Help desk
< January 25	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 27 >

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 26

Deleted edits

This is probably a dumb question, but what exactly are deleted edits? Are they edits to deleted pages? I know they are not edits that have been reverted or undone. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 00:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, deleted edits are edits made to pages that have since been deleted. --Mysdaao ^talk 00:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And they include all edits (including those that have been reverted or undone). – ukexpat (talk) 14:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Existing articles in sandbox

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 04:50, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Is it against policy to import an existing article into one's sand box to for editing purposes?~~ Thanks Tiderolls 00:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. I think I found the answer. Thanks Tiderolls 00:34, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Page for copyright owners donating material?

I've been contacted by a user who says that s/he is the heir of a dead photographer and thus the copyright holder to an image that s/he wishes to release under a free license. What's the page that details the standard process for copyright holders who wish to donate images and text? I've looked at WP:IOWN, and I'm not sure that this is it (there's nothing about heirs, for example), and I'm not sure that OTRS is sufficient. Nyttend (talk) 01:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. --Mysdaao ^talk 01:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Correct my band's entry

Resolved

– Marking this as resolved as the OP has now been blocked for a violation of the username policy. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 04:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hello wikipedia i am a current member of the band xiu xiu for which there is an entry on wikipedia. there are several notations that are irrelevant or are false and i have tried several times to update and correct and complete the entry but every edit i make is reverted to its original. what can i do, as a first hand source, to complete and correct my band's entry and have these edits remain? frequently in interviews people will ask questions based on the site that i will then have to clarify or correct. thank you! Xiuxiufanforlife (talk) 01:15, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple things you can do:

Leave a message on the article's discussion page about who you are and what you are doing, and then edit the article again.
Find news articles about your band to use as citations for the info on your article.

I'm too busy at the moment to edit the article myself, but please leave a message on my talk page if you have future issues, and I'll help you fix things up.

Awickert (talk) 04:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:COI, that is probably why your edits are being reverted. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 04:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are the text/paragraphs shrinking on the page I edited?

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 04:49, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

On this page I edited:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Williams_%28artist%29

After a certain point, the text and paragraphs seem to shrink and indent. The page did not do this before edit and does not appear this way in the edit window. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

~~Sketch V~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sketch V (talk • contribs) 01:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In two places on the page you used the <blockquote> function without closing it with </blockquote>. It's fixed now. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much! didn't catch that.

~~Sketch V~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sketch V (talk • contribs) 01:47, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

requesting permission to upload image

Hi, I am a registered user, but not autoconfirmed. I want to finish an article and need to upload an image to insert into the article. How do I obtain this permission? —Preceding unsigned comment added by SysBio (talk • contribs) 03:30, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be autoconfirmed when it is at least four days old and has made at least ten edits. Your account is old enough but has made four edits. Make six more edits to any page on Wikipedia and your account will be autoconfirmed. If you don't wish to do this, you can also make a request at Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. --Mysdaao ^talk 03:43, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Confirmed to be exact. I can put in a request for you if you like. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 05:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 14:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Helpdesk, does anybody know how I could get the userboxes (under the header 'About Me') into the center of my userpage? Thanks! JulieSpaulding (talk) 03:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've centered them for you. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

Thanks! JulieSpaulding (talk) 06:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

twas the night before christmas

I wanted to see on my screen the verses of this poem but saw only data about it. How can I achieve this?

Thank you,

Geraald Buckley <redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.173.192.59 (talk) 07:00, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not include contact details in your questions. We are unable to provide answers by any off-wiki medium and this page is highly visible across the internet. The details have been removed, but if you want them to be permanently removed from the page history, please email oversight-l

lists.wikimedia.org.

Reformatted to remove initial spaces --ColinFine (talk) 08:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably the same user, though under a different IP, asked the same question on the Humanities ref desk:[1] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Terminology for U.S.-centricity problem?

When editing English-language articles I sometimes encounter language that assumes that the reader is from the United States. I correct such language when I find it. I know there must be a Widipedia term for this error (assuming that the reader is from the United States). I never know what to put in the Edit Summary to explain what I fixed. I have already looked and looked in the Wikipedia Help but haven't found a reference to this problem. What is the term, please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sylviaa (talk • contribs) 07:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a "problem", exactly. As I recall, the editing rules say that an article on a subject that's clearly American should be in American English (favor instead of favour, et al.) If it's not so easy to make that distinction, the standard procedure is that once someone starts an article, it stays in whatever version of English it was in, unless a good reason arises to change it. As an example of the standard, if you're writing about the President, you would use American English. If it's about the Queen, you would use British English. If you're writing about the Moon, you would probably go with whatever the article started with, and the important thing is to keep it consistent. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:04, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If what you are talking about is different varieties of English (as Bugs assumed), look at WP:MOSVAR. But I read your question about something a bit different: referring to things which are familiar to Americans but not necessarily to others in ways that make no concession to non-Americans. I don't know of a discussion on this ssue. --ColinFine (talk) 08:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Helping to add photos to Wikipedia (Guideline clarification)

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 19:32, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Help Desk!

I've been helping contribute to Wikipedia for a long time. Growing bored of only adding text/facts, I decided to branch out and document some of the local points of interest in my area. I have read your guidelines on taking/editing photos, but I have a few questions that need some clarification.

1) In taking photos of a well known person, (i.e., a sports figure), is permission needed from that person to submit a photo? 2) Does Wikipedia strive to have a photo of every "person, place, and object"? Are there some things that are excluded from the list of things needing a picture? (For example, I can take a picture for Chestnut Ridge Park and Bishop Timon – St. Jude High School. While not big articles in their own right, shouldn't they still have pictures?)

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Streetsabre (talk • contribs) 07:56, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your second query, it's fine to have photos of things that don't have "big articles" (around here those short articles are called "stubs"). For instance, I've added photos of Champlain Valley Union High School, Hinesburg, Vermont, and Monkton, Vermont. The articles are barely more than population figures and yet, they have images. The high school article was quite a bit smaller when the images were added and look at what's there now. Dismas|^(talk) 08:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To answer your first question. Depends first of all on the country of origin of the photograph, wether or not it is required, but almost everywere you have to consider Personality rights. If the well known figure is at a public space, where he reasonably can be assumed to be photographed (sporter at sportsvenue for instance. Actress at the red carpet etc..) then it is almost always OK. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 12:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to be uploading free images (ie. with no copyright - like the ones you have mentioned) please consider uploading them to the Commons where they can be used by all Wikimedia projects. You could also upload several pictures on the same topic there, even if, say, only one is used in an article. Then, when an article gets longer, it may require additional pictures. You'd need to register there and then uploading is as simple as it is here. Once an image is uploaded at the Commons, you can link to it here just by using [[file:example.jpg]] and it automatically links to the image on Commons. Pictures are helpful on any article however small. --Beloved Freak 12:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not necessary to create a separate account on Commons, just head over to Special:MergeAccount to enable unified login. Should work for all Wikimedia projects, except where your current user name is already taken on a particular project. – ukexpat (talk) 14:28, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all your help everyone! I'll be sure to take everything into account as I go on a photo scavenger hunt across Buffalo :D Streetsabre (talk) 22:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Messages on my user talk page about image copyright

I have the following message on my "User talk:Salizaf" [I would like to state that the image is my property, and I do not wish any copyright restrictions put on it. In other words, - GNU Free Documentation License and - Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license may be applied on it] Its description may be changed to File:Dr. S Z Hasan.jpg if need be. The message I got is reproduced below:

Messages on talk page

License tagging for Image:Dr S Z Hasan--Col-jpg.jpg This image is now in the public domain because its term of copyright has expired in Pakistan. According to Pakistani copyright laws, all photographs enter the public domain fifty years after they were published, and all non-photographic works enter the public domain fifty years after the death of the creator.

Thanks for uploading Image:Dr S Z Hasan--Col-jpg.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Wikipedia:Image use policy Wikipedia:Image copyright tags This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Dr S Z Hasan--Ovl -jpeg.jpg Thanks for uploading Image:Dr S Z Hasan--Ovl -jpeg.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Wikipedia:Image use policy Wikipedia:Image copyright tags This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Dr. S Z Hasan -- Col-jpg.jpg' Thanks for uploading Image:Dr. S Z Hasan -- Col-jpg.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

Wikipedia:Image use policy Wikipedia:Image copyright tags This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 11:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Syed Zafar-ul-Hasan A "{{prod}}" template has been added to the article Syed Zafar-ul-Hasan, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but yours may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. 172.164.240.39 02:00, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Syed Zafarul Hasan In the article Deaths of philosophers, you wrote that he "died after an attack of paralysis". However this is not stated in the article Syed Zafarul Hasan, and therefore it is unreferenced. If you have a reference for this information, please add it to the respective article on him. If the statement cannot be referenced, I will have to remove his name from the list Deaths of philosophers. Thank you. --Omnipaedista (talk) 14:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Salizaf (talk) 08:36, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for contacting us about this. If you want to donate a picture for which you are the copyright owner to Wikipedia, you need to follow the instructions given at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials, which explains how you can verify that you are indeed the copyright owner. If you have any further questions about this particular issue, you might be better off asking at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions as the folks who contribute to that noticeboard are more knowledgeable in copyright matters than most of us who answer questions here! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

checkuser check

Can't find the answer I'm looking for, so here goes: is there a way to find out wether a vandalizing IP is already being investigated? IP in question is 83.104.72.243; currently blocked, far as I can tell. Regards, --G-41614 (talk) 10:32, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If they are being investigated, it would be listed at WP:SPI. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

thnx, Steve --G-41614 (talk) 14:06, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suitable content for new page

Resolved

– For this page anyway. – ukexpat (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Wikipedia:Requests for feedback

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:James_Duke_Mason

An administrator told me on that page to create my desired content in my "user space" and then "ask at the Help Desk for comment as to suitability". That is what I am doing now. This is what I would like my desired content to look like:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:C4162/James_Duke_Mason

Please consider my request. If you approve, I will, as the administrator told me to, "use WP:RM to get it moved OR". —Preceding unsigned comment added by C4162 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to WP:RFF. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 14:47, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MySpace question

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 19:30, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

someone is using my email address om myspace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.137.56.125 (talk) 14:42, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our roughly three million articles, and thought that we were directly 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 a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand 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. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 14:47, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go here and contact their help desk. – ukexpat (talk) 14:48, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rogue letter on article page

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 16:13, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at BYG Actuel; under the Discography heading, but before the table, there is a lower case Y. I can't see where it's coming from and when I edit the page I can't see it in the raw text. Can anyone help remove it, please? Many thanks, --Richardrj ^talk ^email 14:47, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was hard to find, but I fixed it with this edit. – ukexpat (talk) 14:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks. Would never have spotted that, since it was in with the table data but appeared outside it. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 14:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How do you link to a table?

How do you link to a table? I don't mean linking from a table. Navstradomous (talk) 17:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You need to make sure that the table is in a specific section (with a section header using == Section ==) and then you can link to it by using [[Article-name#Section]] -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 17:51, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So I'm guessing you can't directly link to a table, only to a section. Navstradomous (talk) 18:06, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I obviously didn't phrase that properly! You can't link to a table directly, but if it's in a section (which has a heading, in the same way that this section has the heading == How do you link to a table? ==) then you can link to the section. If you could give more details of which table, in which article/page, then we could give more specific instructions. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 18:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My company has their own Wiki and currently they have an image as their table. I was planning on converting them into wiki format. Usually in the article, it would say See Table 1. The issue is certain articles have more than 1 table in each section. Navstradomous (talk) 18:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can if you add a hidden anchor (a supressed section heading), see Wikipedia:Anchor for more info. Nanonic (talk) 18:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually most modern browsers can link to any block element (including tables). You just add id="name" to the table. Wether or not that is advisable to actually do.... Not sure. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 20:47, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How to use image in foreign Wikipedia article on English version of same article

Resolved

– Mysdaao ^talk 19:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Want to add photos, for example http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DIBLA7_Salone_Automobile_Torino_1968.jpg, to English Wikipedia article, novice contributor Hoov23 (talk) 18:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can't add an image from another language Wikipedia to an English Wikipedia article. The image has to be uploaded either to the English Wikipedia or to Wikimedia Commons. --Mysdaao ^talk 18:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the image on It Wikipedia has been tagged for upload to Commons. – ukexpat (talk) 19:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is, but File:DIBLA7_Salone_Automobile_Torino_1968.jpg on the Italian Wikipedia has been tagged for moving to Commons since 2006. However, the user has uploaded it to Commons as File:DIBLA7 Salone Automobile Torino 1968.jpg and used the image in Di Blasi Industriale S.r.l.. --Mysdaao ^talk 19:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

clinical trial studies

I note a lot of "papers" written to support this technology. Where are the clinical trial studies that would support the accuracy rate claimed??? I cannot find any. Could you please direct me to either the clinical trial studies themselves, or the founder of this supposedly unfailable technology Kari Mullis. Thank you S Olson <removed e-mail address>

Please do not include contact details in your questions. We are unable to provide answers by any off-wiki medium and this page is highly visible across the internet. The details have been removed, but if you wish for them to be permanently removed from the page history, email this address.

Hello. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our roughly three million articles, and thought that we were directly 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 a help desk for asking questions related to using the encyclopedia. Thus, we have no inside track on the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the left hand 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. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 18:10, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How can I download entire wikipedia to hard disk

Is there any way I can download entire wikipedia to hard disk do that I don't have to waste time connecting to the internet? Will you ship a hard copy of the encyclopedia to an address I mention? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Discomboulate (talk • contribs) 18:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:DUMP. – ukexpat (talk) 18:11, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) You can download the entire Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:DUMP) - but bear in mind that the entire Wikipedia takes up a lot of space - it takes up more than 2.8 TB when uncompressed. A hard copy is not available - it would need over a thousand volumes (see Wikipedia:Size_in_volumes) -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 18:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting removal of unverifiable non-fact

Resolved

– – ukexpat (talk) 19:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have a request to make about the article Rollies, which currently states that the subject, a brand of cigarette rolling papers, is "part of the Rolling Supreme family of products which is related to Conwood." I don't know a great deal about Rollies, though I have verified this brand is owned by a company called Rolling Supreme.[2] However, the reference to Conwood makes no sense; Conwood is/was an unrelated company now named American Snuff Company that makes smokeless tobacco. Unsurprisingly, a Google search[3] reveals the top combined mentions for Rolling Supreme and Conwood are this Wikipedia article and its mirrors. I happen to work with Reynolds American, which owns American Snuff Company, so I'd prefer not to remove this personally unless someone else here says OK. Or, if someone else is willing to simply remove this reference to Conwood, I would appreciate it greatly. --Piedmont NC (talk) 18:13, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the information, as it is unsourced. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 18:16, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! --Piedmont NC (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And well done for your exemplary behaviour in stating your potential conflict of interest, and asking here! (You could also have asked on the article's talk page). --ColinFine (talk) 22:50, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Very unusual edit summary

What's going on with the edit summary in this diff? It appears differently in the history, but both are very unusual, and I don't know what's happened. I've scrolled down in my browser, so I know that it's not something stuck to my computer screen. Nyttend (talk) 18:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's just a bunch of Unicode characters stuffed in there for some odd reason. The editor was probably just trying to be funny. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 18:53, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of passengers

I want to see the passengers list of crash plane in 2000 august 23. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.155.9.70 (talk) 18:23, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might find what you are looking for in the article about Gulf Air Flight 072. If you cannot find the answer there, you can try asking your question at Wikipedia's Reference Desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except about how to use Wikipedia, which is what this help desk is for). I hope this helps. --Mysdaao ^talk 18:27, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Important information is missing in article on Wikipedia about Barbie doll

The article on Barbie omits a very important era where BillyBoy* designed the first designer Barbies, created a show which toured Europe and the USA and resulted in a painting by Andy Warhol ...made for BillyBoy*, which is still is in his possession. He had most the designers and artists of the world dress her, a precedent in 1984, a collection he still owns. He designed the first two dolls with a designer's name on a Mattel Barbie doll box.

He wrote a best selling book in many languages, the first which talks about Barbie as a sociological phenomeon and also creating the popularity of collecting the doll.

The way in which Barbie is perceived now and the dolls Mattel creates now, are from his seminal work of the 1980s. This info is lacking in the article on Barbie doll on Wikipedia.

I have tried adding this information by editing the article. The reply was that it seemed off-topic. It is not off-topic.

Do I need to create an entire article on Wikipedia just for this or does it get put into the existing article?

Alec jiri (talk) 18:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you write up the text that you want to add to the article in a user subpage, add properly cited references from reliable sources, then head back to the article's talk page and ask for your text to be reviewed with a view to being added to the article? – ukexpat (talk) 19:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

adding my social network to a list of social networking websites

Resolved

– User name blocked as a spam name – ukexpat (talk) 16:37, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I was looking at the wikipedia page [4] Which is a list of all Social Networking websites. I noticed that the one that I am apart of is not on that list. I was wondering if I would be able to add it, and how would I go about doing so? my page is http://www.peoplestring.com/?f=website As I am an affiliate of this network I wanted to know if I must get permission from the company to use my link on this list which I will do from the chief marketing officer first. I can also get an accurate accounting of whatever information would be needed to put on the chart. I appreciate your assistance, and look forward to your answers.

All My Best,

Damon Belle —Preceding unsigned comment added by Internetstring (talk • contribs) 21:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're from the company, you probably shouldn't be the one adding it or writing about it (since it would be a conflict of interest, see our Business FAQ for more details). But in general, unless there's already an article in Wikipedia on the PeopleString, it shouldn't be added to that list (since the article should be written first). -- Bfigura ^(talk) 21:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Attack sections

I recently noted the attack page page (:-)). There is a page on an organization (I am not affiliated with it) that I have a long-term interest in improving. In general, it is generally poor and contains some nonsense about the history (overuse of internet sourcing). But I have not has a chance to rewrite this part yet.

However, my question pertains to a section at the end. The section is a collection of any possible scandal that the editor or editors can find. Every once in a while it is added to. There is nothing else on the page of recent history, just this stuff at the end. I suspect that this is someone (or someones) with a beef against the current executive director.

Short of adding in a bunch of innocuous stuff from their press releases to counter-balance, what is the proper thing to do? Mzk1 (talk) 21:08, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please provide the article's name? Generally speaking, WP:NPOV is the governing policy. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 21:19, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

National Council of Young IsraelMzk1 (talk) 20:29, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed the article and made a couple changes. I am assuming that the section you are referring to is the "21st century" section, which seems to include content entirely about "controversial" things going on with the group in the 21st century and neglecting any regular (but notable) non-controversial goings-on. I have removed one of the "controversies" mentioned in that section due to the fact that it was very poorly sourced. As for the other two, the sources seem on quick glance to be fair and therefore I didn't take any action on those. I did, however, add a maintenance template to the section that tags it as being very one-sided. Knowing very little about the topic, I wouldn't be able to add in any balancing content, but it looks like that should be done by someone. I would not go so far as to call the section an "attack" on the group, since it appears to be sourced and added in good faith, but it could certainly do with the addition of some not-so-controversial material. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 05:14, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. One issue there is an over-reliance on internet sources with high-sounding names and doubful quality. If you feel like it, you could look at the comment on the history that I put there (under an IP). I hope to completely rewrite the history when I have enough time.Mzk1 (talk) 18:06, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would be happy to, but I cannot find which edit you are referring to. It looks like the last edits to the article by IP addresses were a while back and involved adding the controversy section that I removed, as well as a few external links. Could you provide some more info about what you did? If you are familiar with how to link to the diff, that would be ideal (see Help:Diff). --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 06:39, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A possible suggestion

Hi there I wanted to suggest an idea for wikipedia.org. I was wondering if it has ever been considered to get the wikipedia globe in the upper left hand corner of the website to start rotating, like a planet or something like that. I think it would look really cool, or have a banner/ticker of somesort that scrolls the topics users are searching for real time on wikipedia.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.184.238.132 (talk) 21:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That would be sort of interesting, but I think that would seriously slow down performance. Also, for people who have very slow connections, like me, pages would take much longer to load. However, one interesting Wikipedia logo is File:Bouncywikilogo.gif. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 21:47, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page is only for questions about using Wikipedia, not for general knowledge questions. Thanks! South Bay (talk) 22:20, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And see Commons:Category:Animated Wikipedia logos. It might be possible to change your personal view of the Wikipedia logo by monkeying with your skin or user JavaScript, but you would have to create an account first. There is approximately zero chance you could convince the Wikipedia community to change the logo for everyone. That would be like changing your national anthem. --Teratornis (talk) 23:09, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Content related to climatology.

My comments relate to articles in your website relating to the subject of climate studies and climate change. I feel that Wiki is not the best source for information on the subject and that the information provided in its pages relating to global warming, a controversial issue, are square with the side of those who are proponents of the theory of climate change, and this means that the whole picture is not conveyed. Unfortunately, it would take a lot from me, as a user, to go through and criticize what information has been put on the websites, but honestly I think that there is some bias.

I can provide my two most compelling examples to reinforce my point. On the page "Winter of 2009--2010 in Europe", where the "Causes" are discussed, no reference is made to the assertions by climatologists (from the IPCC, of all places) who assert that the planet is entering a "cooling" phase, and that the winter of 2010 is part of a natural phenonmenon. Instead, the causes are squarely attributed to El Nino. The page on "solar variability" fails to incorporate the fact that proponents of the global warming theory assert that a change in solar variability can affect climate. I hope that this will help and that these pages might be edited. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.196.20.228 (talk) 22:03, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your best bet is to discuss this on the relevant talk pages (Talk:Winter of 2009–2010 in Europe and Talk:Solar variation - I assume the latter is the one you meant) and present reliable and independent sources verifying the facts that you believe need to be added or changed. On the talk page, concensus can be reached on whether the article(s) should be changed. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 22:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Review the rules under WP:EIW#Dispute. On Wikipedia, the editors who win ongoing content disputes (and disputes over climatology are ongoing here) are usually the editors who have put in the most work, and have the most cognitive ability, to understand Wikipedia's rules. As you have not yet learned the correct name of this site, you will be at a disadvantage in any dispute with editors who have learned far more about Wikipedia than that. Not because getting the name right is important in itself, but because you probably haven't learned many other things that your opponents know about Wikipedia. The more controversial the topic, the more you must know about Wikipedia to write about it on Wikipedia, and make your edits stick. (Wikipedia is very much a meritocracy which rewards ability and effort - which makes it somewhat surprising that Wikipedia is often a whipping boy for conservatives who claim in other contexts to deplore the moral hazard of giving people unearned handouts. Wikipedia hands out information for free, but not influence. Would-be influencers must out-work all the other people who are working to influence Wikipedia in other ways. It is an elegant Darwinian competition which free market proponents should relish.) Global warming is a "controversial issue" primarily among nonscientists. Within the scientific establishment, there is little doubt that humans are changing the climate by burning fossil fuels and chopping down forests. That's why virtually all the world's important scientific societies have endorsed the basic conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Until the folks who are still confusing the public are able to convince organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences and the Royal Society to change their official policy statements on climate change, such dissidents will be at a disadvantage when editing on Wikipedia, where authoritative opinions matter a lot more. We see the same thing with other "controversial issues" like Evolution where scientific opinion is largely settled, yet some non-scientific pressure groups continue to attack science. Biologists internally debate a few details of how evolution proceeds (see for example Richard Dawkins vs. Stephen Jay Gould), but there is little scientific argument that evolution occurred and is ongoing. Incidentally, the winter of 2010 has not been unusually cold where I sit. I'll know it's cold when the Ohio River freezes over completely like it last did in the severe winter of 1976. --Teratornis (talk) 00:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted articles log

As I understand it Administrators can access deleted articles in the archive. Is there a log or some kind of oversight of what articles administrators are accessing out of the deletion archive. andyzweb (talk) 23:02, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No. Algebraist 23:17, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

However, if they were to move it to userspace (whether their own, or another user's) then this would show up on the deletion log. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 23:46, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

article for deletion Andrea Rivera

rather than tag this stub for "notability", it seems it might be an article for deletion or speedy deletion. article asserts no notability as a comedian. the one citation is a dead link. a mention of rivera's criticism of the catholic church could be merged into article on the pope at the time i suppose. i've never gone further than a "notability" tag (i.e, never done a speedy deletion or article for deletion request). thanks for help.--98.113.187.11 (talk) 23:14, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This would not be eligible for speedy deletion, as the mention of his criticisms of the Catholic Church would be an assertion of notability. You could still tag it with the notability tag, or propose it for deletion. If you think this might be controversial, you can send it to Articles for Deletion -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 23:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than try and delete it, why not try to improve it? I am sure there are Italian sources for this person, and those could be used as sourcing to try and help establish the notability of this person. ArcAngel (talk) (review) 23:57, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I should have suggested that too... a very quick search yielded this, this and this - the last gives DoB etc... and all of these are from January 2010... I'm sure there's more out there. I don't read Italian, but an Italian-reading editor could find a few refs I feel -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:15, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a References Section to an Existing Article

I am a complete tyro, so please bear with me.

The article on "Meerschaum" is very short, with a paucity of citations.

Several years ago I did extensive research on this subject and have an extensive bibliography, mostly annotated.

1) May I, and if so, how may I, add a references section to an existing article?

2) May I use my existing format or is there a standard template I must retype everything into?

Thank you for your consideration.

Chelovek2010 (talk) 23:29, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion for improving the Meerschaum article. My advice would be to discuss this on the article's talk page (here) and present the information (along with the bibliography) there - a discussion can be held to see if the consensus is to insert it, and how. Without knowing what you want to add, and what references you want to use, I can't advise any further. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 23:49, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Photography source

I am anxious to find the source for your picture of the costume worn by the Harvey Girls depicted in your section on that subject- it is uncredited as to its source. My email is ~~Users email~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.60.192 (talk) 23:52, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Style guidelines#Non-prose components to see why it is allowed in the article ...

I have remove you email as per Wiki-policy ..so i hope you come back here to see message !! ...Buzzzsherman (talk) 23:58, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not include contact details in your questions. We are unable to provide answers by any off-wiki medium and this page is highly visible across the internet. The details have been removed, but if you wish for them to be permanently removed from the page history, email this address. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 00:08, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean by "source"; but if you're referring to File:Harvey-uniform.JPG, the file page indicates that the uniform itself is in the "Arizona Railroad Museum" (by which I presume that the Arizona Railway Museum is meant) and that the photograph was taken by a person named Jot Powers. Deor (talk) 00:52, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]