Help desk
< June 29	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	July 1 >

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.

June 30

I'm writing because i really need to understand why is not possible to find it on the search bar? The article i wrote is a biography and i still have it in my personal page but i want it to be evident to everyone Could you please help me on this? Thank you so much

incorrect link

If you pull up the Rossington Collins Band on Facebook. The members are listed. Derek Hess is the drummer. If you click on his name it tells you he is some artist and it is completely not him. He is a friend of mine and he deserves to have the correct bio for him be the right bio. Please fix it for him and his fans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎74.239.223.79 (talk • contribs)

By "artist", I think that the page means "musical artist". I'll fix that. :) Ha dg er 00:58, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstood the OPs issue. The Derek Hess that we have an article for is a different person entirely. The one we have an article for has an official site that does not mention his work with Rossington-Collins at all. The response to the OP is that we simply don't have an article on the Derek Hess that he knows and is part of the RC band. Dismas|^(talk) 01:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the link to Derek Hess on the band's page. Andie ▶Candy◀ 13:26, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Zeta Delta Xi

I am not the author of--nor have I ever contributed to--this article, and I have no connection with the subject. I performed a Google search on the organization this evening, and followed the Wikipedia link to discover the article deleted:

20:38, 22 June 2012 SarekOfVulcan (talk | contribs) deleted page Zeta Delta Xi (A7: Article about a group or club, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)

I do not believe A7 applies in this case.

The article cited several examples of the significance of the organization, foremost among which is that after 130 years at Brown University as Zeta Psi fraternity, the Epsilon chapter had its charter revoked because of its decision to accept females as full members of the organization.

Despite being one of the first chapters of Zeta Psi, the Epsilon chapter was forced to forfeit its franchise for what was then viewed as a radical defense of gender equity. They are now fully-chartered at Brown University as Zeta Delta Xi, a coed fraternity in full and equal standing with the rest of the Greek community.

The article Zeta Delta Xi should be restored because

the deletion criterion cited by SarekOfVulcan appears to have been misapplied: A7 does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines;
despite no per se claims of significance (i.e., the organization is significant because...), several credible reasons for the organization's significance are clearly provided;
as an article under the category Student Societies in the United States, the threshold for significance should plainly be in the context of organizations comprising that category.

My primary concern is that as a third party, do I have any systematic recourse for restoration of a deleted article?

I realize I am coming in post hoc, but I am troubled that this deletion is presented as a fait accompli, with no information provided other than date of deletion, editor responsible for deletion, and criterion cited for deletion. Transparency can be expected to suffer when accommodating such large numbers of users, but I can find no arena for recourse, debate, or consensus-seeking regarding restoration--nor can I find evidence that any such discussion ever took place.

Thank you for any guidance you might be able to provide. --Patronanejo (talk) 06:11, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion review is the proper venue for requesting undeletion. The article claimed several examples of the significance of the organization, but there was not a single working citation; the only in line reference spoke to the re-use of their former building, sourced to the school's department, which currently doesn't mention the building, let alone the fraternity. The other references were the fraternity itself, the university, and a university history; as none are independent, none speak to notability, which is established by external coverage. Sources probably exist, and if found, Deletion review can restore the article, though it would still be subject to scrutiny and might be taken to Wikipedia:Proposed deletion or Wikipedia:Articles for deletion even after the references are included. While I agree the topic should have been discussed, since deletion is reversible, it is not worth dwelling on. Dru of Id (talk) 13:20, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

From Louisville Kentuckh

How do I get listed on the "Actors From Kentucky" page? I'm from Louisville (Valley Station) and I've been an actor for 55 years. See my IMDb. Conrad Bachmann — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.219.191.14 (talk) 02:14, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you meet the criteria to be notable, leave a note on the article's talk page suggesting that you be added. RudolfRed (talk) 02:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

reading list

hi I am a doctor and I was thinking : why cannot I organize name of diseases or medications of a certain system into a list- like reading list if this is possible I can put and organize wiki articles into a meaningful reading material depending on subject that matter to me.

in similar way people do make list on youtube to listen to or playlist on itunes if i can put say for example all pneuomonia related articles (bacteria, medications, etc,..) I can help other people find quick answers when I am looking for a subject only be referring them to such a list that cite few articles is this feature available thanks Dr alsawah — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.43.213.191 (talk) 02:25, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Books. Dismas|^(talk) 03:01, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eric P. Hamp

EricusPraticus (talk) 02:33, 30 June 2012 (UTC)Someone created his page. We did not create it. We were not aware of it when it was created nor was he consulted. That said, he does not mind the page exists, however he wants the information to be correct. I am his daughter and I created this account recently in the hopes of correcting what had been entered on wikipedia.[reply]

I have been (very poorly) going through his info trying to make small edits and make it sound more objective and readable.

BEFORE I did this, I tried to contact someone at Wikipedia (a grad student friend who knows about Wikipedia suggested I contact the person that created the page) to find out who started this so I could get this updated with correct info. I never received a response. Don't know if I did it the correct way though.

So ... Now what do I do?

I am so new at this that I feel it will take me ages to get this edited correctly, so since you know what the rules are, I am asking for help.

Thank you for reading this and replying.

Respectfully,EricusPraticus (talk) 02:33, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Post your concerns or suggested changes on the article's talk page, and also read the guidance for conflict-of-interest. It is usually better not to made the edits yourself. RudolfRed (talk) 02:43, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If there is information on the page that is wrong and not cited to a reliable source anybody may remove it, and for a biography of a living person, anybody who find it should do so. But by the same token, nobody should add information unless it is cited to a reliable published source: personal knowledge is not sufficient.

But as RudolfRed has said, because of your conflict of interest, you should generally not edit the article yourself, but should make suggestions on that article's talk page. --ColinFine (talk) 19:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Registration

Hi,

I have registered with your site, and have received a confirmation of this. But when I try to upload my information, it says that I am not registered.

Can you please help me out with this problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ron.stretton (talk • contribs) 02:37, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What information are you trying to upload and what page are you using to do it? RudolfRed (talk) 02:41, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you copy and paste here the message you are receiving when you've tried to edit or "upload" and it failed? What I suspect, though I am by no means sure, is that you tried to do something that only autoconfirmed accounts have permissions to do. Autoconfirmation is a threshold that kicks in when you account is at least 4 days old and has made at least ten edits.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:45, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you are Ronald Stretton, please read WP:COI as soon as possible. Dismas|^(talk) 02:46, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

faulty link

May I suggest an "Incorrect Link/ Flag" on every page. It was too damn frustrating to get to this page to tell you good volunteers what the problem is. And I'd fix it myself but apparently it is more difficult than you think to do this. Thank you for everything that you do Wiki!!!

When on this Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat

there is a link to "Stearic" [acids]  (under "Fat Profiles")

FAULTY LINK!

It directs you to the misspelling:

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

(supposed to be "stearic acid" NOT "Stearic_aid"

Thank you for your time & courtesy in reviewing this correspondence, as well as your forthcoming correction :o) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.60.76.152 (talk) 04:20, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the Wikilink. Thanks for pointing it out. Next time, feel free to be bold and fix the error yourself. RudolfRed (talk) 04:31, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Figuring out a good name for a new article

I recently created Imperial Gift which is about the post WW1 donation of surplus British aircraft to various Dominions - South Africa, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and India (or more correctly the British Raj) The intention was that the Dominions take up a share of the burden of defending the empire. Some of the countries used the donated planes and related equipment to establish their own Air Forces.

As I am South African I happen to have access to far more detailed information about South Africa's portion of the Imperial Gift than that of any of the other countries, so instead of creating a single unbalanced article I want to start a separate article that comprehensively covers the South African part of the story.

Finally I get to my question: Please help me come up with a suitable article title for - "This article is about the history and technicalities of the portion of the Imperial Gift that went to South Africa and how it facilitated the founding of the South African Air Force." Thanks Roger (talk) 09:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you have enough info on South Africa to satisfy WP:N? I'd say something very simplisitc like Imperial Gift (South Africa) or South Africa Imperial Gift. I wouldn't stray too far from the current article title. CTJF83 10:08, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have a fairly good pile of impeccably reliable sources: Articles from the journals of the South African and the Royal (UK) Aeronautical Societies; books by recognised aviation historians; a few popular aviation/military books and magazine articles - written by the aforementioned historians. Documents and other material from the South African National Museum of Military History (an independent org - not part of the military "establishment") and last but not least, the South African Air Force Museum's own publications and website (primary, but good for some details.

Is posessive case acceptable in article titles? I'm thinking South Africa's Imperial Gift would look less like a disambiguation title. Roger (talk) 10:26, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All sound like good sources. As far as possesive, I'm not sure actually. Can you think of an instance and check if a page exist with a possesive? Being it's close to bed time, I can't think of anything right now. CTJF83 10:31, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Valentine's Day has the answer! Go for your suggestion :) CTJF83 10:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! If anyone needs me I'll be in my Sandbox... Roger (talk) 10:37, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

editing reverted

I edited a highly inaccurate article and my edits were rejected. I have personal, indisputable knowledge on this topic (and in fact provided indisputable citations in my edits.) Please let me know who I need to contact to ensure that this article is reverted to my final edit.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanmus (talk • contribs)

Your edits were reverted by a bot. Due either to your youtube and/or myspace links. Try reverting the bot's edit and omitting the youtube and myspace links, save it, and then try and readd them, and see if that helps. CTJF83 10:28, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MySpace and YouTube links will get you reverted, since these are not reliable sources. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:54, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Downloading large numbers of pictures?

I'm working on a project which requires the download of large numbers of pictures. Obviously, I'd like to do this without breaking any Wikipedia rules or guidelines. I have read that using "Wikix"[1] is the recommended way to download all images from Wikipedia, but some people have said they were blocked from Wikipedia by using it. Could someone please advise if this is the right way to do it? Many thanks,Nozzleberry (talk) 11:33, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Restoration of Article Zeta Delta Xi

Using a cached Google image, I have re-created a deleted article and saved it to my user space. I believe the editor responsible for its deletion has misapplied speedy deletion criterion A7, and I would like to have the article considered for restoration unchanged.

I do not wish to have the matter reviewed by that editor, whom I have named in an earlier post. Let me state explicitly that I have no reason to suspect malice, and hope he does not take it personally that I wish to have his actions reviewed by a third party. If I am correct about misapplication of A7, the decision to delete would appear to have been made arbitrarily. Further, it appears to have been undertaken despite some objection, although I can find no evidence of it here.

While I agree the article would benefit from more support for the notability of its subject, my understanding of A7 is that it precludes speedy deletion if the author makes credible mention of such attributes as he believes confers significance on the subject. -- Patronanejo (talk) 13:19, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that as you were posting this, I was responding to your previous post; as it remains visible, this section should probably have been appended to it. While I am not sure, I would guess that recreation of an article from it previous version(s) without its editing history creates licensing problems, and suggest Deletion review is still the best path forward. Dru of Id (talk) 13:53, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

using many sources

I have found that in one article I need to source many state records to provide verifiability. Can I, in any way, compile these records into one "source," or is that original research?Computerchippo (talk) 14:13, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the context here. Here is an example:

If you have 4 sources that state the following:

X happened in 1955.
X happened in 1956.
X happened in 1957.
X happened in 1959.

And you want to back up the claim that "X happened in 1955, 1956, 1957, and 1959", then you can either intersperse the sources directly after each date or you can add four sources one after another to the end of the statement.

If you are instead trying to back up the claim that "X didn't happen in 1958" or that "X happened 4 times between 1955 and 1959" then this is original research.

Because the issue depends on the specific context and this board is only intended for general help in using wikipedia, you would probably do best to repost this question at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. -Thibbs (talk) 15:06, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

adding a reference

Hello,

I am trying to add a reference to the article on Westenhanger Castle, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westenhanger_Castle. I have a book with both a history and illustrations of the house/castle. But the information I am typing in is not being accepted. I am trying to add: Archaeologia Cantiana Volume 17 (1887) pp 193-208 "Thomas Smythe, of Westenhanger, Commonly Called Customer Smythe". This book is available on-line for free as well as bound.

Thank you, Constance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Constancedaly (talk • contribs) 16:07, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a {{reflist}} template that the article was missing. It will now accept and generate your references properly. Please feel free to continue editing! :) -- WikHead (talk) 16:22, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) - It has been accepted actually, but it has been properly formatted and shifted into a different part of the article. You can find it here in the References section. The standard procedure for Wikipedia articles is to include general references in the references section and wherever possible to include specific references as inline footnotes. For more information on how to properly format references see WP:REF. Thanks for your contribution! -Thibbs (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No references in Constituent Assembly of Egypt despite adding Reference Reflist markup

After adding content at the Constituent Assembly of Egypt page the references are not listed, despite adding an Reference Reflist markup at the bottom of the article. What's the problem with the site? --91.42.35.210 (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The site is fine, one of the references in the article was not closed with a </ref> - that caused everything efter that point to be parsed as the cite. Roger (talk) 16:29, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I think the problem was that a refname tag had been misformatted. Instead of writing <ref name="xyz/"> make sure that the terminal "/" falls outside the quotation marks like this: <ref name="xyz"/>

Hope that helps. -Thibbs (talk) 16:32, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. --91.42.35.210 (talk) 16:44, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

books that are notable biography guidellines

I am the author of Art Talk: Conversations with 12 Artists (reprinted in 1995 by HarperCollin in 1995). It is in the collection of many notable academic citations. Which books qualify a person for a biography page in Wikipedia?

Thank you for your help.

Kind regards, Cathy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cindynemser111 (talk • contribs) 17:58, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cathy, please read Notability for the notability guideline. Also, please do not write the article yourself, or have anyone affiliated with you write the article, as you and all those affiliated with you have a Conflict of Interest. Athleek123 18:04, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The book does not make the author notable. Notability of a person depends on the existence of third party reliable sources about the person, not the person's work or other activities. Even if there are hundreds of published reviews and commentaries of the book but none of them say anything substative about the author, the book probably would be notable but not the author. Roger (talk) 10:47, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Advertisments

Whats with all the advertising from UK companies,why do we need to see that rubbish??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.31.231.126 (talk) 18:10, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You'll have to be more specific. Wikipedia does not have advertisements. If you feel that an article is promotional of specific companies, please indicate which articles. Cresix (talk) 18:22, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or you are not looking at Wikipedia's real site (http://en.wikipedia.org/*** ), just a mirror site which often include adverts - please provide the URL of the page you are referring to. Arjayay (talk) 18:31, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or you have malware on your computer which inserts ads on Wikipedia pages. See WP:RFAQ#ADS about that. We cannot answer your question without knowing which pages and ads you refer to. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:30, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No tabs on Talk Page

The talk page for Lemmy currently has no tabs across the top (Article/Talk/Read/Edit/New Section/History) and no WP logo or text in the LH column - Yes I've purged my cache, and even rebooted my machine, whilst all other talk pages seem OK - any idea what's up? Arjayay (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to have sorted itself out now (Best way to solve a problem - post about it and it solves itelf, although it can make you look stupid) Arjayay (talk) 18:36, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Remove copyright writings please

hello. i have copyright for the writings in your article. Nobody have e-mailed me for permission to copy the writings to your website. Your editor ksanthosh89 has also copied from other websites into all the articles he has written. Please remove all the copyright writings. immediately. Thanking you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.235.128.94 (talk) 19:53, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have almost four million articles here. Which ones do you mean? And who are you? --Orange Mike | Talk 19:56, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellanahalli copied writings from ootyrealestate.wordpress.com/2008/06/02/plots-for-sale-in-ketti-valley-ooty-the-nilgiris-tamil-nadu-india/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.235.128.94 (talk) 20:20, 30 June 2012 (UTC) and I am a student doing online part-time work. please remove the copyright writing from other articles also. thanks.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 223.235.128.94 (talk) 20:27, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I removed some of the material in that article and placed a message about copyright violation on ksanthosh89 (talk · contribs) talk page. Cresix (talk) 21:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you vert much. And about the other articles? 223.235.128.94 (talk) 21:45, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List them please Athleek123 21:46, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I checked his other articles and all of them were copied from other websites.. There is too much websites to list.223.235.128.94 (talk) 21:55, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should be bold and fix them. Or, raise the issue on each article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 22:38, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Took care of quite a few. See ksanthosh89's talk page. Athleek123 23:51, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks..223.236.142.51 (talk) 11:04, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can't create a peer review page as an IP user?

I placed Talk:José Rizal for peer reviewing and the " is currently undergoing" just appears red. When I clicked on it the article does not appear to have been created. 119.224.27.62 (talk) 21:31, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I created the page for you Wikipedia:Peer review/José Rizal/archive2. You can label why you listed it there. Ryan Vesey Review me! 21:39, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) 119.224.27.62 (talk) 21:44, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]