Page move-protected

Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikipedia Help Desk
  • This page is only for questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia. For other types of questions, use the search box or the Reference desk.
  • Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
  • We are all volunteers, so sometimes replies can take some time. Please be patient. Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.

  • New users: While this is a good place to ask questions, new users may prefer to ask for help at the Teahouse, an area specifically for new users to get help with editing, article creation, and general Wikipedia use, in a friendly environment.
Are you in the right place?
Search Frequently Asked Questions
Search the help desk archives and other help pages

August 15[edit]

Where did my profile on Wiki go?[edit]

I am opera singer Korliss Uecker. My profile was posted several years ago by a publicist. IIt was there recently but now is gone. IIt was a lot of work to edit etc. Where is it? Who can I contact? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:22, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a social media site that has profiles; it is an encyclopedia which has articles on subjects which are condidered notable, meaning that the subject has been the subject of significant coverage by multiple published reliable sources independent of the subject. If you click on the red link to the article Korliss Uecker you will see that the article was deleted because it was created by a banned or blocked user. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:36, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) It was deleted in December 2016 by admin @JzG:. The article had been created by a blocked user circumventing a block. I just need explain the terminology around here as you've used language that can rile people. It's not "your profile", Wikipedia doesn't have profiles, it has encyclopaedic articles about noteworthy subjects that have been covered in reliable independent sources. No one owns an article here, anyone can (and will) edit an article, the subject has no control over the contents whatsoever and is actively discouraged from editing the article. Also seeing as you said it was your publicist, there are Paid editing and Conflict of interest issues. - X201 (talk) 07:38, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
You may also wish to read Wikipedia:Why was the page I created deleted?  Seagull123  Φ  19:18, 15 August 2017 (UTC)


Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection I made a request at this page for protection(Dyslexia), and there are several other editors who have requests as well, is there anyone over there?, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:48, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello Ozzie10aaaa, hope you're well. WP:RFPP is well manned and someone will handle your request soon enough. Having said that, I should also mention that with respect to the article you wish protected, as the vandalizing IP editor has already been blocked, there doesn't seem to be an immediate need for protection. But I'll leave it to the responding administrator at RFPP. If there's anything else you need assistance in, feel free to ask. Thanks. Lourdes 14:08, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:48, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Removal of maintenance template[edit]

I've deleted the references for this page since they were too generic. Should more be added in order for the top template to be removed? It's been there since April 2011 and the team at the MIA are not sure how to rectify the issue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:49, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, your question makes me think that you have some sort of connection with the Motorsport Industry Association, and if so, you have a conflict of interest (COI), and so you must disclose this. If you are paid to edit here, see this page. There's also a page of the help available to editors with COIs. Your edits to the page haven't done much to the overall page, and there are still only two inline citations, but more general references (in the News items section), and so the message about "This article includes a list of references..." ({{more footnotes}}) should still stay on the page in my opinion. However, I am removing the one about the external links ({{external links}}), as I don't see any inappropriate use of external links. If you do have a COI, please read the links about them I've left in this message. Thanks.  Seagull123  Φ  18:54, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Forcing a column break[edit]

Resolved: By Trappist the monk... Lourdes

The two column list at John Tenniel#Book illustrations obviously needs a break just above the "In collaboration" subheading. I tried {{col break}} but it doesn't work, please help. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:28, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Done my first merge... did I miss anything?[edit]



I've helped Nishidani with a merge of Bardi people into Baada. As this is my first merge, would someone mind casting an eye over what I did, and letting me know if I missed anything, or did anything incorrectly? Thanks! Stephen! Coming... 16:32, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Stephen, hello and hope you're doing well. The merge looks neatly done procedurally. Just one small observation; post the merge, the term "Bardi people" suddenly appears in the midst of the article, without a previous connecting explanation. You or Nishidani might wish to consider connecting Baada with Bardi people right in the lead (something like, "also known as Bardi people"). Thanks. Lourdes 07:03, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Done.Nishidani (talk) 07:11, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Stephen! Coming... 11:16, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Google Search Image connected to Wikipedia Page[edit]

Hi there,

When I do a search for The Heckscher Foundation for Children, the logo that appears with the Wikipedia entry is an old version. I've already updated the logo on the Wikipedia page itself so how can I make it sync with the Google search results? Thank you!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SMF0501 (talkcontribs) 17:45, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

@SMF0501: Wikipedia has no control over what appears in Google search results. The message here may be of interest to you. Can I also ask, the logo you uploaded, File:Heckscher Foundation Logo.png, you have tagged with a cc-by-sa-4.0 licence, and you have said it is you own work; however, since this is a company logo, I doubt that you have personally created the work, and at the bottom of the organisation's website it says "© 2017 THE HECKSCHER FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN", with no mention of a Creative Commons licence - so, could you please confirm that the logo has been licenced under the cc-by-sa-4.0 licence? You may wish to see this page about confirming licencing. The logo may be in the public domain (PD-logo) if it doesn't reach the threshold of originality, however, I am not an expert, so you may wish to visit the copyright village pump Wikimedia Commons, or see this page about licencing on Commons.  Seagull123  Φ  18:45, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
This is a rare case where Google did actually get the image from the Wikipedia article. The logo was replaced in the article three days ago. It's possible Google will automatically replace it soon but we have no control over that. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:42, 15 August 2017 (UTC)


Comment: While watching National Geographic on 8/9/2017, cable channel 283, in TN at 4pm central time re: otter, I noticed that the otters were in a sanctuary of mentoring female otter who were acting as mothers teaching the baby otter how to survive. The sanctuary was housed in a, what looked like, large barrel of some kind. MY CONCERN: where the mentors/mother were teaching the baby otters how to crack a shell against the walls of the enclosure, there were chips of paint missing. Hopefully, this is not something that the otter are eating mistakenly. I am just concerned for the otters. You are aware of the affects of paint chips to a human, just concerned about the otters.

Thank you for listening. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:52, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

We're not an otter sanctuary. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:54, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 5.4 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. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:09, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

how to cite a book chapter in multi-author book?[edit]

I want to cite one chapter from a book where each chapter is written by a different author, and then the book is put together by an overall editor. I can't find a template for this (have looked at ) Advice on what to do, please? MerielGJones (talk) 21:11, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

See "Citing a chapter in a book with different authors for different chapters and an editor" at Template:Cite book#Examples. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:14, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you ! Exactly what I wanted. MerielGJones (talk) 21:29, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Please Edit[edit]

NON ALIGNED MOVEMENT PAGE — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:37, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Maybe if you had stuck to sources and discussed changes with other editors, the page wouldn't be locked. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:03, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The article has been protected because of your persistent vandalism. (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) resumed vandalism immediately on expiry of recent block and is apparently the blocked long term abuser (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) & (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), & also (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) & (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) are obviously the same long-term abuser. --David Biddulph (talk) 00:05, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

August 16[edit]

Leatherback sea turtle article[edit]

It has the † witch is the extinct symbol on it but i cant find it in the article and its not extinct as i saw a few on the beach a few months ago (talk) 00:46, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Fixed! It was a probably with the templates used—took a while for me to figure out. Thanks for letting us know! RileyBugz会話投稿記録 00:59, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

What qualifies as trivia, and what is a reliable source?[edit]

I recently made an edit to the page on Neil Degrasse Tyson, where I noted that he made an appearance on a song by Avenged Sevenfold. I understand how this could be seen as trivial, but I thought that it was uncharacteristic enough that people would be interested to know. If someone wanted to look into it, there's a nice story tied to it. For reference, I used a youtube video where a member of the band told an interviewer about it. User Dp76764 undid my edit with the message "GFE, but non-notable trivia. please find a reliable 3rd party source. youtube is not one". While this fact is somewhat trivial, I thought it made for an intriguing window into Tyson's character, as someone who would push boundaries to teach about science. Also, by using a youtube video for reference, I thought that the video of the band member themselves delivering the data was the source, not youtube. I believe my reference was as close to a first party reference as I could get. I have already looked through help articles and such, but I do not know how to communicate with Dp76764 about this issue. If I am in the wrong, I'd like to know why. If I am in the right, I'd like to know the proper way to resolve this issue with the person who reverted my edit. The edits were made on 11 August 2017 Samuel010898 (talk) 00:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I find this rv rather odd based on the edit summary reason: considering the section specifically refers to Tyson's "Media appearances" and the question of "notable trivia" is a fine line, since this is mostly made up of "trivia" in "popular culture". Second, references within this section are cited directly to YouTube (i.e. "Everything wrong with Gravity") I think this editor is simply hashing with semantics, honestly. If they are going to nitpick a section that is mostly trivia and has YouTube videos for reference, then they need to heavily scrub and clean-up the section themselves. That being said, it is easily referenced by a third party to support your content. I say: get right back in there, find that reliable source and reinsert it WP:BOLD. Try these: [1], [2], [3]. There can be no contest regarding these sources. If you have any more difficulty with this edit, notify me on my Talk Page. Good luck! Maineartists (talk) 01:10, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The revert was correct based on the quality of the reference; Youtube does not cut it. Any of the other references given above should though. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 22:57, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Actually the revert was incorrect, and I have restored the cite. It is not enought to say that "Youtube does not cut it." Many YouTube videos are perfectly relaible sources, many more are not. Postings on the official channels of reliable sources are themselves relaible, and their beign on youtube matters no more than the quality of paper that a newspaper is printed on. In this case, the video was on the official channel of Metal Hammer, which is blue-linked and appears to be a relaible source for this sort of thing. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:11, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
DES Thanks. WP needs to begin taking YouTube clips individually into consideration and at their own merit, I believe. There is just too much umbrella blanketing of disqualification at present for the site as an unacceptable source. However, I do hope the other sources I brought will suffice, too. Maineartists (talk) 23:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
I might have reverted this on the grounds of it needing a source that establishes some level of significance, as discussed at WP:IPCV. The text doesn't make it clear to me that his appearance on the album is particularly noteworthy. DonIago (talk) 00:57, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

New version of file (replace photo with rendering to improve resolution)[edit]

I want to contribute to the quality of the Santorini (game) article by adding a high resolution image which is a rendering of a model I made based on the infobox photo in the article. The rendering is (arguably) a replacement for the photo, and I have already added it to the wiki commons. How should I go about adding it to the article? Upload a new version of the existing photo? Replace it on the page?

I'd like for someone to take a look and advise, please. Thanks! Jsejcksn (talk) 01:37, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I find your rendering clearer and better than the photograph currently in the article. Some editors may disagree. I suggest you put your version on the article's talk page and ask for opinions – and if no-one responds for a week or so, just go ahead and make the change. Maproom (talk) 07:13, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, Maproom (talk · contribs). Jsejcksn (talk) 17:25, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hidden links to Wikidata: how to make more obvious?[edit]

So I figured out that the wrong information for a page here was coming from Wikidata, fixed that, then ranted about how arcane that whole process is at Wikidata.

Coming back here I'd love to attempt to make the mysterious more clear.

'Repository' in the infobox at page Blink (web engine) happens to come from Wikidata. There is no indication that that is true, except for maybe the existence in the left sidebar of an item under 'Tools' - "Wikidata item" - which does go to the 'shadow' page over at Wikidata.

?) If perhaps maybe one or more infobox items might have data infiltrated in from Wikidata, is the presence of the link under 'Tools' the trustworthy indication? Or are so many pages here now having tiny pieces from Wikidata that that link's presence is useless as an indication? (Carrot points to Carrot which informs me that a carrot is shaped like a cone. Ah'yep.)

?) Is there any foolproof way to determine whether infobox data is coming from Wikidata, other than comparing the page's source for the infobox with the presence and value of data in the 'shadow' page at Wikidata? This is all very complicated and non-obvious.

If one should happen to peer into the documentation for Template:Infobox_software/doc there are some BTW mentions in descriptions that two values 'might' come from Wikidata: 'website' and 'repo' (repository). How does one know that *only* these two values might come from Wikidata?

Limply helpful is a notice tucked away at top of the template documentation in the midst of so much else that it is completely obscured that "This template uses the Wikidata property: official website (P856)", and also that "This template tracks the Wikidata property: official website (P856)".

?) What is the difference between 'uses' and 'tracks'? I've looked around and still can't figure it out.

I wanted to know because we need to add one or both of

{{[Uses Wikidata|P1324}}
{{Tracks Wikidata|P1324}}

to the existing "{{Uses Wikidata|P856}}{{Tracks Wikidata|P856}}" in that documentation. This is an oversight. (And in how many other places also?) But again, which one?

And in fact links like P1324 should probably be added to the mentions in the template description, such that "..., infobox attempts to acquire the website link from Wikidata." ought to something like "..., infobox attempts to acquire the website link from Wikidata. (see P1324)"

There are too many mysteries here to think that anyone would be comfortable saying that integration with Wikidata is in a good state. But in the meantime, can you point to answers to any of these questions, here, at Wikidata, or elsewhere? Or... even better places to rant? ;) Shenme (talk) 01:43, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Shenme. The best place to ask questions (and to rant) would be Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), since many Wikidata discussions happen there. You can search the Village pump archives to see the discussions and RFCs. StarryGrandma (talk) 02:03, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Hi again Shenme. I could not find any documentation. However, after reading templates and categories I have come to the following conclusions:
  • Tracks wikidata allows some process to go through articles and add them to the hidden categories in Category:Wikipedia categories tracking Wikidata differences such as Category:No local image but image on Wikidata. I don't know what use is made of this data; perhaps bots then move things to Wikidata. A template editor decides that articles using the template should be patrolled in this way.
  • Uses Wikidata shows the users of the template that the code of the template will read the value from the associated property in Wikidata. You can view the source and search for "#property" to see if that documentation is accurate. For example {{infobox software}} has a template that says it uses official website (P856). However the source shows that it also uses repository (P1324). {{infobox telescope}} is an example of template using Wikidata where Mike Peel has provided very clear documentation that is always up-to-date. That template also provides a little pencil icon next to each item from Wikidata (except for links to websites) in the infobox for the article. If you hover over it it says "Edit this on Wikidata".
Hope this helps a bit. StarryGrandma (talk) 04:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Thank you greatly for pointers to that template. See below. Shenme (talk) 22:42, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
All pages with a Wikidata item will link to that on "Wikidata item" under "Tools". A page has a Wikidata item if there is a Wikidata item with a sitelink to the page, for example wikidata:Q9603949#sitelinks-wikipedia. The page may or may not use the Wikidata item. Wikidata usage is usually but not always via templates in Category:Templates using data from Wikidata. Links under "Languages" and "In other projects" in the left pane are nearly always from the Wikidata item. If you edit a page or preview code then the bottom of the Window may have a collapsible list saying "Wikidata entities used in this page". It can vary whether and how template documentation mentions Wikidata use. That's the responsibility of English Wikipedia editors and not editors at Wikidata. Wikidata is used by hundreds of wikis and other features. Each wiki has its own templates. Some infoboxes display a Wikidata link in the rendered infobox but I think that's mainly infoboxes which get a lot of content from Wikidata. See Oxygen for an example with "in Wikidata" at the bottom right of the infobox. The use of Wikidata in the English Wikipedia could be discussed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikidata but activity seems low. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:17, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mike Peel: I have linked to the template and a usage in replies to my query at Wikidata, as demonstration that better process clarity is possible. Note there the last comment, where a short guide for the first-time visitor is contemplated.
I love the pencil shortcut. Does it appear only when the data item has actually come from Wikidata? Is there any way to do that for every Wikidata-source item, including such as 'website'? (the occasional editor won't have read documentation saying that is always a possibility. It would be fantastic to have a visible dead-certain yes/no indication - source locally or globally?)
I have no beef with the sharing of centralized data from Wikidata - that is working. But the implementation is incomplete when the difficulty is so great for the uninitiated, just wanting to fix one fact and return to their usual editing. You've shown good progress is possible here. Wikidata just need to realize the urgency of completing the implementation, the end-to-end round-trip process. Shenme (talk) 22:42, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

rectifying contains content written as advertisement.[edit]

Hi I have edited the page to resolve the issues highlighted. Namely "This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. (November 2016)". How do I get the error page removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:50, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Removing the lists of departments would help. Maproom (talk) 07:16, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello. Welcome to Wikipedia. You could consider reading Wikipedia's NOTADVERTISING policy as well as the SPAM guideline to know why Wikipedia does not welcome advertising attempts. SPAMMER is a part of the above mentioned guideline which recommends a few steps to ensure your material is not considered spam.
Adding to what Maproom has said above, in the particular article, most of the claims are unreferenced (you need to provide reliable sources to support the claims). Statements like "Currae Hospitals is now recognised by NABH (National Accreditation Board for Hospitals & Healthcare Providers, India) for its quality of healthcare" has the hospital's advertisement being provided as a source (and that's not acceptable). Further, giving all the department names of the various divisions under the hospital seems belabored and almost spammy. While you can work on these suggestions, the best place to discuss this issue is the talk page of the article. Some editor has already left their comments on that page; continue discussions there. Feel free to come back here for clarifications if you get stuck up somewhere. Thanks. Lourdes 07:28, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

editing an article[edit]

when some links given in an article are not correct, how to delete these links — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goelmg12 (talkcontribs) 07:37, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@Goelmg12: Please be more specific about the problem. Is it about links going to wrong Wikipedia articles, or no article, or external links which don't work, or go to sites with wrong information, or what? Help:Link or Wikipedia:Link rot may be relevant. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:37, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

getting a new page live[edit]

Ronald P. Rohner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi, I have successfully written a new wikipedia page. All edits have been made but the page is not live. I don't see any button/option that would enable the page to go live. Can you please help in getting the page go live?

I also edited an online page and after the edits I made I could see it in my browser but this new page is only in my account.

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali.shaila (talkcontribs) 14:25, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ali.shaila - Firstly, please sign all posts on talk pages with 4 tildes ( ~~~~ ) which will add your signature and a timestamp
You didn't say, but I assume you are talking about the Ronald P. Rohner article which has been "live" since you started it on 1 August, as is clearly shown by it being a bluelink, as otherwise it would be a redlink. - Arjayay (talk) 14:39, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict)@Ali.shaila: I have made some minor 'clean up' edits to the page. If by 'live' you mean visible in search engines, new articles will not be indexed by Google or similar, for 90 days or until they have been reviewed, whichever is the shorter period. Eagleash (talk) 14:43, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Create a page[edit]

How do I create a new page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:39, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

What type of page? At Wikipedia:Articles for creation you can create a draft article and submit it for review without having an account. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:41, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
... and advice is available at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:42, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia article not appearing in google search[edit]

Hi, I just created the article called: "Abdourahmane Sarr". It is on the main encyclopedia but not on google searches. Why is that?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by LigueyeKat (talkcontribs) 19:57, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

  • Articles now have to be reviewed by another editor before they will show up in Google. Or 90 days if nobody reviews it by then. CrowCaw 19:59, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Edit Request[edit]


I need help, can someone please make the following edit in this article?

Someone wrote the article about my client with wrong information in it, I am requesting an edit on her behalf to correct the wrong information. Following are the details:

This is the a FALSE statement in the article:

"The Chin Kiss King (Plume, 1998).[3] It was originally published in Spanish as El Rey de Los Besos by Editorial Planeta, S.A. in 1997."

Following is the truth:

"The Chin Kiss King was originally published in English by Farrar Strauss & Giroux in 1997. It was re-issued in 2015."

Thank you! Nayab K. Siddiqui — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Then please post reliable references to this effect on Talk:Ana_Veciana-Suarez. Point out that you have a COI from her being your client. Also, this writer does not appear (to me) to be notable either; anymore than having a book published and writing a few articles makes anybody automatically notable. Think this should go for AfD unless 'reliable' references can be provided. Aspro (talk) 21:52, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
The existing cite to the publisher confirms the above publication info, so i am going to make the change, but Aspro is quite correct that such requests should normally be posted on the talk page of the article, with {{request edit}} to draw attention to it. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:58, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Does that reference or any of the others show notability in the WP sense? Aspro (talk) 22:07, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Aspro There are now two cited sources which are reviews from major publications: the Washington Post and the New York Times. They are surely enough to contribute to notability. They may not be enough on their own to establish notability, but until a WP:BEFORE search is done, there is no way to know what other sources may be out there. This should not be nominated at AfD unless the nominator has done a BEFORE search (nor, in general, should any article when the issue is notability). DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:18, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
  • The problem is that neither of these two references indicate notability because they are both just reviews. Much the same as they have food critics reviewing restaurant etc. to provide the reader with a broad range of reading matter (which provides more pages into which they can insert even more adverts - in order for the publication can stay in business) . For this article to stay (as an encyclopedic article here) we need references to show that she is an author which has risen above the many tens of thousands of wordsmiths – and I can't find a single one! If Anaveciana had submitted her article about herself as a draft for review first, it probably would not be accepted for lack of reference showing notability. Aspro (talk) 23:16, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

A false information regarding a company named Business Initiative Directions[edit]


Since august 6 an entry appeared claiming that Business Initiative Directions is a company that sells "vanity awards" or fake awards. This company is a Spanish communication consultancy agency, specialized in marketing, corporate marketing and corporate events. They have several events, some of them called International Quality Awards have a fee and include an award gala at the end of the event. To call this a "fake" or a "scam" as it is imply in the entry, its dishonest. They have 50 years working under Spanish law and more than 20 years now under the European Legislation. Is a well known and renowned company in Spain and their line of business is clear: the promote other companies and organizations. Is marketing. Like many other things. The people behind this attacks is hurting a legal company, that is working in total compliance with the European law. The entry is TOXIC is causing massive damage to BID clients and BID reputation. Its unbelievable that Wikipedia will allow the use of its international renowned for some kind of business revenge. Please stop this. BID is willing to provide all information regarding the matter in their offices in Madrid at any given time. Wikipedia was never meant for ruining people business. This is shameful.

This is the entry — Preceding unsigned comment added by FernandoSantiago (talkcontribs) 21:05, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

This looks like a candidate for AfD, which would solve the issue. Aspro (talk) 21:21, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia only cares about what is stated in published reliable sources. We're not saying anything about these awards, we're only saying that this group says something about them. I will also advise you to read WP:NLT before an admin blocks you for the legal threat you made in your last edit to that article. CrowCaw 21:45, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Aspro: it looked like a candidate for AfD when FernandoSantiago had deleted all the references. They have since been restored, repeatedly. Maproom (talk) 22:36, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
  • Still could be... of the 6 sources, 4 are the company itself and 2 are the watchdog agencies calling the company out... CrowCaw 22:40, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
But has anyone done a competent search for sources that exist but are not in the article? As specified in WP:BEFORE that should be done before starting an AfD. I don't know what such a search will disclose. it might confirm lack of notability, or make it clear that the business is notable. Meanwhile, please see User talk:DESiegel#Nomination of Business Initiative Directions for deletion or help. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:46, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Purpose of main pages 2-5[edit]

This is a mildly disingenuous place to put this question as I'm not an admin and so can't actually use any of these pages anyway, but I was looking at the source of the main page and noticed that not only it but also WP:Main Page/2, WP:Main Page/3, WP:Main Page/4, and WP:Main Page/5 are protected. Why do those four pages exist and why are they protected? Mehmuffin (talk) 21:06, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:FAQ/Main Page#Why are there so many backups of the Main Page? PrimeHunter (talk) 21:15, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

August 17[edit]

Lupton family[edit]

Ref number 106 has been altered (vandalised?) by another editor and is now an incorrect quote. I mucked up trying to revert this person's edit. The line in the text and the quote in the ref are now all wrong - with an accent in the line. Also, this editor needs to understand that a person's FULL TITLE should be used initially - and then their surname only. Please advise the editor called "esmgee". Thanks for your help with ref 106. Srbernadette (talk) 01:24, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

The edits to the quotation in that reference were made by you. The words in the quote before your edit were direct quotes from the reference document, whereas the wording you added was not in the reference document. You must NOT include as a "quote" wording which is not in the document being used as a reference. I have therefore reverted your changes.
You have used the word "vandalised" in regard to the edits by User:Esemgee. You need to read, very carefully, Wikipedia's definition at WP:Vandalism. Esemgeee is making good-faith efforts to improve the article, and in no way can that be regarded as vandalism. If your own edits continue to be dispruptive they are liable to be reverted. --David Biddulph (talk) 01:43, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
My main concern RE vandalism was when editor "Esmgee" removed - without a decent explanation - a photo of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge from the Olive Middleton section on this page. The records show that editor KeithD replaced the photo. We both were certain that Catherine's descent from Olive Middleton (she is Olive's great granddaughter) was significant and relevant to this section of the article. The photo remains today - but there are concerns that at any given moment the editor Esemgee will remove it again, citing the reason as "namedropping" et al. I have often chosen to give the correct title of a member of the nobility when the person is first referenced - subsequently only using their surname. Esemgee consistently states that they consider this "namedropping", only using their christian and surnames throughout the article. Any suggestions to guide us? Thanks for your continued help and we will keep working together. Srbernadette (talk) 04:45, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Copyright License[edit]

Hello, I have signed copyright license document from the creator that I would like to use for an article. Where do I file it or upload it? What's the process... — Preceding unsigned comment added by EarlMcAlpine (talkcontribs) 01:32, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello, EarlMcAlpine. The instructions that the copyright holder needs to follow are at donating copyright materials. What kind of material are you intending to upload? If it is an image, that is fine; if you are talking about uploading text, it is rare that that is appropriate, as text created for other purposes is rarely sufficiently neutral to be used in a Wikipedia article, other than short cited quotes. --ColinFine (talk) 09:49, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

A question regarding use of titles of nobility[edit]

I have re-read this page -

If, for example, the text says that "Susan Smith married John Jones" and John Jones some time later became John Jones, 2nd Baron London (and has a Wikipedia page) shouldn't the text put John Jones, later 2nd Baron London with a link to the page?


Do we put that "Susan Smith married John Jones, 2nd Baron London".

I must add that EVERY TIME I put in a person's title, one editor will tell me I am "name dropping". Please advise.

We understand that after mentioning the full title in the first instance, the rest of the text only refers to the person with their surname.

Thanks Srbernadette (talk) 02:38, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

While (in my personal opinion), linking to 2nd Baron London seems appropriate (and no, you don't need to mention either the full title or give the link after the first instance of mentioning and linking the same), these discussions are best to be held on the talk page of any particular article you are referring to. Thanks. Lourdes 10:39, 17 August 2017 (UTC)


There used to be a button in my sandbox to request a review for article creation. I'm not done working on it, so I'm not ready for it to be reviewed yet, but I want the button to be there when I do need it. Ramesty (talk) 03:27, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

You removed it in this edit, which I have now reverted. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:36, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Is it supposed to say resubmit though? Ramesty (talk) 03:52, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

It does. On the blue button in the bottom left-hand corner of the pink box at the top of the page. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:58, 17 August 2017 (UTC)


how to create Wikipedia page for our company? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fairwealth123 (talkcontribs) 12:48, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

@Fairwealth123: You don't. Wikipedia is not a place for advertising or promotion, we discourage users from writing about subjects they have a conflict of interest with, we discourage paid editing, and we do not allow users to share accounts. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:54, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Security problem[edit]

Someone is repeatedly trying to reset the password to my account that isn't me. Is there any way that Wikipedia can investigate or block this behavior?

Driinternational (talk) 14:23, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Help - in a discussion that is partly deleted[edit]

I have been trying to rescue the article at this talk page: Dong Sheng, it is unclear what is going on. There appear to be several editors with conflict of interest who are trying to create this article to match something they want. I am trying to rewrite it to fit in with Wikipedia style. however most of the article history is deleted and i have no idea what the original article said. could someone who can see deleted stuff take a look and advise? A Guy into Books (talk) 14:34, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

There are three URLs in the edit history. The editor that hid the text listed the URLs that it had been copied from. - X201 (talk) 14:48, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Much of the content of the article was removed (and redacted) for copyright reasons, leaving the article in an unsatisfactory state. This has been remarked on in the talk page, without prompting anyone except you to improve it. I see no evidence that anyone is "trying to create this article to match something they want". The deleted material was copied from and, which may be some help, though the latter does not look like a reliable source. Maproom (talk) 14:50, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Getting an article published in Wikipedia[edit]

What is the process for submitting and getting approval for publication of a new article in Wikipedia? Are there criteria for approval? Is it a lengthy process?

Thanks, Steven Crozier Seattle, WA — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sleecrozier (talkcontribs) 15:30, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

See WP:42 (which explains why most articles are deleted) and WP:My first article. If an article is written correctly (which means more time spent before posting it), then there really isn't any sort of process beyond posting it. If it is not written correctly (not enough sources, or it has plagiarism or copyright violations, or it's written to promote something) then keeping the article is going to be a long and painful process.
When I write articles (such as Livre des Esperitz or Magical Treatise of Solomon), I:
  • gather all professionally published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically about the topic but not affiliated with it
  • summarize the relevant portions of those sources (sticking the citations behind those summaries) in Microsoft Notepad (with no formatting)
  • combine those summaries into a paraphrase (moving the citations throughout as necessary), again in Notepad
  • post that article as the first draft, and expand from there using other sources (such as ones that only discuss the topic in passing or are affiliated, though don't rely too much on affiliated sources)
It's more work, but when I follow through with that plan my articles do not get tagged for deletion.
Ian.thomson (talk) 15:44, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
There two processes. One is a process called New Page Patrol where reviewers make sure that articles do not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or What Wikipedia is not. Articles are not indexed by search engines until the have been patrolled or they are 90 days old. Another process called Articles for Creation is available to unregistered editors or editors with a conflict of interest. Articles for creation are created in draft space, accepted upon a favourable review and moved into mainspace by an AfC reviewer. Mduvekot (talk) 16:30, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Template error[edit]

Can someone help me with the {{ArticleHistory}} template on Us Tareyton smokers would rather fight than switch!? I'm trying to list it as a delisted GA in the template.

I have this code:

{{ArticleHistory |action1=GAN |action1date=21:32, 6 August 2006 |action1result=listed |action1oldid=68071734 |action1link=Talk:Us Tareyton smokers would rather fight than switch!/Archives/2012#GA nominee |action2=GAR |action2date=June 16, 2008 |action2link=Talk:Us Tareyton smokers would rather fight than switch!#GA Sweeps Review: Kept |action2result=Kept |action2oldid=219811132 |action3=GAR |action3date=July 25, 2017 |action3link=Talk:Us Tareyton smokers would rather fight than switch!/GA1 |action3result=Delisted |action3oldid=786650338 |dykdate=6 August 2006 |currentstatus=B |topic=Socsci }}

It's telling me "Lua error: bad argument #1 to 'params' (string or number expected, got nil)." and I can't for the life of me figure out which string is wrong. Ten Pound Hammer(What did I screw up now?) 16:58, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

That took some finding, it was the "B" in CurrentStatus - X201 (talk) 17:42, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
As for the reason why, see WikiProject assessments in the Errors section on the template Documentation. - X201 (talk) 17:44, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

mobile device language selector[edit]

I often read wikipedia articles in different languages. On the desktop there is a language selection box. Where is this on mobile view? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:12, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

On the Android app, it's the middle icon on the bottom bar, looking like a Chinese 'wen' and an A. I assume it's something similar on IOS. --ColinFine (talk) 18:37, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
On the mobile website, it is a symbol of a small Chinese character and a capital "A" just under the article title to the left.  Seagull123  Φ  20:28, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

On the history of Louise Troy[edit]

I was reading about High Spirits, which was written by my landlord Timothy Gray. I read about Louise Troy & noticed that even though it was so it doesn't mention that she was Lauren Bacall's never seen understudy in Woman of the Year. I know as I worked it from the beginning to the end. She did do a rehearsal or 2 that I remember. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:18, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello. I'm afraid that, because Wikipedia can be edited by anybody, we require that information be backed up by reliable published sources. If you can find a published source (maybe a biography?) that says she was the understudy, then it can go in the article; but I'm afraid that if it's only from your memory, then that can't be used in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 18:39, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

How to create a page[edit]

Hi- I am trying to figure out how to make a wikipedia page for my company. can you please send me the steps on how to do it!

Thanks, Ashley — Preceding unsigned comment added by Innercirclesports (talkcontribs) 19:25, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

@Innercirclesports. Hi, please first read conflict of interest (COI), and please note that you shouldn't really write an article for a company you work for. Wikipedia's policy on COIs says "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests or in the interests of your external relationships." Writing an article for Wikipedia is harder than many people realize. Even professional writers find that the format and style needed for a good encyclopedia article are different than what might be appropriate for other venues. You could:
  • Get someone else to do it—If your only goal is to make sure that an article is added to Wikipedia, you can request that someone write an article on the subject.
  • Start by editing other articles—If you are interested in becoming an editor at Wikipedia, our experience demonstrates that it is better to start by improving existing articles, which will help you get a sense of how this place works, and then you will be ready to write your first article from scratch. A good place to visit is the Wikipedia backlog, where there are literally hundreds of thousands of articles needing help from editors. Find an article in a subject area you know, and add a source, or a reference, or simply help write it better.
  • Go ahead and try—If you do decide to write an article immediately, please read our policy on conflicts of interest, then read our guide to writing your first article, which will repeat some of the good advice above. Then please use the Article wizard, which will help you through the steps. I urge you to accept the option to save your first draft in your user subpage, which will reduce the chance your work will be deleted before it is ready.

.  Seagull123  Φ  20:10, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Put a footnote in notes section rather than references[edit]

I want to put a footnote in an article that has a notes section and a references section. The notes section is currently empty. If I use the ref tag, it puts it in the references section. How can I make it to to the notes section? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 19:25, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

@Bubba73: See WP:REFB#Alternative systems. Eagleash (talk) 20:02, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Also, Help:Footnotes#Footnotes:_groups might be helpful Mduvekot (talk) 20:07, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, that got me there. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 20:18, 17 August 2017 (UTC)



How do I get my band and their Biography in Wikipedia ? Can I make my own and add it or does someone else have to do it ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnyshutup (talkcontribs) 20:48, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

@Johnnyshutup: Yes, basically you are strongly discouraged from creating any articles on a topic with which you have a close connection. (See WP:COI for more info). Wikipedia relies upon information gathered from independent reliable sources with no direct connection to the subject and has little, if any interest in what that subject may have to say about itself. If your band is 'notable' in the Wikipedia sense then undoubtedly someone will create an article about it in due course. Wikipedia is not a form of social media whereby persons or organisations can create a bio or profile about themselves.
If you feel that your band could pass the notability requirements (see WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC), you could ask that an article be created at Wikipedia:Requested articles but you would have to be patient. Good luck. Eagleash (talk) 22:21, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Johnnyshutup BTW - What is the name of your band? The above was "policy"; but not "inquiry". Care to share? Thanks! Maineartists (talk) 22:46, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

August 18[edit]

How can I find out[edit]

how many articles I have started? Suddenly I am curious. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 00:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

At the bottom of your user contribution page [4] there is a link: [5] "Articles Created". Maineartists (talk) 00:20, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Well "you learn something new every day, if you start out dumb enough." (moto of a friend of mine) Thanks, Carptrash (talk) 01:17, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
That's how I start every single day! Maineartists (talk) 01:39, 18 August 2017 (UTC)