Help desk
< December 28	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	December 30 >

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.

December 29[edit]

Donation to Wikipedia[edit]

I went to donate money to Wikipedia but saw that any of the information I provided I would have toagree to share with anybody in the Wikipedia community this I do not agree with and is why I decided not to donate...I think you're making a major mistake by asking this of donors! How many other people do you think may have thought twice about donating..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.193.147.63 (talk) 03:52, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I fear you have misunderstood. Any edits you make to Wikipedia, you agree to share with anybody in the world who uses Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Your personal information is not going to be passed around like baseball cards at a swap meet because you donated money to keep it going. --Orange Mike | Talk 04:06, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Right. See wmf:Frequently asked questions#What is your donor privacy policy? PrimeHunter (talk) 04:47, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging a page to query renaming?[edit]

How / what tag can I use to query and have other editors look at the issue of whether a page should have been renamed, or a new page created under a new name? Ishel99 (talk) 06:41, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ishel99, you can use template {{Requested move}}. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 08:56, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for ypur help with this! Ishel99 (talk) 12:54, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Post my article[edit]

raghvendra yadav

i want to post my article and poam on wikipedia,also about me please allowed me for that and suggest me how to do--49.201.121.18 (talk) 07:49, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, any user can edit Wikipedia, with a few exceptions. However, only a registered user can create an article. You not a registered user, so if you would like to create an article, you will have to register here. Also, it is not recommended that you post your own poem on Wikipedia, unless it is notable enough. If it is notable enough, probably another user would have created the article already. heyzec! 08:33, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, read what Wikipedia is not for guidance on why you cannot simply publish information that you want to publish. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a web hosting service. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:15, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback rights and edit frequency[edit]

Hi there, I've been wondering whether I should request for rollback rights. On Wikipedia one of things I do is to revert vandalism, my editing frequency is quite irregular, mostly editing during holidays and sometimes during weekends. I worry that my request will be rejected because of that. Should I request for rollback rights? heyzec! 08:26, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hz.tiang, it is mostly about trust and experience. With 500 edits last year and 2000 total you should be fine. I note that your last vandalism revert is back in October. I don't expect this to be a major issue, since it is obvious that you will be using the rollback right in the future. Be bold and go for it. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 08:51, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it, you've already got Reviewer, your logs show good contributions and no record of misbehaviour, I see no reason to refuse. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:11, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you both for your advice, I guess I'll make the request soon! heyzec! 09:28, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Art Uytendaal[edit]

Please help me, I am old, and not used to this. I have written a story about my husband Art Uytendaal. You are asking me to verify this, there is a lot on google 'Art Uytendaal' and also videos of him showjumping on youtube. I do not understand how to let you know this. Thanking you, sincerely, Kerrin Uytendaal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tongalapark (talk • contribs) 10:12, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What needs to be verified is not his existence, but is that he is notable, meaning that he is discussed in reliable independent sources. I know nothing about horse-riding, but I think sources like this may be the sort of thing that is needed. Maproom (talk) 10:35, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And, Tongalapark, Wikipedia requires that all information be verifiable from published reliable sources, not just from personal knowledge,. To see why this is, suppose you insert some information into the article that you know, but has not been published. A reader coming along can see that that information is in Wikipedia; but how can they tell it is correct? Even if you are who you say you are (no offence, but we have no way of knowing this) and have remembered the information correctly, perhaps somebody else has come along since you wrote it and changed it - maybe they thought it was not very clear, maybe they thought they had more accurate information, maybe they were a vandal deliberately inserting false information - for whatever reason, a reader has no way of checking what is correct, unless the information is cited to a published reliable source. --ColinFine (talk) 10:42, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unified login on other languages[edit]

Apparently, my username (The Average Wikipedian) already has accounts on some Wikipedias such as German and French, yet not on other project sites. Therefore, although I really want to edit Wikipedias of these languages (and maybe some others), and I have completed login unification on meta.wikimedia.org, my account is only active on 615 project sites, thus I can't login so I can't do anything other than edit under an IP on those Wikipedias. Again, my account is active on other project sites such as fr.wikisource.org but not on fr.wikipedia.org. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 10:54, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

de:User:The Average Wikipedian and fr:User:The Average Wikipedian are not registered. What exactly happens when you click those links while being logged in here? If you lose your login then what exactly happens when you try to log in there? PrimeHunter (talk) 12:39, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In fr.wikipedia.org, using an English login interface, the error message displayed in a red box is:

Login error

<<trouvez un peu plus original...>>

In de.wikipedia.org, using an English login interface, the error message displayed in a red box is:

Login error

.*[Ww][IÌÍÎiìíîıl][Kk][IÌÍÎiìíîıl][PpMm][EÈÉÊeèéê][Dd][IÌÍÎiìíîıl][AÀÁÂaàáâ].*

<newaccountonly|casesensitive>>

Using a German Interface, the message is:

Fehler bei der Anmeldung

Hinweise.>

If I am logged in on English Wikipedia, for example, when I click links to those pages I am simply not logged in. I ticked the remember me box anyway, but I have never successfully logged in. It is not a password problem definitely, and if I try to create an account on these Wikipedias with this username it tells me to choose another one. Simply put it is as if someone has my username but a different password which doesn't allow me to use these Wikipedias, although as PrimeHunter has pointed out the accounts are in fact unregistered. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 14:24, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. The German and French Wikipedias disallow creation of usernames containing "Wikipedia". It's done with entries in de:MediaWiki:Titleblacklist and fr:MediaWiki:Titleblacklist. Administrators at those wikis may be able to override it and create the account for you, but I don't know whether they have policies about it or a process to request it. They do have a process to request a username change at de:Wikipedia:Benutzernamen ändern and fr:Wikipédia:Demande de renommage de compte utilisateur. You could try creating an account with another name and then request a name change to The Average Wikipedian. I don't know the details of their processes but if you try it then I suggest making a post at User talk:The Average Wikipedian confirming the request is from the unified account The Average Wikipedian, and link to that post in the request. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:34, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, but all renamings have to be done globally, (i.e. done by stewards), right? --Good afternoon (talk) 01:23, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think a request can be made at the German and French Wikipedia. I don't know the details of how it would be carried out. It's also possible the solution is not a renaming but an account creation by somebody who can override the titleblacklist. I don't think a normal global rename can be done here when The Average Wikipedian already has a unified account which should keep that name. People who actually work with renaming will probably know what to do, assuming it's allowed. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:55, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Continued at #An overheated BLP noticeboard debate and login for other languages. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:13, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Made an article , don't know how publish or process further,[edit]

I just finished my article and want to update it on the website . Please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Choubeyalin (talk • contribs) 12:30, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If, as I presume, you are talking about User:Choubeyalin/Sudhir K Mishra, there is a big green button on the page that says, "Submit your draft for review". Sadly, I would advise against it, as the draft article is by no means ready for submission. Your notes are not formatted properly, your language is not properly impartial and objective, and there are no wikilinks to explain any of the terms used in the draft. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:22, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Choubeyalin. It also wouldn't be wise at this point to move your draft to the main encyclopedia, because you haven't included references to multiple independent reliable sources to verify the information. For example, you could include a reference to this news article. Press releases and the person's own web site or company information are not considered independent. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:30, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is the correct user warning?[edit]

I should know this, but what is the correct user warning for introducing something that is deliberately inaccurate? I've just done a revert of something that gets added from time to time, but couldn't remember the right template to add to the user's talk page. Thanks, This is Paul (talk) 13:20, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That would be the uw-error series, beginning with uw-error1. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:23, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Mike. This is Paul (talk) 13:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creepy spoken word article on Wikipedia.[edit]

Please listen to the Bhutanese_passport article and tell me that the spoken word version is very bizarre, unless my speakers are not working right. --Spoœekspaar (talk) 15:27, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just played it through headphones and it does sound rather strange. The tone of voice reminds me of someone from a comedy, but I can't think who, and there are parts of it that are indecipherable. I guess it needs re-recording. This is Paul (talk) 17:42, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is bizarre. User:KuchenZimjah was the uploader. Is that a useful recording or is it too weird? Sam Walton (talk) 17:49, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to say "too weird". NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:52, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Too strange, putting articles into the spoken word in this fashion is just game playing and might be considered a new type of vandalism (IMO). Mlpearc (open channel) 19:10, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

submission[edit]

Hi I cant tellif my article is under review or stuck in "limbo". I have been trying to get a short article approved: Eoin Mcnamee (Irish Republican) with no success. This is my first experience here - can someone please check on the status of my submission? Thanks very much Palisades1 15:28, 29 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palisades1 (talk • contribs)

Draft:Eoin Mcnamee (Irish Republican) is in the queue to be reviewed, along with 2742 other drafts. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:54, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article was declined twice, both times in November 2014, due to no sources. You then added sources. Since there are more than 2700 drafts in review, there is no real distinction between it being in review and being "in limbo". Is there a Submit button for you to request that it be moved to the front of the queue? You can, to be sure, Move the page to article name space, but that would risk having it tagged for proposed deletion. I suggest that you do a Google search and find more independent references to Eoin McNamee to add to the article (and possibly more information about him, such as his date of birth). Robert McClenon (talk) 16:00, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can't edit from VPN[edit]

I edit a lot from different VPNs due to the need for security while on Public WiFi. Recently I signed up for SurfEasy. Why I can't edit when I connected to a Singaporean VPN? Why are web hosts blocked? Is it possible for me to be exempted from all this? pcfan500 (talk) 15:58, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A Wikipedia search of Surfeasy shows that Surfeasy.cn was blocked in 2007 as an open-anonymozing proxy. Someone with more familiarity with Wikipedia policy on proxies may be able to direct you to whether you can seek a review of whether it should still be blocked, or can be soft-unblocked for registered users. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:05, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rob, I don't understand why it is considered an "open-anonymyzing proxy" when it requires a login. I know that Tor is a open proxy as it allows anyone to connect without an account but SurfEasy requires an account. Do you mind clarifying what is considered "open anonymizing proxy" in Wikipedia's policies? Thanks! pcfan500 (talk) 16:08, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A search on 'Surfeasy' shows that it was blocked as an open-anonymizing proxy (a Tor-like proxy) in 2007. That is what I found. As I said, someone with more familiarity than I have with Wikipedia proxy policy can explain how to seek a review of that block, if indeed that is the reason for the block. If it does require a login, then it is no longer an open-anonymizing proxy and should be unblocked. The alternative explanation is that it is being blocked from accessing en.wikipedia.org by national censorship, or that it is now under control of state media and is blocking you from accessing Wikipedia as censorship. Unfortunately, Wikipedia cannot do anything about national censorship. Can someone here address the question of whether this VPN has an old stale block for a proxy, or should this be taken to Village pump (technical) or somewhere else? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:19, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

East Village Pharmacy[edit]

Hello I would like to make a Wikipedia page for the New York City reggae band East Village Pharmacy. How do I do this? Thanks, SugarcaneSound — Preceding unsigned comment added by SugarcaneSound (talk • contribs) 16:32, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Your first article. But first read Wikipedia:Notability (music)#Criteria for musicians and ensembles. In order for an article on the band to be justified, you must provide evidence from third party published sources that the band is notable according to our guidelines - we get a lot of articles created for bands, only for them to be immediately deleted. If you have any connection with the band, you should also read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest - we strongly advise against editing articles where there is a persnal or professional involvement. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:40, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Articles waiting for review[edit]

Hello,

I have made four article contributions and I would like to know if there is a problem with their review. I understand that there are lots of articles pending for review, however, is there a way I can know if they are acceptable as they are and will pass a review once their turn comes?

Thanks for the help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snajamahmed (talk • contribs) 18:51, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One preliminary question as the drafts are all about related subjects - are you connected with the subjects of these articles? If so, please read our guidance on handling conflicts of interest. One other point, all of the images (the pic of Alex Smith and the logos of the companies) appear to be copyrighted based on the copyright notices on the A Better Fort and BAALS websites and the lack of any specific release of copyright on the 3G website. So I have tagged them for deletion. If the copyright issue is sorted out they can be undeleted.--ukexpat (talk) 19:16, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted pages and revision history[edit]

I don't think I've asked this before. If I delete an article, then restore it, including all revisions, why does the delete not show up in the revision history? See here. I'm used to being able to see the delete history by clicking on the "deleted edits" link (or something like that) in the upper left of the screen when other administrators have deleted it and it was recreated.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:24, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion event itself is registered in the deletion log and not the page history. If there are no longer any deleted edits then I don't think the page history ever indicated the page had previously been deleted. The page history for admins only displays "View or restore X deleted edits?" when there still deleted edits like in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Womanizer&action=history. If all deleted revisions have been restored then you have to click "View logs for this page" to see whether there is a deletion log. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand now what I need to do to see the deletion, but I'm having trouble following the reason (sorry). Is it the fact that it was restored rather than recreated that makes it different?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:07, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can say that. In general, the fact that matters is whether all deleted revisions have currently been restored so there are no longer any deleted revisions to display. "View or restore X deleted edits?" would not make sense if X is 0. It would sometimes be helpful if the page history indicated a past deletion even in cases where there are currently no deleted edits, but that doesn't happen. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:38, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As always, thanks for sharing your extensive knowledge and helping others understand it.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:51, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it contributes to confusion that Special:Undelete/Womanizer (the result of clicking "View or restore X deleted edits?" in the page history) displays both "Deletion log" and "Page history" in separate sections, but "View or restore X deleted edits?" was only displayed in the page history because the "Page history" section has deleted edits. The software's purpose for displaying "View or restore X deleted edits?" is to provide access to the "Page history" part when it's non-empty, and it's just a feature that the deletion log is also shown on the same page. Compare to Special:Undelete/Martin D. Burke which only shows a deletion log. The "Page history" part is empty because all revisions were restored, so there is no "View or restore X deleted edits?" on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Martin_D._Burke&action=history. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:57, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]