Help desk
< January 21	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 23 >

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 22[edit]

How to say needs citations?[edit]

I've seen entire articles marked at the top that they need citations. I think http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elswyth_Thane is in that category, but I can't figure out how to mark it. Or is it exempt from citations because it's said to be a stub? Thanks Trudyjh (talk) 00:12, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've added {{Refimprove|{{subst:DATE}}}} to the top of the article. Quite right to point out that it was lacking citations. Good call! As for stubs being somehow exempt...no way. All articles must be verifiable. Thanks for taking the trouble to ask for help. In future (if you find another article in need of citations) look through the templates available here, and use the most appropriate one you can find. Happy editing! fredgandt 00:27, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article on Robert Peernock[edit]

The article on Robert Peernock is incorrect and biased. He was convicted of murdering his wife and the attempted murder of his daughter. The article implies he was framed due to being a whistle blower and has a link to his website which is bizarre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.217.91.131 (talk) 00:13, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that can be speedy deleted. I'll add the request template once I find the right one (not requested many deletions). fredgandt 00:31, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a revision that doesn't include the obvious whitewashing? If there isn't, it's G3 (blatant hoax). —Jeremy v^_^v ^Bori! 00:36, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly it's a BLP with possible COI issues and a nasty little stub about someone with little notability with one reference to a source that has questionable reliability. Which tag is that? ;-) fredgandt 00:42, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added a prod tag, since it seems that this should probably be deleted, but it doesn't seem to qualify under any WP:CSD criteria. --Jayron32 01:19, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ha! That's what "prodding" is. I've idly wondered that for many months. Learn something new every day.

fredgandt 01:24, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have made WP:PRODDING to make it easier to find out. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:32, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia blackout[edit]

Hello,

Sorry to sound daft, maybe I just don't get the issue (and I did not know where else to post a general message "to Wikipedia")- but I don't understand why the blackout is over. I don't understand why the blackout was created just for PIPA/ SOPA with ACTA already signed by the US, with a pending signature from the EU on Thursday. Can anything be done about that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katieskaa (talk • contribs) 00:53, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see Wikipedia:SOPA. This page is for help using and/or editing Wikipedia. fredgandt 01:09, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are these images unuseable[edit]

Recently I uploaded these original Tom and Jerry film posters to their respectable articles, and they were reverted without any explanation. So, is there some reason why they can't be used here? Sarujo (talk) 01:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image use is not my area (at all), but as with almost all content disputes, it is best to discuss the changes we disagree with on the talk page associated with the page we are trying to improve. For example: Fine Feathered Friend shows in its history that you replaced one image with another and it was reverted. The reverting editor left a note as an edit summary, offering some small indication as to why they chose that action. In that case it is wisest to start a discussion about the content at the associated talk page. My guess is that most of these images are likely to be challenged as fair use isn't something we should be taking advantage of. If images already exist that do a fair job, there is often little justification to replace them with copyrighted works. fredgandt 02:06, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's the problem, I've had a run in with the reverting editor in the past, and they only responded back when I reverted it back. If I go there or their talk page they will just ignore me. The previous despite was very much like this one over infobox images. However, I feel that the images I've singled out here are adequate as they depict the action without the use of a gross over abundance of images. Sarujo (talk) 02:22, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You could try dispute resolution. RudolfRed (talk) 02:37, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

These images are posters for the selected cartoons - however, the animation Wikiproject guidelines (and this is reflected in nearly all animated cartoon articles) is for a cartoon's title card to be represented in the infobox, not a poster. As the addition of these images went against the standard presentation, that is why their addition was reverted. If you wish to add them into the body of the various articles, I have no problem with that - although I did notice you removed quite a few other images in your edits this morning. However, they do not belong in the infoboxes. MikeWazowski (talk) 07:00, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Could you show me these guidelines? I'm not understanding why title cards are preferred. in this matter. If it's size issues, they can be resided. Sarujo (talk) 07:09, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Baridhara Mohila Samobaya Samity, Ltd.[edit]

You have incorrectly deleted the article on The Baridhara Mohila Samobaya Samity, Ltd. Apparently, some of your editors decided it was a hoax; far from being spurious, it is the largest women's organization in Bangladesh and, probably, the largest women's financial cooperative in Asia. It was recipient of the 2011 Performance Award from the Assoc. of Asian Credit Unions. The article should be reinstated.74.198.9.45 (talk) 02:44, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baridhara Mohila Samobaya Samity, Ltd. - there were notability and original research issues too. – ukexpat (talk) 02:53, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A simple Googling turns up a fair number of references to "Baridhara Mohila Samobaya Samity, Ltd." including that it is mentioned in Amarok Society. It is possible the consensus to delete was a little little and not perfectly considered. fredgandt 03:12, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article was deleted nearly four years ago, after a number of editors failed to find any reliable sources for it. It is quite possible that there are now sources available. If you have the multiple independent reliable sources which are required to establish that a subject is notable (see WP:CORP), then you could recreate the article, or you could ask an admin to userfy the deleted article, so that you can work on it. But unless you reference the required sources, the article will get deleted again. --ColinFine (talk) 20:01, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't look at the date. Quite frankly, if the article hasn't been missed since March '08 then it probably isn't terribly important. At least not to en.wp. fredgandt 20:30, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sulu archipelago article[edit]

Dear Wikipedia editors,

When reading your page on the Sulu archipelago, I noted a comment saying "needs expanding". I could contribute, but feel there is plenty of people with more authority than I who could make a more informed contribution on this topic.

There is a website administered by the Sultanate of Sulu and Sabah - www.royalsulu.com. If you are inclined to visit that site you will find a wealth of information on this topic.

Best regards,

Peter Kelly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.149.62.240 (talk) 04:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you have suggestions for improving an article, you can discuss it on the article's talk page. Also see WP:BOLD. RudolfRed (talk) 04:40, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you have an interest in the matter, and one or more reliable sources for the information you think should be added, then you have all the authority that is required. --ColinFine (talk) 20:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Tags[edit]

Do I remember rightly that we have a tag that looks for potential COI violations? To my surprise, the only tag that these two edits attracted was References Removed. Nyttend (talk) 04:22, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Look at Template:COI. RudolfRed (talk) 04:38, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like vandalism to me - I can't find any evidence that he is married to Emily Spence/Gosling. – ukexpat (talk) 04:43, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is unfortunately not unusual for IPs, I presume teenagers, to insert that they are married to their idols. I imagine seeing it in "print" makes their fantasies realer.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:06, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Tags does indeed have COI tags based on comparing the username and edit but they don't get close to catching these edits, and I wouldn't expect an automatic tag to do it. The edits by Emilygosling didn't directly say "Emily Gosling". PrimeHunter (talk) 12:25, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

second AfD[edit]

This Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murray Turnbull (Murray Turnbull nomination) is a second AfD for Murray Turnbull. Was the AfD done properly? I can't get an "On AfD" to link to the proper discussion page (WikiProject_Chess#..._to_delete.2Flisted_for_deletion). Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 05:39, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, the AfD page was named wrongly. I've moved it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murray Turnbull (2nd nomination), fixed up a couple of headers, transcluded the page into Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 January 22, and fixed the link at Wikipedia:WikiProject Chess. I hope that's everything... -- John of Reading (talk) 09:00, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

thank you. Bubba73 ^{You talkin' to me?} 14:42, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have alerted the folks at Wikiproject Chess to the Afd. – ukexpat (talk) 16:27, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IP112.203.42.16 VANDALISM[edit]

Hi, user IP112.203.42.16 just attempted to vandalize the article of the film Underworld: Awakening. Thought you might want to know.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 05:57, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've warned him on his talk page. You can use templates from WP:TUSER to warn editors making unconstructive edits and if it gets persistent, report at WP:AIV. --lTopGunl (talk) 06:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

President of Benin[edit]

My name is elma zamarripa I would like tohave the email address of President of Benin I would like verry mucn to send him an email and i do send emails to the federal Ministry Of Finance . I do know his name is Dr Tomas Yayi Boni please comply thank you elma zamarripa — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.11.1 (talk) 11:56, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While it does not give an email address for him, you can use the contact page of his official site here. Dru of Id (talk) 12:08, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of pages exempt from NFCC 9[edit]

Resolved

I remember there is a list of pages not in main namespace that are exempt from NFCC#9, but can't remember where that list is located. Can someone point me to that list? Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 12:04, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I found Category:Wikipedia non-free content criteria exemptions. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 12:13, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UTT[edit]

I was recently annoyed by an editor who continuously shouts in CAPS even after I had given him warnings upto level 3 of this template, which he removed without any acknowledgement, as can be seen in his edits, which violate WP:SHOUT and WP:YOUREWRONG. So, do I continue to give him a level 4 warning and report him to admins if he ignores that or should I just ignore him and let him shout to his heart's content? Oh, and where do I report him to the admins if I have no choice? X.One ^SOS 14:46, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance would seem to be the correct place to advise admin about shouting etc. Although as long as the editor isn't making a mess or bullying people, maybe let it pass. General rules apply. AGF, use talk pages, then user talk pages. Only if things get nasty or out of hand should admin be called in. fredgandt 17:01, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am not reporting an admin. Just a normal editor without much rights who regularly trolls pages, and as long as I do not have to assume good faith, I can say that he is intending to promote the person who he worships. As far as I know, shouting in CAPS is definitely a Wikilawyering method, and all editors will naturally get discouraged to undo his edit. I will take a look at WP:WQA, but to go to the extent of blocking seems too far. Thanks. X.One ^SOS 13:45, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where do I request site improvements?[edit]

I"d like to see a "random" search option for Wikipedia.com. I sometimes when I'm bored I like to learn about new things. A randomizer could be used to display any random article from wikipedia. This would be especially useful on the mobile app. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.103.196.219 (talk) 15:28, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Under "navigation" on the left hand side, it should be the fifth item.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:29, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In answer to the section heading question: We have Village pump to make suggestions for improvements to Wikipedia. There are several village pumps. VPT for technical issues, VPP for policy issues, VPIL for community development/scrutiny of ideas before making proposals, and VPM for miscellaneous stuff that needs discussing. fredgandt 17:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wacky diffs[edit]

I've just been meandering around WP and found my way into Larry Sangers contribs (It's late here and I was bored). Anyway, I'm just wondering why clicking on a given diff from that user's contrib history renders a result such as this? Is there any way of fixing it as such diffs appear to give (possibly) inaccurate attributions. Claret Ash 15:35, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note the date of those diffs. They have been imported from the old database once though lost. However, the don't always show in the right order. — Edokter (talk) — 15:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kai Bird[edit]

Dear Wiki editors,

My biographical entry has once again been modified to add a libelous comment by the Israeli historian Benny Morris about my memoir, Crossing Mandelbaum Gate. I thought we had resolved this issue last summer or spring. Whoever recently edited the entry tried to balance the Morris quote with a quote from Christopher Hitchens. It does not work and it is not fair. Morris is saying that "practically nothing" I have written about the Arab-Israeli conflict conforms to factual history. This is a libel against any historian--and a rather ridiculous statement at face value. I have posted Morris's critical review of my book on my own web site www.KaiBird.com but I also post my lengthy rebuttal which shows that the "facts" Morris says don't conform to history are drawn largely from his own books. If Wiki's editors think a quote from the Morris review is warranted in my bio entry, I think the least you can do is provide a link to my rebuttal published in the New Republic.

Also, whoever reinserted the Benny Morris quote--a quote that was taken down by your editors last summer--also deleted the fact that my memoir was a Finalist for the National Book Critics Circle Award. Why?

We all know the Arab-Israeli conflict is an emotional hot button. Most reviewers however found my memoir balanced and emotionally sympathetic to both sides. So it is tiresome and distressing to see my book so mis-labeled on Wikipedia.

Sincerely,

Kai Bird — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaibird4263 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. While I can't really help with the specific issues in the article, I do want to point you to our guidelines on conflicts of interest and our autobiographies. On Wikipedia we take these concerns quite seriously. Raymie (t • c) 17:14, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is "the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit". Unfortunately this means that it often gets vandalised, or edited by people who in good faith believe that certain information, claims, or views should be inserted or removed. Generally these get resolved quite quickly, but where a matter is contentious, it may take some effort - and a later editor may then come in who is unaware of the discussion that has taken place. Our guidelines such as WP:IRS and WP:NPOV let us often reach consensus quickly.

The point of the preceding paragraph is that there is no way of making any change or resolution permanent: all we can do is keep watch on pages of interest to us. If you are concerned about changes to an article, the article's talk page is the place to argue the matter, especially if the article is a biography of a living person and somebody has introduced unreferenced material. --ColinFine (talk) 20:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use issue[edit]

File:Cobra Logo.jpg

The Carolina Cobras of the Arena Football League are a dead franchise that played from 2000 to 2004. Their logo is on Wikipedia, File:Carolinacobras.jpg. Somewhere along the line, Cactus High School in Glendale, Arizona picked up the logo, recolored the tan to electric blue, and produced what you see at left! I'm not sure of the licensing. The franchise is seven years deceased, but we know that the AFL owns the logo rights (it does for all but one dead AFL franchise).

What is the licensing for Cobra Logo.jpg, the electric blue cobra? Note: I have a request with the Graphics Lab to have both redrawn as non-JPG files. Eventually, Cobra Logo.jpg will be moved as well. Raymie (t • c) 17:11, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should probably ask at WP:MCQ where the copyright experts hang out. – ukexpat (talk) 17:15, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know that existed. Thanks. Raymie (t • c) 17:17, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I replied at WP:MCQ#Carolina Cobras logo. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 17:47, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged the commons file for speedy deletion. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 17:57, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Number of visits[edit]

I vaguely recall once being able to see how many users had read a page, but for the life of me I can't remember how it was done. Can someone help me? Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:41, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Click the "history" tab at the top of the page, then click on "Page View Statistics".--Wehwalt (talk) 17:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, perfect, thank you for your assistance. You are highly awesome. Nutiketaiel (talk) 17:52, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Only login on hungarian pages[edit]

Hi,

I would like to ask, this is normal, i can only login Hungarian pages? Nothing more.. My profile: https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Szerkeszt%C5%91:Mauricius

For example: login OK and successful editing: https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jedlik_%C3%81nyos

login error and reset password does not work: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balanescu_Quartet

Thanks, BR, Mau — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.132.87.210 (talk) 17:59, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When I look at http://toolserver.org/~quentinv57/sulinfo/Mauricius I see that the username Mauricius was registered on enwiki on 9 November 2007. Did you register that account? If not, then someone else registered an account under that name on enwiki. If that is the case, you can request usurpation of that account at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 18:14, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I accept the situation. I registered other new user name. Close the problem. Thanks, BR, Mau — Preceding unsigned comment added by Info.media.blog.team (talk • contribs) 18:52, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How to deal with citations that Redirects 301[edit]

[1] asks to not fix them and wayback machine hasn't crawled the page. Should they be replaced or left as they are for an artcle that is about to be FAC. September88 (talk) 18:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the exact technical details of the link in question, but that guideline says in general that you should fix 301 cases ("...301...302...In the former it is recommended that the site update the URL to use the new address.") DMacks (talk) 18:59, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And immediately below that, it says Do not "fix" redirects. Maybe that page needs to be edited to be more clear on whether the link should be updated or not. I'll raise the question on the talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 19:20, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NVM. I think that page just says don't use the checklinks tool to fix the redirect. I don't think it means don't update it at all. This earlier entry on the talk page suggests that you can fix redirects via copy-and-paste. [2] RudolfRed (talk) 19:24, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

bloodgroup[edit]

i want to know if the mother is having b+ve bloodgroup and the father is also the same one, then what is the bloodgroup for their new born baby. and what's the process of origin of bloodgroup in the new born babXy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khedkarsatya (talk • contribs) 18:29, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a straightforward case of genetic inheritance from both parents. Our ABO blood group article has a section entitled "Inheritance" that talks about it in some technical detail for the A/B/AB/O cases and the Rh blood group system article talks specifically about the +/– part. I don't see a direct chart of the possibilities (each mother–father genotype combination and the possible child genotype outcomes) there. To discuss further, please ask on the science reference-desk. The help-desk here is primarily for discussion of using wikipedia itself. DMacks (talk) 18:54, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Berners-Lee invents WWW / World Wide Web[edit]

Hello there , I'm an avid Wikipedia user but not a member. I'm not very computer savvy but I have reasonably good ears. I was just listening to a CBC program about Wikipedia and Twit-TV and other web based information resources. In this program they mentioned Sir Tim Berners-Lee as the inventor of the internet and originator of the phrase WWW or World Wide Web. Until today, I had never of him and he sounds like an interesting and bright fellow. My only quibble with him is the time line for 'inventing' this phrase. Something piqued my curiosity, and then I remembered where I heard a similar phrase 27 years ago. "Buckaroo Banzai Across The 8th Dimension" features an imaginary information sharing computer system called "the World Watch Wire". I'm sure I'm not the only retro sci-fi watcher out there, and surely someone else has bought this to the attention of the observational powers that be. It just seems really obvious that this reference was in popular media 5 or 6 years prior to his 'invention' ... just sayin' . JV Canada

Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension, Scene 4 ,Paramount Pictures (1984)

216.254.195.37 (talk) 18:50, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you have reliably sourced information which is additional to, or contrary to, information in a Wikipedia article, you may be bold and add it to the article. Personal recollections are not acceptable, as information in Wikipedia articles should all be verifiable.

In the particular case, even if your recollections are correct, Sir Tim Berners-Lee invented not just the name, but the thing. This is rather different from a science fiction writer "inventing" a device. --ColinFine (talk) 20:25, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Google searches go astray[edit]

When I search a topic on google, and click on the wikipedia results, it sends me to another page. //datingpuma.com Specifically, I have searched "House of Payne" and "The Cosby Show". — Preceding unsigned comment added by JAZZIGYRL (talk • contribs) 19:01, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please use a descriptive title in future questions.

This is nothing to do with Wikipedia, and probably nothing to do with Google either. It almost certainly means your computer has been infected by some malware. --ColinFine (talk) 20:25, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It might serve you best to ask for help at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing. They know all kinds of stuff. fredgandt 21:09, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New Photo To A Article[edit]

I would like to add a photograph to an existing article from another website on the Internet. I e-mailed the website owners to ask permission to use one of their photos for Wikipedia and they said that I could use it but to just give them credit for the photo. My question is how do I get the photo from their website to the Wikipedia article?24.209.202.69 (talk) 19:15, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you need an account to upload to Wikipedia. That's step one. I can tell you the rest of it too, but unless you get an account ...--Wehwalt (talk) 19:19, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See HELP:Images. Note that it is not enough to grant permission to use a picture on Wikipedia. Because Wikipedia itself can be used for any purpose, all images used on it must be licensed with one of the licences compatible with Wikipedia. See WP:IOWN, --ColinFine (talk) 20:27, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Code needed[edit]

I have not received the email with code for use. Help.20:13, 22 January 2012 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kendedom (talk • contribs)

This is probably not the place to deal with that, but I don't know where to tell you to go.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:37, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While not providing any personal details, can you be more specific about what code it is you are lacking? Who should have sent it to you by email. Again (I can't stress this enough), don't post any personal details such as account passwords, email addresses etc. fredgandt 21:05, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you referring to Email confirmation? It's not required to edit Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:44, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you see how many people look at your Wikipedia pages?[edit]

I just made a page on Chuck Testa and I want to see how many people look at it. Is there a way to see it? Corwin Karl (talk) 20:34, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, click the "History" tab at the top of the article's page and then click "Page View Statistics".--Wehwalt (talk) 20:36, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted due to advertising?? Huh?[edit]

One of my students submitted a number of articles which were apparently deleted due to "unambiguous advertising.." which was never the intention. As these were modelled specifically on similar topics already accepted, we would appreciate it if you would review and please advise what specifically was considered "unambiguous advertising" please - so corrections can be made

 (Deletion log); 04:05 . . NawlinWiki (talk | contribs)‎ deleted "Relational Marketing" (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)  (Deletion log); 04:05 . . NawlinWiki (talk | contribs)‎ deleted "Dr Brian Monger" (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)  (Deletion log); 04:04 . . NawlinWiki (talk | contribs)‎ deleted "Offer Life Cycle" (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)

The second item "Dr Brian Monger" was modelled on the article on Philip Kotler. Where is the unambiguous adveretising then? Both other submissions are on significant marketing topics not so far addressed in Wikipedia

All information is referenced and can be verified

Obviously we are not experts at this and would appreciate your advice

Please advise us what we can do (specifically) to resolve this situation.

Brian Bmonger (talk) 21:40, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While I understand you don't want to be referred elsewhere, a conversation with User:NawlinWiki might be beneficial.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And while you're at it, please read WP:Autobiography.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 22:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Promotion" doesn't always mean "buy our widgets, they are the cheapest and best in the whole wide world". Some biographical articles, usually those created by editors with a conflict of interest, read like resumes in tone and fall foul of WP:SPAM. – ukexpat (talk) 01:18, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review desired[edit]

I am a newby with no time to learn but a burning desire to contribute. Could an experienced user go here ---> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Slidhome/H.T._Lockard , and get the article in line to be considered as a regular article in Wikipedia? Thanks. 98.86.32.16 (talk) 22:30, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's quite well done, considering. Did you write it?--Wehwalt (talk) 22:41, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did, but obviously I pulled from sources. Slidhome (talk) 23:11, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I will work on the two articles. I will do one at a time and try to leave very detailed edit summaries so you can track what I do and learn from it. Does that sound good?--Wehwalt (talk) 23:13, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

you're the boss

Slidhome (talk) 23:29, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Request[edit]

I am a newby and have not the time to learn. Could an experienced user go here ---> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation/Lincoln_University_School_ofLaw,_1938_-_1955 and get this article in line to be made a regular article in Wikipedia? I do want to contribute but find mines in the field which block my way. Is there a book "Wikipedia for dummies"? 98.86.32.16 (talk) 22:40, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming that is original work, it's quite good now. I'll polish it to fit the MOS, if you give me a day or two.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article traffic statistics[edit]

Is there any way you can find out the sources or links for the views of a certain date on an article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatthewGoodfan101 (talk • contribs) 22:33, January 22, 2012 (UTC)‎

Go to the article page, click on the "History" tab at the top, then click on "Page View Statistics".--Wehwalt (talk) 22:39, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]