or some such name. More specifically, I want to take this template (below) and make it into a Wikipedia article entitled "List of Academy Award-related lists" (or some such title).

Any thing like that around? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Joseph A. Spadaro - There's List of film lists, List of Sri Lanka cricket lists, and List of United States congressional lists. While List of Academy Award-related lists may meet WP:LISTPURP, I think it still needs to meet WP:LISTN. It's unlikely that any reliable sources are writing about the collective of Wikipedia's Academy Award-related lists. It seems like readers would find value in having such a list. If no one complains, then there would be no issue. Alternatively, you may be able to add List of Academy Award-related lists on Wikipedia:Project namespace. -- Jreferee (talk) 10:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. This is helpful. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:32, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

The Nanny

FYI Nanny Season 1 had 24 Episodes, not 22. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.73.64.148 (talk) 17:26, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

All sources I have found say 22 like Wikipedia. What is your source? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:58, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I added a sentence to The Nanny regarding the 22 episode first season.[8] -- Jreferee (talk) 12:06, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Alphabetical order

Does Wikipedia have any guideline for the correct way to alphabetize items? I looked in MOS, but I couldn't seem to find anything. I have questions such as this, among others: How are numerical entries alphabetized within lists, when compared with letters (e.g., Where does "12" fall alphabetically, before the letter "A", since it is a number; or with the letter "T" as if it were spelled out "twelve"?, etc.). Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Numbers always sort before letters. I don't know more general guidelines but some special characters are often ignored when sorting. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:43, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. But is there any "official" Wikipedia rule or guideline (e.g., MOS) about this? Thank you. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:11, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:LEADEMBEDDEDLIST. The guideline is that the list should be in an order the reader expects, with the exampke "A B C should be followed by D and not 1903". See also Collation#Alphabetical_order. RudolfRed (talk) 20:35, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. As a guideline, that is unhelpful. Some people "expect" the number 12 at the top of the list, before the letter "A"; some people "expect" it with the letter "T" for "twelve". Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:57, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

How to change redirect

Hello, I recently moved the article Constitution of Egypt to Egyptian Constitution of 2012. However, if I search for Constitution of Egypt, I still get redirected to the Egyptian Constitution of 2012 article. How do I change the redirect so I can start a new article on the 2014 constitution? Thanks.David O. Johnson (talk) 18:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Nothing is stopping you starting an article on Egyptian Constitution of 2014 - click on the redlink and start writing - and I think the article needs to be written, before trying to change a redirect to point to a non-existent article. Currently, there are about 300 incoming links to Constitution of Egypt how many of these are only relevant to Egyptian Constitution of 2012, which is where they currently go, and how many will be relevant to the new article, I have no idea, but we cannot simply redirect all the links to a new article. Arjayay (talk) 18:34, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't expect a year in the title of the current constitution. I think the question was about how to turn the redirect into an article and not change the redirect target. But until the article matures, a year may be good. In either case, see Wikipedia:Redirect#How to edit a redirect or convert it into an article. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I've created the article per Arjayay's suggestion here: Egyptian Constitution of 2014. Thanks.David O. Johnson (talk) 18:58, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

given the number of constitutions, I think it makes more sense as a disambiguation page than a redirect, and so I have listed the various articles I have found. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

There is a bad redirect. Egyptian Constitution of 2014 is redirecting to Egyptian Constitution of 2012. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:40, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

The article that appears to be on the 2014 constitution is really only a redirect to the 2012 constitution. Where is the article that was created? Robert McClenon (talk) 23:48, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

someone cut and pasted it to Constitution of Egypt overriding the DAB that was there. Its back where it should be now.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:05, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Sorry but it is not a new constitution --Panam2014 (talk) 00:22, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

The whole Egyptian Constitution area seems to be a mess: see Category:Constitutions of Egypt and search. There should be a main article, such as Egyptian Constitution, with a main category, such as Category:Egyptian Constitution, and all the other major subtopic should go in a separate article of its own per Wikipedia:Summary style and appropriate subcategories used. As a start, perhaps create a navigation template to give a better picture of the topic area. -- Jreferee (talk) 15:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

A continuing discussion is taking place at Talk:Egyptian Constitution of 2014#Requested move. EdJohnston (talk) 13:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

WARNING!! Don't use our school's name on Wikipedia anymore. Otherwise will will take an action under copyright law against Wikipedia and their editors who is trying to change the information! Thanks!

WARNING!! Don't use our school's name on Wikipedia anymore. Otherwise will will take an action under copyright law against Wikipedia and their editors who is trying to change the information! Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vjaasief (talk • contribs) 19:50, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

1) Please retract your legal threat or you will be blocked.

2) You really do not have a clue about how copyright works. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:55, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Note: Vjaasief has been blocked indefinitely for legal threats and disruptive editing. [9] AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

His message is somewhat incomplete for the "will will". When I first read his statement, I thought this to be a warning to fellow users not to use your school's name as someone else will try to sue you? Who should be interested in having noone on Wikipedia using anyschool's name? Seems a bit odd, in my view. Are you sure the user meant what you think he meant?--37.230.15.218 (talk) 22:07, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

its a case of "if i cannot have the article exactly like i want it, i am going to take the ball and go home!" -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

It's this school, if it helps. Britmax (talk) 18:49, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

User contribution link

Hello there, fellow Wikipedians,

I have question: When one visits another user's page, shouldn't there be a direct link to his contributions? --37.230.15.218 (talk) 22:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

There is. It's on the left under Tools. Dismas|^(talk) 22:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes. Go to the left side of the page, and there is a link to that user's contributions. RudolfRed (talk) 22:11, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

And if you find a page saying "User:Whatever" and it does not have such a contributions link, that means the page is not a user page—it is a page that someone not called "Whatever" created, and no such user exists. Johnuniq (talk) 06:59, 19 January 2014 (UTC)