Help desk
< October 5	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 7 >

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.

October 6

Inaccurate Article

Greetings, I'm Dr. Mitch Seal and am a representative of the "Joint Medical Education and Training Center". The article is quite inaccurate. The title of the article is "Joint Medical Education and Training Center" and describes the Medical Education & Training Campus. I'm editing the article body, but I can't change the title. If we can't change the title we need to delete the article all together.

Sincerely,

Dr. Mitch Seal [Phone number removed] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.65.201.11 (talk) 00:21, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go to Wikipedia:Requested moves. They've got some instructions there for requesting a move, which is basically a change in page title. You can't do it yourself because you don't have an account. To get an account, go to Special:UserLogin and follow the directions there. Hope this helps! --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 00:27, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've tagged the article as having no references. In reality, it has three, but none of them works.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:53, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Seal, please read up about conflict of interest. It's fine for you to correct straight errors of fact in the article (preferable with independent references) but you need to be very cautious about making any other kind of change directly. --ColinFine (talk) 06:57, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the article, according to what the official web site calls the facility, to Medical Education and Training Campus. Dismas|^(talk) 07:39, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jeweller article

Hi I have just completed a history piece regarding a jeweller and it has come up with a warning message about promotion. Please can you advise why my below is any different to Fhinds or HSamuel, which is very similar? Thank you for taking your time in answering this question as I do not want to offend anyone or be rejected as I have clicked the wrong section. Look forward to your response. Regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrightsthejewellers (talk • contribs) 00:18, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I don't see it in your contribs (a list of edits you have made to Wikipedia). I'm guessing the article got deleted. What was the title? (Oh, in case you didn't know, you don't have to type out full links to Wikipedia articles on here. Just put the title in a set of double brackets. So [[Dog]] displays as Dog and links to [1].)

Back to your question: the tag might have been replaced because it sounded a little promotional. Wikipedia tends to shy away from that sort of stuff because it's supposed to be a pretty neutral encyclopedia. Also, your username indicates you might have a personal connection to the subject, but I might be wrong. It's considered acceptable for a jeweller to write about the history of jewellery, but it's best for that jeweller not to edit pages about his/her copany, etc. See Wikipedia's conflict-of-interest policy for more information if I'm confusing you

Hope this helps

--- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 00:53, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also cannot find the article, or a record of its having been deleted. If you want us to look further, please reply here with a link, by copying exactly the title at the top of the page, and pasting it here inside double square brackets: then we can look at the article and see who has done what to it.

Articles are tagged, (and considered for deletion, if approprate) on their own merits. "Other stuff exists" is not regarded as a strong argument.

In any case, I have just tagged the article F. Hinds: in its present form (without references, and hence no establishing of notability) it should not be in Wikipedia. It seems likely to me that it does meet our criteria of notability - hence I have not nominated it for deletion - but I have not been able to find the requisite references. Your company may or may not meet those criteria; but in order to be kept the article must reference sufficient independent reliable sources to establish notability, and be written in a neutral encyclopaedic tone.

You should also read our article on conflict of interest: since you appear to be connected with the company it will be very hard for you to write an article in the right way. Finally, your username appears to violate our policies, as it appears to be promotional, and possibly for multiple users.

Sorry to give you all this probably unwelcome feedback; but Wikipedia is a huge enterprise, and needs to be regulated. It is also an encyclopaedia not a directory or advertising medium, and anybody who comes to it for the purpose of promoting anything (be it a company or anything else) is likely to be disappointed. --ColinFine (talk) 07:41, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The contributor may not have got as far as creating the article. According to this log entry, one of the edit filters noticed that the proposed article title Wrights the jewellers was very similar to the user's name. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:20, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The_No._1_Ladies'_Detective_Agency_(TV_series)

Hi! I think The_No._1_Ladies'_Detective_Agency_(TV_series) should go under the category Category:2008_Botswana_television_series_debuts because it is a Botswana television series and it is filmed and set in Botswana. I also think it should go under the category Category:Botswana_LGBT-related_television_programs because there is a gay character in it called BK_(The_No._1_Ladies'_Detective_Agency). Let me know what you think. Thanks!Neptunekh2 (talk) 02:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you be bold and do it yourself? To add a category to an article, place the category's name at the bottom of the page, surrounded by two brackets. For example, [[Category:2008 Botswana television series debuts]]. Hope this helps! --- cymru lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 03:23, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

nominate for deletion

How do I nominate a page for deletion? 72.194.215.153 (talk) 02:10, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:AFD Dismas|^(talk) 02:19, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you would like to start a deletion discussion regarding an article, take a look at WP:AFDHOWTO; it outlines, step by step, what needs to be done to have an article listed for deletion in a discussion. When the discussion is initiated, other editors will participate and discuss the article. Note that what I just linked to pertains only to articles; you'll have to see this list if you wish to place a non-article page for deletion. For some extra tips or information on deletion, you can check out Wikipedia:Guide to deletion and Wikipedia:Deletion policy ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:29, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to answers for new article "National Association of Real Estate Brokers (NAREB)"

First thanks for the information regarding how to "move" an article. However, I'm have both a question and concern. (see original question below "Follow up to question asked 10/4/10 re can't figure out how to publish final article???)

First, my concern. This is my first article for Wikipedia. I have been working on it since August of this year... approximately 2 months. Referring to the thread that has been accumulated its clear that I've received a lot of input and recommendations on how to write the article. I have taken all of the comments and addressed them accordingly because I wanted this to be as "perfect" as perfect can be within this context. However, I'm concerned about, what I'm perceiving as what is increasing being presented as personal opinions. Specifically, one person comments that the article is too promotional, I make the changes. Then another person comments that the article is not. Then another person comments there needs to be third party references. Fair point, however, once those changes have been made, someone else comes along and alters. Last, someone offers constructive criticism, links an example of how the change should be made, and then offers to "move" the finalized article for me, but once it is made, someone else comments that now the tone of the article needs work! Quite frankly, at this juncture, there is obviously a lack of consistency and a strong theme of "opinion" in this process that is making it difficult, at best, to contribute, and reach any kind of final positive outcome.

My question...what gives?

collapsing repost of prior questions and answers

"Follow up to question asked 10/4/10 re can't figure out how to publish final article??

Though the answers I received worked, when I went out to Internet and Googled the article using the new title (National Association of Real Estate Brokers (NAREB)) for the "redirect", I noted that the old "User Flossie Bell..." comes up as a searched document! When I clicked on it I was taken to a brief page with a link redirecting to the moved new page. Is this supposed to happen? I thought the old page would cease to exist. Did I screw up? If so, how do I fix it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flossie Bell (talk • contribs) 03:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC) A page move turns the old page into a redirect page and doesn't normally delete the page (only administrators can do that). Do you want the redirects at User:Flossie Bell/National association of real estate brokers and User:Flossie Bell/National association of real estate brokers to be deleted? Then they will be removed from Google's search index when Google discovers they are deleted, but Wikipedia does not control when this happens. Clicking "Cached" on Google's search results page currently shows that Google last indexed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Flossie_Bell/National_association_of_real_estate_brokers on 12 September where it still contained your draft article. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:39, 5 October 2010 (UTC) I have moved the article to National Association of Real Estate Brokers (removing the acronym from the title) and created a redirect at NAREB. The tone of the article needs work IMHO. – ukexpat (talk) 15:34, 5 October 2010 (UTC)" [edit]

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Flossie Bell (talk • contribs) 02:55, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What gives is that this is how a collaborative project works. You created the article in user space, it was moved, eventually, to the correct title per naming conventions and tagged with a maintenance tag (both by me). IMHO the tone of the article is a little promotional, but reasonable minds can differ on that. Once you create an article it is almost a certainty that it will be edited by others. As it says below the "Submit" button, albeit in a small font, If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here. All text that you did not write yourself, except brief excerpts, must be available under terms consistent with Wikipedia's Terms of Use before you submit it. – ukexpat (talk) 16:51, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright

The personal page has a skype link with an email address. I do not want personal information like email address divulged. Also, I have copyright on images, but don't know how to be allowed to upload. Not interested in lots of uploading, just one page, one picture. And this because I was asked somehow if I have the copyright to the picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tessabell (talk • contribs) 12:46, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If an email address has been disclosed improperly within Wikipedia, the page Wikipedia:Requests for oversight explains how to contact an administrator privately to have it removed. If the email has been disclosed at some other site, contact the owners or administrators of that site. Do not post any more details here.

If you own the copyright to a picture and want it to appear in Wikipedia, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:45, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, I have removed a large chunk of text from Emma Bell as it is a copyvio from http://emmabell.net/blog/biography – ukexpat (talk) 17:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why my changes have disappeared

I have made some changes to my few topics and one of them have no more changes i had made....what happened to them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aamirsq (talk • contribs) 12:51, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are adding material without any reliable sources. In one article, all you did was add a long list of how many kilometers it was to other villages, which is not encyclopedic content and has been removed. Any expressions of personal opinion will also be removed. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:58, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A place called OFEN before WWII,it was in Germany close to the former city of Danzig.I cannot find it in any of your maps of Germany or Poland

Hallo.I am searching for the birth place of my father called OFEN.Before WWII it was located in Germany,close by the city of Danzig. I know that actually Danzig is called GDANSK (in Poland),but I cannot find the searched location of OFEN in the Wikipedia maps.Could be that this has also changed the name? My father's parents are buried there and I would like to visit the place.Can you help me with this.Thanks.Regards.Frida —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.194.158.134 (talk) 14:42, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if this is the answer you're looking for but the article about Buda (German translation = Ofen) describes it as the western part of Budapest. CaptRik (talk) 15:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look on the German Wikipedia, it says "the German name of the place Piece (formerly Ofen, district Prussian Stargard, Pomerania), today part of Kaliska in Poland". See Starogard Gdański for Prussian Stargard, and Piece, Pomeranian Voivodeship. There are several places called Piece or Kaliska, but this seems to be the one. Best wishes for your travels. DuncanHill (talk) 15:43, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the folks who hang out at the Reference Desk can help? – ukexpat (talk) 16:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removing 'stub' status

I would like to know how to remove the 'stub' status of a specific article. The article in question is Sound On Sound which is displaying as a stub despite being a lengthy article.

Thanks in advance!

SOSJennifer (talk) 15:40, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If an article is clearly not a stub, you can just remove the stub template, and it looks like that article really isn't a stub. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 ^(Contact) 15:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

or by replacing with class=C for example-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 16:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken off the Stub template, feel free to change the rating on the Project template on the Talk page. IMHO it clearly rates at least as Start class. Roger (talk) 16:27, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wapedia vs Wikipedia

A few weeks ago I created a new page on James Eccles and was pleased to see that it went straight in at no 3 on Google if you searched for "James Eccles". It is still at no 3, but now Google links to Wapedia not the Wikipedia page (which has disappeared off the radar, although the Wapedia links to it if you look hard enough). Anyone care to say why this has occurred? I can't say that I view it as an encouraging development, what with the adverts and all (I dare say I might if I owned a mobile phone). Ericoides 16:21, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't worry about Google search rankings. We are here to build an encyclopedia, not engage in a Google ranking contest. – ukexpat (talk) 17:01, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You quite misunderstand the purpose of my question. I'm concerned about finding articles; given that Google is the no 1 search engine, it's distressing that it doesn't find the best source of info on an individual in the best medium, throwing up instead an inferior copy containing advertising. If you had read my question, it was about why this has happened. Please keep your condescending tone to yourself. Ericoides 17:44, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a question you would need to ask google since they control how they rank the articles that show up on the search engine. Wikipedia has no control over how google ranks. ~~ GB fan ~~ 17:48, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It strikes me as odd, however, that one day it's there and the next day it's not. I guess it's 1. because of the transition to mobiles and 2. because Google benefits from the advertising. But then why not have the Wapedia link from the get-go? Ericoides 18:00, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google's page-ranking algorithms are a well-guarded trade secret (for understandable reasons) and so figuring out why the Wapedia page would beat the Wikipedia page for a specific article is a pretty futile exercise. There are some methods out there for attempting to "game" Google's search algorithm, but this is not really why Wikipedia exists. --Jayron32 19:41, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(←) PageRank is under patent, so at least some of the details are available to the public. The ranking of a page has something to do with the number of links to it, and the ranking of the pages containing those links. New articles on Wikipedia typically have few backlinks; Special:WhatLinksHere/James Eccles shows a start. I suppose you could find all the relevant Wikipedia articles which could legitimately link to the James Eccles article and add the links. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (linking) for what constitutes a legitimate link. We should not add spurious links just in an attempt to pump up an article's PageRank. Incidentally, the James Eccles article appeared sixth in the Google search results when I checked it just now. I don't see anything about Wapedia on the first results page. There seems to be an artist by the same name who has some non-Wikipedia pages that Google ranks higher. I agree with the other helpers' opinion that on Wikipedia we don't care too much what Google does since we have no real control over it. --Teratornis (talk) 00:45, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I'm not interested in artificially upping the links or anything like that. I was just wondering if there was a trend to Google migrating over to Wapedia links as opposed to WIkipedia. I'd have thought that people might have noticed whether or not this was a trend, and whether there was a reason behind it. That's all. Oddly, putting the same info into the search engine today brings up the Wikipedia page not the Wapedia page. All seems like pot luck. Never mind, I'll carry on building this encyclopedia, as ukexpat advised. Ericoides 07:14, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Important Band Missing

I have just been looking at your Punk Bands listing L to Z and for some reason "Public Image LTD" isn't listed. How come?

DannY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.99.179.52 (talk) 17:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because no one has added a link to Public Image Ltd to List of punk rock bands, L–Z yet. But you can. --Teratornis (talk) 17:10, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh but wait. List of punk rock bands, L–Z says not to add Post-punk bands, which it seems Public Image Ltd is. I have no idea actually as I've never heard of them. --Teratornis (talk) 17:14, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PIL is the band formed by John Lydon (previously Johnny Rotten) after the Sex Pistols. Rojomoke (talk) 17:48, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is also musically not considered a true "punk" band under most reliable sources. Other examples of punk artists who did non-punk work include Big Audio Dynamite, which was Mick Jones's post-Clash band, or much of John Doe's post- X alt.country work. Just because musicians once played a certain kind of music, doesn't mean that they always play the same kind of music. --Jayron32 19:37, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect categorization

Shouldn't Category:Redirects from alternative spellings be a subcategory of Category:Redirects from alternative names? I came here following the advice on the talk page. --M4gnum0n (talk) 17:25, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't think so. An alternative spelling ("Ukexxpat" for example) is not necessarily an alternative name ("Ukexpat", also known as "the editor who hangs out a lot at the Help Desk"). – ukexpat (talk) 18:12, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, --M4gnum0n (talk) 21:39, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Demeaning and Inappropriate Description Of Tyler Perry BIO

I Cruising through Wikipedia today Oct 6, 2010 on Producer/Actor Tyler Perry Opening read this: Tyler Perry (born Emmitt Perry, Jr. September 13, 1969) is an American [redacted] actor, director, playwright, screenwriter, producer, and author.[1] Already a successful artist in Southern theatre, Perry began to make national celebrity status in 2005 with the release of his first movie, Diary of a Mad Black Woman. In 2009, Perry was ranked by Forbes magazine as the sixth highest-paid man in Hollywood.[2] As of July 2009[update], Perry's films had grossed nearly $400 million worldwide.[3]

Totally out of line and this needs to be changed. If I was to have my 10 year old look up this info or other info for a report this is what it states about him. Appalling!!!

Thanks

Alexis —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.243.175.44 (talk) 18:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was vandalism and it was in the article for 4 minutes and was reverted six minutes before you posted this. ~~ GB fan ~~ 18:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And the revision has been deleted; the offending term does not even appear in the history. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 19:41, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For future reference, should you see this kind of vandalism (a personal attack, defamation or libellous accusations) then you can report it via the links at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight. In this case, I deleted the revision in the article, along with the copy of the text on this page, so that it is not publicly visible in the article history. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 09:13, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Updates to family member's article (not Tyler Perry's)

There is a page about my Father on here he is now 91 and I would like to edit the page and bring it up to date. I did edit it once but the changes never came through. Can you advise me on how I should go about this —Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.45.243.93 (talk) 19:16, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We'd need more information: What is the name of the article you wish to update? UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 19:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You need to be very careful about editing pages about people you are closely associated with: please read WP:conflict of interest and WP:verifiability. --ColinFine (talk) 23:09, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editing refs

Can you please tell me how to enter new references when I see Reflist in double curly brackets.JFB80 (talk) 19:47, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does Referencing for beginners help? – ukexpat (talk) 19:57, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to enter the actual reference in the text between a <ref> tag and a </ref> tag. The {{reflist}} is automagical code that displays text between the two ref tags. TN X Man 20:08, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to explain in a bit more detail. The references are added to the text, directly next to statements or paragraphs they support, using <ref> and </ref> tags to mark them. In the article, these are displayed by little footnotes. The template {{reflist}} added to the end of the article colates and displays all of the references within the article in a numbered list whereby the numbers correspond to the footnote numbers in the text. --Jayron32 20:12, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]