Help desk
< January 3	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 5 >

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 4[edit]

Blatant rules violation[edit]

One of Wikipedia's rules, "Do not create pages about yourself, your company, your band or your friends, nor pages that advertise, nor personal essays or other articles you would not find in an encyclopedia." ... has been in violation by numerous articles. For example, "Wayne Besen" has a wiki entry dedicated to him [written by himself, so I understand], which is a violation of the above quoted rule. This is just one of numerous examples. For many of these violators, they are of people of no particular interest or achievement yet Wikipedia has not deleted them.

Is it that Wikipedia picks-and-chooses or does not enforce its own rules?

Thank you, Dr. Bryan Wilcutt, DC.S. ^{[details removed]} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwilcutt (talk • contribs) 01:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know there is no policy that says "Do not create pages about yourself, your company, your band or your friends, nor pages that advertise, nor personal essays or other articles you would not find in an encyclopedia." The conflict of interest behavioral guideline says, "It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply." The Autobiography content guideline says, "It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply." Where did you see that it was against the rules to create pages about yourself? GB fan 01:55, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is that Wikipedia is a big place, and not every article gets checked by an experienced user every day. Thank you for finding another violation. I guarantee there are many more. We're doing the best we can around here. --Jayron32 01:51, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, conflict of interest (if admitted) is not a terribly big deal, if the article has good references. There is no harm in an editor creating an article about themselves as long as they admit their COI, have notability, and are providing good references. fredgandt 02:19, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, neutrallity must be adhered to. This is the same for all articles, but known COI editors may be more strictly monitored (rightly). fredgandt 02:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What you definitely do not do is blank the article without discussion, as you have now tried to do twice to the Wayne Besen article. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 02:34, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't get your msg above before modification. The quote I gave, "This article is in violation of Wikipedia rule, "Do not create pages about yourself, your company, your band or your friends, nor pages that advertise, nor personal essays or other articles you would not find in an encyclopedia." is actually take directly from Wikipedia's own rules, I didn't make it up. It is the 2nd rule in the guidelines.

The guideline BWilcutt is quoting is here-[1]: he isnt making it up!Tigerboy1966 (talk) 02:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gentlemen, the rules I am referring to are the "don't do's" at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Your_first_article

See bullet item #2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwilcutt (talk • contribs) 03:00, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not have hard rules. As long as you behave in a decent manner and try to improve the encyclopedia. If you have a genuine concern about a conflict of interest, you can start a discussion at Talk:Wayne Besen with specific statements within the article you have concerns about (that is, that there are specific things you want fixed). It should be noted that the history of the Wayne Besen article shows that there have been several dozen different contributors to that article, so your claim that he "wrote" it himself seems plainly to not play out in reality. --Jayron32 03:32, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you folks haven't bothered to read the article. It covers several people over several topics. Can you possibly point out an article that is in more violation than this one? "Wikipedia does not have hard rules". No, they have "rules". These rules are designed to meter the data going in as well as meter the decision of the 'editors'. The rules are to be followed in an effort to clean up the KB and make it more appealing to academia. They are there to also help attract financial support from the commercial world. "shows that there have been several dozen different contributors to that article, so your claim that he "wrote" it himself seems plainly to not play out in reality." In fact, I said I was led to believe that.. I did not state it as an absolute. Again, you are reaching. Your sarcasm, as misplaced as it is, is not very professional. The lesson I've learned here is if you ask for help, expect to get attacked by uncivilized people like yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwilcutt (talk • contribs) 04:20, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Few of us are professional editors (paid by the WikiMedia foundation). We are volunteers, like you. We are trying our best to help. Please don't make insinuations that any one of us is uncivilized or is attacking you. The policies and guidelines have been described and linked here, and there is little more to be said. All articles are constantly being developed. Problems are there to be fixed. With approaching 4 million articles, we must expect some errors. Please feel free to attempt to fix them. That's what we're all trying to do. fredgandt 04:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But you see, I made an attempt to fix something. A lot of good it did. Maybe I was in the wrong, I won't bother to try and do this again as it was merely an experiment for an article. I really don't care about the article in question, why would I? Thanks, gentlemen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bwilcutt (talk • contribs) 04:58, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Except, it doesn't look like you tried to fix anything. You just erased it. We want to improve Wikipedia content, not necessarily eliminate it. If you have ways to make that article a better article, please do that. If you have fixes you would like other people to make, please use the article talk page. --Jayron32 05:09, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More to the point, the article was not written by Besen. An account called "Wbesen" made a total of one edit to the article, adding two sentences. On the other hand, the reporting editor has identified himself above as a fellow who's advocated violence as a response to the legalization of same-sex marriage, which suggests that his vandalism of Besen's article is less about policies and more about politics. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 06:06, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, there's that too... --Jayron32 06:08, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can't access Sue Gardner message with IE[edit]

Moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)

I can't access the msg from Sue Gardner at the top of my WP pages using IE. Both the "Read me" button and the "please read" message do nothing. I have tried on two PCs, with IE8 on one and IE9 on the other? I can access it with Firefox. 130.216.68.41 (talk) 01:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya. This might be better posted at the technical village pump, as it may be caused by either a known or unknown bug. If known: the response will be quicker there. If unknown: the technical folk may need to know about it (in order to fix it). Thanks. fredgandt 02:11, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hiya Fred. You have a point; such things might be good to know for the technical folk. So I think it's better if we just do it, instead of waiting for the OP who may or may not do it. — Sebastian 04:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Use Wikipedia image for my book[edit]

I would like to use the image titled The Basic Candlestick under sub-header Candlestick Chart Topics from the following http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candlestick_chart.

I would like to put this image in my book, to be published soon, for profit. Is that OK? Meaning, I don't need permission?

Who should I address such Qs to, in future? TQ very much for your help.

From: TTTT — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.106.226.93 (talk) 07:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Different Wikipedia images have different copyright statuses. This one, according to its file page, is in the public domain, meaning that you can do what you like with it and don't have to credit anyone. Credit may be appreciated, and you may want to contact the user who made it on his talk page (User talk:Rentier) to let him know that you're using it, even though he doesn't appear to be active anymore - but none of this is required as it has been released into the public domain. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 08:12, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Roscelese. In future cases, how do I get to see the file page?

I'm also using a number of references to Wikipedia. How do I know whether these are public domain:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candlestick_chart

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bollinger_Bands

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MACD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum_(technical_analysis)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_trend

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Microelectronics_Corporation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_People's_Republic_of_China

Appreciate any help you can provide. Thank you very much.

From:TTTT — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.106.226.93 (talk) 08:51, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Double-click on each picture to see the file page. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:00, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you are talking about reusing images, John's advice is relevant. If you mean you want to cite the articles themselves, pick "Cite this page" from the sidebar - but take note of the information at the top of that page, and also remember that an article may get radically changed at any time. If you want to reuse material from Wikipedia articles, you may do so freely, provided you give proper attribution. See WP:REUSE. --ColinFine (talk) 09:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Each picture have their own pages which detail their authors, sources, licenses, etc. Scroll down in the page for File:BollingerBandsSPX.svg for example, and you will see the licenses it is released under and the conditions by which it might be reused.

However if you meant the articles themselves, the text of all Wikipedia articles are released under CC-BY-SA license. It is different from Public Domain, so please see Wikipedia's Terms of Use instead.

I also wouldn't recommend using Wikipedia as a reference. See Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source. In addition to being user-edited, Wikipedia is also a tertiary source like paper encyclopedias. Tertiary sources are generalized sources of information and are not ideal for referencing. Instead you might want to use the references used by the Wikipedia article or at least ensure that you retain the references used by Wikipedia for further verification.

Also see Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content and Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 09:52, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

U guys must be very busy answering all the queries and all on donation basis. Wow. U guys deserve a free meal if I ever meet up with u guys. Anyway, I'm not tech savvy. So, I'm sorry that I have to keep u guys busy for a while.

1) First, I got the one on the file page. That's easy enough to understand John. Thanks.

2) Where exactly is the sidebar for "cite this page?" Is it on the left or right because I don't see any selection for "cite this page." Is it something that I have to move my cursor over?

3) I know u said no legal advice given here. But for Bollinger's, in my book I just wanted to said that "Bollinger's Band was invented by John Bollinger in the 1980s and that is the first sentence in that Wikipedia site. And I'm wondering whether the Wikipedia licence is good enough for me not to seek out permission from the author for commercial purpose. In that sense, it is not a material reference and I'm less worried about the item getting deleted than the author taking copyright action or plagiarism action against me. Same with MACD also on the founder and year founded. For momentum, it is in reference to that formula that appears in the first paragraph on the site. For market trend, in relation to the 2007 crash. For PRC, in relation to it being the 2nd largest economy, which is the first sentence on the site. So, all one sentence each except for 1 four sentence paragraph on the background of UMC. So, did I get it right? Did u said all the text are released for me to use freely in my book for commercial purpose and I don't have to get any permission to use it?

From: tttt203.106.226.93 (talk) 11:35, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For point (2), whenever you are looking at an article, the "Cite this page" link should be under the "Toolbox" heading in the left hand sidebar. Alternatively here is a direct link: Special:Cite. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:13, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To put it simply, yes. You do not need to contact the authors of the text. Furthermore, if you are using only one or two sentences consisting of only facts, it is not plagiarism (see Wikipedia:Plagiarism#What is not plagiarism) since it lacks enough creativity to be copyrightable. But for longer snippets of text copied verbatim from Wikipedia you need to include a notice that it is under a CC-BY-SA or GFDL license (some of Wikipedia's text is dual-licensed, choose only one), a link explaining said license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ for CC-BY-SA or http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html for GFDL), and a link to the original article in Wikipedia in your references. The easiest way to do this is to use the Cite this page function (the location of which is pointed out by John of Reading above). All of this, again, is described in Wikipedia's Terms of Use.

And again please read Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. You can also seek further advice about file licensing in Wikipedia:Media copyright questions (it's a help/discussion board much like this Help Desk, but specialized for copyright-related questions). -- Obsidi♠n Soul 12:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very good advice but one thing is incorrect or at the least stated too generally: "...if you are using only one or two sentences consisting of only facts, it is not plagiarism..." The text from the "what is not plagiarism is: "Phrases that are the simplest and most obvious way to present information. Sentences such as 'John Smith was born on 2 February 1900' lack sufficient creativity to require attribution." This does not mean the same thing and most sentences of any length you come across, whether purely factual or not, do not fall within this exception.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:17, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry for that. I felt it would be too clunky to explain it all in full detail and just linked it. :P For what it's worth, TTTT's example "Bollinger's Band was invented by John Bollinger in the 1980s" fall within this. -- Obsidi♠n Soul 13:24, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys. This is very clear. U guys have been a great help. Serious. From: TTTT — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.138.166.113 (talk) 14:51, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

page references[edit]

hello and thank you for your reply.

I understand about how to create the link or reference in the text but there is a problem with several exterior links, specifically to the BBC and Guardian Newspaper.

These references relate to a crime against humanity and are crucial in having the wiki-article accepted.

The information or web page address works perfectly when copied and pasted to your browser, it also works if contained in an email, but as a wiki-link it only directs you to their home page where it tells you that the page cannot be found please enter the correct address. Obviously a wiki-reader would not know the address and without functioning links there is no evidence to support the article. And it shall not be accepted.

Please can you offer some advice.

A kind soul (talk) 08:35, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't understood the problem here. In your draft article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joss-Ink, the first two references are external links to pages at the BBC and the Guardian. Both these links are working for me; they take me to news pages dating from 2004. But I notice that those news pages don't say anything about "Joss" or "Joss-Ink" -- John of Reading (talk) 08:57, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I may be misreading your intent, but when you say "These references relate to a crime against humanity and are crucial in having the wiki-article accepted", I think you may have a purpose that is not entirely in line with the aims of Wikipedia. We are here to make Wikipedia as good as it can be as an encyclopaedia: this includes getting every article as well-referenced as we can. It does not include advocacy for a cause or viewpoint, no matter how worthy the cause or viewpoint: see WP:NOTADVOCATE. If you are working on an article in order to tell the world about a crime, it is likely that you will have difficulty adhering to Wikipedia's policy on neutrality, and you would be advised to take up a discussion on the article's talk page, rather than editing the article directly (though improving references would be fine). Apologies if I have misunderstood you. --ColinFine (talk) 09:50, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was fixed when you posted about it at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2011 December 10#References to exterior pages. If the links still don't work for you then bypass your cache on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Joss-Ink to see the current version of the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Response Dear friends, thank you for your comments and assistance. Perhaps God does exist.

How to handle problematic IP user[edit]

I'm in trouble with an IP user. What is appropriate way to handle such type of problematic IP user ? Gentle suggestions are welcome !

That user have done:

claimed original research without showing any reliable sources
posted complicated comments without any useful advices
repeatedly reverted the article before reaching consensus on discussion
repeatedly wrote provocative words on edit summary field and article talk page (Note: however, I can't understand the exact meaning of his/her words, because his/her words are always very uncertainly and hard to understand : ) )
and, finally posted obvious lies on the article talk page: in spite of that user's self misunderstanding, he/she claimed it as an another person's misunderstandings.

These behavior seems pathological, in my views.

Also, this user's behavior seems similar to a particular banned user who wrote personal opinions and uncertain descriptions on the same article in the past, and finally banned with unknown reason. (it is a my personal impression, and it may be possibly not correct)

best regards, --Clusternote (talk) 10:19, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Dispute resolution has several avenues for content disputes. I see you have reported and gotten the page protected - hopefully this will be a step in the right direction. Яehevkor ✉ 12:18, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for kindly guide. On this issue, I faced to several users who use uncertain English, and communication with them were extremely hard. However, your kindly words can be well understood. --Clusternote (talk) 13:19, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

new element discovery of ashish kaushik[edit]

respected sir or madam

after studying periodic table carefully I come fact that there is a element between Astatine and Radon.SO,I want to ask you that it is a possible element between Astatine and Radon? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaushk ashish (talk • contribs) 10:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should probably bring this up either on WP:Reference Desk/Science or Talk:Periodic table. However, I must tell you that the Periodic table is extremely well established, and to propose a change will require extremely strong, reliably published references. Wikipedia does not accept original research anywhere, and in the case of theories which challenge established knowledge the chances of publishing in Wikipedia are particularly low. --ColinFine (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, as Astatine has an atomic number of 85, and Radon an atomic number of 86, you ought to start by answering the question as to what the atomic number of your new element would be? - David Biddulph (talk) 11:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there has to be something out there that would require stronger sources than this, maybe a new number between 37 & 38...Naraht (talk) 21:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fix this[edit]

Please fix this article.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_in_Southeast_Asia

Joyson Prabhu ^{Holla at me!} 10:59, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed with this edit. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:10, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the Charles Addams entry seems to have been severely hacked,but I don't consider myself competent to edit it. 7 January 2012 noon CSTProfessa S (talk) 18:22, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Categories - wrapping[edit]

I guess this is a tech question and may be in the wrong place but can long categories be made to start on line n and wrap onto the next line? Kittybrewster ☎ 13:07, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You mean in the display of categories at the bottom of each page? I think the answer is that this would need changes to the core software. Each category link is exported inside <li> .... </li> tags, and browsers think that these "list items" cannot break.

If you don't get any other replies here, I suggest you ask again at Village pump (technical). -- John of Reading (talk) 16:25, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ref desk q re Nigeria[edit]

Please is al-hikmah university kwara state nigeria accepting second choice jamb result — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.0.8.255 (talk) 13:42, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.8 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 13:51, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Coord template[edit]

hello,

can someone fix the coord templates here? I just hope someone will make a good instruction for newbies. Thanks. ♫GoP♫_T ^C _N 14:34, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. type, dim, region are not different template parameters separated by pipes. They are one parameter containing underscores as separation. See Template:Coord#1. display=title (or (display=inline,title) shows the coordinates near the page title. This only makes sense if a single coord set applies to the whole article. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:03, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

rick manasa keyboardist for bob seger[edit]

Can you find Rick Manasa and do up an article about his experiences with the Silver Bullet Band? I understand he is in Virginia at one of the Woman's colleges now. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.49.15.210 (talk) 14:48, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Requested articles.Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do i make a numbered list[edit]

something like this:
1 bla bla
2 blah blah
3 blah blah blah
Standard2211 (talk) 16:06, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Markup#Lists. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:10, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook[edit]

Its saying go to a recognized computer.to sign in how do I get on my account — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.204.120 (talk) 16:07, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried the Computing section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:09, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Special Pages:User contributions as of specific dates instead of before certain dates[edit]

This would be an awfully great feature if it could be implemented on the User Contributions special page. I rarely need to see the contributions before a specific date, and I don't want to see ALL the contributions per user, just the arbitrarily recent ones.

There's already a feature From year (and earlier) / From month (and earlier). Could you add a "and later" option as well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael.Spanner (talk • contribs) 16:29, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with getting ALL the contributions? Just stop reading when you get to the cut off date. —teb728 t c 17:33, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The idea is to speed up the search by excluding information before a specific date, and get only those contribs, say, after 2012-01-01 (and even to not tax the server that much in its search).... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael.Spanner (talk • contribs) 15:45, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

David T . Beers Article[edit]

See updated information in the link below:

http://www.bankofcanada.ca/2011/11/press-releases/bank-canada-announces-appointment-special-adviser-11/

Dtbeers (talk) 17:02, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's a press release, notoriously not a reliable source. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:21, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources can be used in cases of uncontroversial information though. -- Obsidi♠n Soul 17:37, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My Account[edit]

I HAVE JUST CLICKED ONTO THE LINC FROM MY EMAIL FOR AN ANSWER TO A QUESTION I PUT ON AND HAVE GOT ACCOUNT SUSPENDED COME UP I HAVE NO IDEA WHY CAN YOU PLEASE HELP ME THANKS MIKE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.2.61.187 (talk) 17:09, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand correctly, you got an email notification that your user talk page had been modified, and when you tried to see the change, you were notified that your account had been blocked. Is that what happened? If so, what is your username? —teb728 t c 17:13, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Major Wikis hosted by .EDU[edit]

Does anyone know of any popular and "open" wikis that are hosted in .edu space? Preferably, (1) hosted by a institution of higher education, and (2) focused on some academic topic? Thanks, West.andrew.g (talk) 18:12, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can probably find several .edu sites using the MediaWiki software at MW:Sites using MediaWiki/en. —teb728 t c 19:13, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are several on that list, a couple that might be open but I am not certain any fit the "popular" criteria. Rmhermen (talk) 19:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I added an item to column 2, but it appears in column 1.[edit]

I added an item to column 2, but it appears in column 1. Rilke: translations: other collections.Timsmind (talk) 19:59, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed in this edit, I hope. The {{refend}} template marks the end of the two-column material, so your new item should have been added just before it. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:25, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming an article[edit]

How can Hanwell Cemetery be renamed as City of Westminster Cemetery, Hanwell without 'Hanwell Cemetry' remaining as a redirect. Reason being, is that 'Hanwell Cemetry' is the informal name used by Westminter City Council for it's Hanwell cemetry which is the same informal name used by Kensington and Chelsea London Borough Council used for their Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea Cemetery, Hanwell. Both cemeteries are in the same road so it leads to confusion (there is also a third Hanwell cemetery but that beside the point). Obviously a redirect is not applicable here. This composite photo of 'both' signages show the problem.File:Han cem.jpg. Poor old John Conolly is now resting on the wrong side of the road according to Wikipedia (but thankfully not on Google Maps and else where). --Aspro (talk) 20:51, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If there are three of that name, then what we need is a disambiguation page: see WP:DAB. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:54, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. The third one is the Graveyard of St Mary, Hanwell, and yet minicab drivers drop people off there as well, when they really want to be at one of the others. --Aspro (talk) 21:28, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please Delete Article[edit]

Could you please delete this article? It's called Category: Katy Perry songs. The reason why I want you to delete it is because

I don't know how to delete it
I am creating an article that is the same subject of that. It's called User: Herostratus/List of Katy Perry songs, but I am going to turn it into List of Katy Perry songs soon.
The article isn't really right for that kind of topic because it should be a article, not a category.

Please answer this question at my Talk Page. CPGirlAJ (talk) 21:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Short answer, the category should stay even if the article is created. In fact the article should both be added to the category with sort order entry of '*' and set as the main article, see Category:Alvin_and_the_Chipmunks_songs for an example of the second.Naraht (talk) 21:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We already have Katy Perry discography so maybe your content would be best used to improve that article. – ukexpat (talk) 21:45, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK trying one more time: Why do we need List of Katy Perry songs and Katy Perry discography? Shouldn't the former be merged into the latter? – ukexpat (talk) 14:42, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged the two for possible merge. - TexasAndroid (talk) 20:23, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]