Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2013 December 18

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

December 18

Maine map page contains "its a shitty house"

Maine loc map.svg don't thInk you want this here. Could it be a cryptic message? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.16.100.17 (talk) 01:19, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Probably vandalism, could you please link to the specific page or file? DES ^(talk) 01:25, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

File:USA Maine location map.svg - fixed at commons, thanks.--Melburnian (talk) 01:48, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

How do I get a list of Wikipedia articles in language x that are not in language y?

I am interested in translating articles but can't seem to be able to find a feature that lets me see all the articles for example in Arabic that are not in English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakkalrast (talk • contribs) 03:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't work with translation but have you tried Wikipedia:Translation#Articles needing translation? PrimeHunter (talk) 03:28, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

there is probably some way using Wikidata. WP:wikidata-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 04:10, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I have tried that PrimeHunter. It is not very good. I thought the same thing about Wikidata any idea how it could be possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rakkalrast (talk • contribs) 15:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Just to add that I also had difficulty in getting a translation on Wikipedia (French to English) sometime ago. XOttawahitech (talk) 14:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

DISPLAYTITLE template

Hi! I've been over at the List of Survivor (U.S. TV series) tribes article trying to move the page to "List of Survivor (U.S. TV series) tribes" and it's not working out. I was here the other day with a similar question about another article and was told to use the DISPLAYTITLE template if I wanted to Italicize a certain portion of a title. I'm trying to do that now, but it won't let me because these bracket "{ }" thingies are supposedly unsupported characters. Could somebody please help me understand how to do this? Thanks! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 06:27, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Is this edit what you were trying to do? - David Biddulph (talk) 06:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes. And it just doesn't seem to work. I must be missing something here! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 07:01, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

For me, when I look at the title at the top of the article it now shows the word "Survivor" in italics, which it didn't before the edit. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:04, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I get that part. But when I was trying to do the same thing before, the filter kept telling me that these "{ }" were not okay. What did you do differently? To me your edit looks like the one I attempted to do. Survivorfan1995 (talk) 07:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I merely typed {{DISPLAYTITLE:List of ''Survivor'' (U.S. TV series) tribes}} into the top of the edit window. No idea why it wouldn't work for you. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:33, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Oh, that's all there was to it? I thought I had to click "move" and type in the new title. Okay, maybe I get it now! Thanks! Survivorfan1995 (talk) 07:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I think you've realised this, but you're not changing the title (moving the page); just altering the way it is displayed. --ColinFine (talk) 09:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Article "India Against Corruption etc.

Nobody has taken action on our official complaints of defamatory and false information published by Wikipedia about India Against Corruption and linked articles like 2011 and 2012 Indian anti-corruption movements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:2381:72D:0:A928:C888:EE9B:8A91 (talk) 08:14, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I see there is a discussion on the article's talk page. If that has reached a dead end, please follow the next step in the dispute resolution procedure.--ukexpat (talk) 13:50, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

India Against Corruption is not interested in using Wikipedia's internal Dispute Resolution procedures. We have filed official complaints to Wikipedia as per WP:CONTACT and we require our concerns to be attended to immediately. We emailed repeatedly from the official (and verifiable) email ID of IAC but did not get any response. It was only then that we posted to Article's Talk Page. We also don't intend to debate this issue with a bunch of anonymous persons hiding behind mass manufactured throwaway wikipedia identities created to vandalize our articles. We want to talk to somebody in authority over the email and not over public channels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:2381:72D:0:E85D:16CF:292F:3724 (talk) 15:10, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

If you are unwilling to use our processes, then I am unwilling to help. I had rewriting the article on my to-do list, but if you are not willing to follow our processes, I have better things I can do with my time. If you wish, you can prepare a draft of what you think the article should be link at somewhere like Draft:India Against Corruption, and submit it through WP:AFC or WP:Requested edits. Also, you will not reach any Wikimedia FOundation employees through that email address; AFAIK, it is run by volenteers. --Mdann52talk to me! 15:23, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Please overlook our formal language. We waited for 24 hours only to have somebody distort the article even more. We didn't hear from you beyond that initial one liner and can't be expected to speculate on your intentions or future coure of action without dialog Please note we have utilised all avenues mentioned in [1], As an aggrieved "Living Person" who has approached through official channels we expected an official and immediate response so that IAC's incorrect biographcal information is removed or corrected without further delay by somebody senior. If you want a draft of what the article could be like - [2] is the official public website of IAC and it has a CC-3 licence for text (but not images which will have to be checked individually).

Interestingly your IP address geo-locates to "The Isle of Portland Aldridge Community Academy". Arjayay (talk) 15:25, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

And this has something to do with the price of fish ? 2 Emails have been sent from IAC's offical email ID to Wikipedia's official email ID for "Article subjects" to use for this situation. Surely its not Wikipedia's case now (seeing the preceding discussion) that the email address we sent it to is just a dead letter box. I also advise all of you to read this from Jimmy Wales on precisely this situation. [3] - which BTW is not a legal threat by us. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:2381:72d:0:e85d:16cf:292f:3724 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 18 December 2013‎

Please note that WP:CONTACT says:

"Wikipedia has no central editorial board; contributions are made by a large number of volunteers at their own discretion. Edits are not the responsibility of the Wikimedia Foundation (the organisation that hosts the site) nor of its staff."

If you re unwilling to discuss the matter at the relevant talk page, you will probably get little help. As it happens I edit under my legal name, but most respected editors do not choose to do so. This does not make them "persons hiding behind mass manufactured throwaway Wikipedia identities", many of them have been here for years and have significant reputations attached to their user names. If you won't or can't work with such people, Wikipedia is really not for you. DES ^(talk) 17:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Note also that "India Against Corruption" is an organization, not a person, and the content of India Against Corruption is generally not "biographical information", although some specific individuals are named. Note that the subject of an organizational or biographical article does not get to control it, nor to demand that well-sourced content be removed. If another group used your group's name improperly (as it seems you assert on Talk:India Against Corruption (if i have followed that correctly) but was so identified in press accounts and by the public at large, our article will have ot say so and use that name, but if there are reliable sources indicating that two or more different groups used the same name, that can also be stated. DES ^(talk) 17:36, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanations:

IAC is not concerned with secondary sourcing which are Wikipedia's internal . standards. Such sources are essentially beyond both our mutual controls considering that a very large number of people have been fooled and swallowed what was told to them without proper inquiry. IAC is concerned only with unimpeachable primary sources - ie. sources which will stand up in a court of law. As a private body IAC is not obliged to publish anything other than statutory filings. IAC takes its privacy as seriously as it does its good name and reputation. Under India's law IAC is a "living person" and we have a right to sue (this is again not a legal threat)

Hence, IAC is summarising its position below, we woudl be obliged if somebody acts rapidly on them.

• India Against Corruption has never supported a demand for Lokpal Bill (in any flavour)

• India Against Corruption disassociated from "Team Anna" (not our term) on 09.Dec.2010 in response to unauthorised use of IAC name by Anna Hazare & Ors. to write letters to the PM and Chief Justice of India on 01.Dec.2010 asking for a Lokpal, and IAC gave them clear and unmistakeable written notice not to use IAC's name in future, which they initially heeded.

• July 2011 IAC wrote to the Speaker of Rajya Sabha summarily informing him that India Against Corruption opposes 2011 Lokpal Bill and that from Manish Tewari's letter of 19.04.2011 to Prime Minister it is clear that as Anna Hazare has been repeatedly indicted for corruption by the Commission of a retired Supreme Court judge of integrity, the IAC would prefer that no mention of the name "India Against Corruption" is recorded.in the proceedings/ report of the Rajya Sabha for the 2011 Lokpal Bill and repudiates itself from any association from Anna Hazare or his drafting Committee or agitation.

• That till about 15 August 2011 core "Team Anna" did not use IAC's name overtly.

• When Anna Hazare was arrested on 16 Aug 2011, some parts of India went into a state of mass hysteria and the name of IAC was again mischievously attached to this movement. The misuse of IAC's brandname took place primarily at the instance of Baba Ramdev and his followers as he controlled an unauthorised facebook page "Indiacor" whose creator was using the name "India Against Corruption" on Facebook. (Ramdev had been earlier arrested in June 2011 while leading his own protest and was desperately trying to link his movement to IAC's fair name).

• Dissatisfied by the outcome of the Lokpal Bill draft, Team Anna in March 2012 decided they would be be taking the political path and assured that IAC's name and assets would be restored in an honorable manner to HRA with due reparations for misuse of the name.

• However, the BJP elements behind Team Anna could not accept Anna's going political and did not allow poor Anna to rest once the political route was generally known in April 2012. Hence the move got postponed till Aug 2012.

• On 18 Sept 2012 when it became known that IAC name is being restored to HRA (which nobody outside the charmed circle even knew the existence of till then) these elements caused considerable stress within Team Anna requiring the handover to HRA to be drastically speeded up with new websites and mailing lists etc. to hasten the transition in a highly surcharged political environment.

• On 26. Oct 2012 the IAC's honor was satsfied. Around that date it was publicly announced that Er. S.Roy will be taking over as the new National Convenor of IAC pro-tem and from 26.11.2012 pro-jure.

• All positions of the IAC are on its website, backed up by .numerous primary references / records automatically archived on its mailing lists or in the IAC's private digital archives.

Accordingly,IAC desires of Wikipedia community that the India Against Corruption article should be exclusively about our organisation. Furthermore all articles on the 2011 and 2012 Indian anticorruption movements must not overuse name of IAC or logos within them so as to mislead general readers of Wikpedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:2381:72D:0:E85D:16CF:292F:3724 (talk) 18:43, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

While I am only a single editor (albeit a somewhat experienced one, having edited her since 2005), and have no greater authority than any other editor to make decisions, I do not think that request is likely to be granted. If, as I gather from the above and from reading the India Against Corruption and Talk:India Against Corruption pages, members of "Team Anna" used the name "India Against Corruption" during 2011-12 (or whatever period it actually was) and if this use was widely accepted and reported on by reliable sources, particularly secondary sources, then the Wikipedia article must say so. If the various groups that used or were referred to by the name "India Against Corruption" are not sufficiently clearly distinguished in the article, this should be improved and made clearer. Wikipedia must follow the sources, particularly the secondary sources, in such matters.

If you are not making legal threats, why do you repeatedly mention your right to sue? Those statements are likely to be taken as legal threats, even if you do not so intend them.

I am not knowledgeable about India law. I do not know to what extent it equates such an organization as yours with a "living person". But the Wikipedia Biographies of living Persons policy (a policy of a private organization, headquartered in the Unites States) clearly applies only to actual individuals, not to groups or organizations of whatever status. WP:NPOV is much wider, of course.

All this really belongs on Talk:India Against Corruption, or in a dispute resolution forum, but I answered you here since you posted here. DES ^(talk) 00:31, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear DESiegel

We really appreciate the effort you are making to assist us.

1. For an outside body like IAC who is aggrieved with the content of Wikipedia's article, WP:CONTACT (we are informed) contains all the steps to be taken by such outsiders.
2. As you noted the individual editors are responsible for the content uploaded to Wikipedia and WMF bears no liability. In these circumstances is WMF prepared to provide the actual names and addresses of the editors who added wrong content about us so IAC could hold them responsible ? [4] in this case WMF was let off from this because they had already removed the controversial text on receiving notice.
3. As an outside party, we are least concerned about Wikipedia's internal systems and processes to regulate its content. As Wikipedia's founder Mr Wales has noted on sveral occasions, outsiders cannot be compelled to play by Wikipedia's rules to get content about themselves amended.
4. Thus we should not be made to go through Wikipedia's Dispute Resolution procedures. Wikipedia must have independent grievance redressal mechanisms for cases like ours
5. We are repeatedly clarifying that we are not making legal threats since we are only here under WP:CONTACT and Mr.Wales's article. Mr Wales has clearly understod what the problem is with Wikipedia's process for outsiders. As Mr. Wale's article implies, many other persons who have complained have been banned for "issuing legal threats". We are making it abundantly clear that we are not issuing legal threats.
6. US law does not apply to us. IAC is being defamed in India. Indian law also applies to Wikpedia in addtion to US law. IAC is a living person in almost every Commonwealth law jurisdiction. WP:BLP does not say that it extends only to natural persons - WP:BLPGROUP clearly extends to a small body like IAC.
7. Other leading abusive social networking sites like Google and Facebook based in USA were sued in India and used the same defence. The Indian Government has directed (on the Court's orders) that all leading social networking sites are to publish the names of Grievance Redressal Officers in terms of the Information Technology Intermediary Guideline Rules 2011. The rules mandate, inter alia, that offensive content is to be removed within 36 hours and the content grievance resolved in 30 days. [5]

The Delhi High Court on Friday directed Google and Facebook to appoint a grievance officer to deal with complaints and disclose their grievance redressal mechanism by publishing the same on their web-pages within two weeks.

A Division Bench comprising of acting Chief Justice B D Ahmed and Justice Vibhu Bakhru said, “We direct Google Inc and Facebook Inc to display the name of grievance officer on their respective sites. We also direct other intermediaries that the compliance (of the rules) be done in two weeks. They (all the social networking sites) cannot flout the law just because they are a foreign company. Like us, you are bound by the rule of law of this country.”

IAC has also noted that Wikipedia apparently has an office in India opened for its fundraising efforts - the only one outside of USA. [6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:2381:72D:0:E85D:16CF:292F:3724 (talk) 05:39, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Point by point response:

1. I believe that you are misinformed, and that WP:CONTACT is not the sole and sufficient mechanism for requesting changes. For simple and blatant misstatements, such as the Siegenthaller case or such as an article asserting with no supporting references that John Doe is a Nazi or a Pedophile, yes the WP:CONTACT procedure should be sufficient, but then in a case liek that a post here would have the issue fixed in minutes. For a complex case such as this, where the statements are apparently not inaccurate but may need clarification, and sources support the version now in the article, engaging on the talk page will at the very least be much faster and probably more effective. Frankly IO do not know where emails sent through the WP:CONTACT addresses wind up -- I surely never get any of them.
2. Providing names or other contact info of individual editors would be absolutely against policy, as I understand it. See https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy where it says: "In response to a valid subpoena or other compulsory request from law enforcement" and various other quite limited reasons, and then "Except as described above, Wikimedia policy does not permit distribution of personally identifiable information under any circumstances." This is a policy approved by the WMF Board of Trustees. They can be reached at WMFboard(at)wikimedia.org or via this contact page. Moreover, in most case the WMF will not have legal names or physical addresses for contributors. No one is required to supply such information to edit Wikipedia, and most editors do not.
3. Again I think you are far more likely to get your wish using the internal system that you so object to. But it is your choice to use them or not.
4. There is the OTRS system, see Wikipedia:Volunteer Response Team. But I do not think it is really aimed at the kind of issue this is. This could in theory lead to Wikipedia:Office actions, but those are very rare.
5. Fine, I will take you at your word.
6. The WMF takes the position, as I understand it, that it is subject only to US law in such matters, but I am not a representative of the WMF, nor a legal expert. My understanding may be incorrect, or the WMF's position may be legally in error, I could not say. As to the policy, WP:BLPGROUP says:

"This policy does not normally apply to material about corporations, companies, or other entities regarded as legal persons, though any such material must be written in accordance with other content policies. The extent to which the BLP policy applies to edits about groups is complex and must be judged on a case-by-case basis. A harmful statement about a small group or organization comes closer to being a BLP problem than a similar statement about a larger group; and when the group is very small, it may be impossible to draw a distinction between the group and the individuals that make up the group."

1. This is far less clear-cut, at least, than the case of an individual person.

2. Wikipedia is not a social networking site. I do not think Wikipedia has a "Grievance Redressal Officer", if it does I do not know the name or address of any such officer. Of course, I am only a volunteer, if a somewhat experienced one.

I again urge you to use the talk page of the article, and to consider our Dispute resolution procedures. But no one can 'make you do either. DES ^(talk) 22:25, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks DESiegel

1. We shall try the talk page approach since you mention it may result in what we wish to achieve.
2. As you mentioned, this is not a simple change we are requesting . Are there any prior cases like ours for wikipedia articles on impersonators ?
3. Have checked the actual judgement [7], it apples to all "intermediaries", including social networking sites. For protection under the "safe harbour" clauses, intermediaries (like Wikipedia) can either rectify wrong content on their own or within 36 hours when brought to its notice. The dispute between the parties can then be resolved within 30 days by the Grievance Officer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:2381:72D:0:15FD:D4B9:AB35:FAF6 (talk) 11:32, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

Repeated reference

Hi there,

I want to refer to the same footnote from two or more places in the same article / wikipedia page. How do I do that? This question is because everytime I use the "< ref > xxx < /ref >" tags with a reflist, it creates a new reference footnote.

For example, one (the same) attribute of four different parameters of an entity is described in one foot note and the same needs to be referred to from all the four parameters.

Thanks in advance for your help and informaiton.

Regards,

Vasudeva Sharma — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vasudevasharmamk (talk • contribs) 11:06, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

The answer is at Wikipedia:Ref#Repeated citations (or, for more detail, Help:Footnotes#Footnotes: using a source more than once). --David Biddulph (talk) 11:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Edit Warring by advertiser

Hello, i need to point out that this person: User talk:Kamal hossen has been continuously and stubbornly reverting all our edits to this page: Sabrina Porshi He created the page with the sole intent of promotional purposes, and no matter how many times the rest of us editors have explained to him that the tone and style of the writing is completely inappropriate for wikipedia, he continues to perform a massive re-edit back to his "promotional" version every few hours. We suspect that he has been paid to maintain this promotional page. Please help us, this kind of edit-warring is probably not allowed on wikipedia anyway. Thanks for your help! Ridessam (talk) 11:32, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any evidence that you or any other editor have tried to discuss this problem with User:Kamal hossen. I have left a note on his talkpage explaining that he needs to discuss his edits before blindly reverting. Please try and talk to him - this looks like a user who just doesn't understand how Wikipedia works yet. Explaining Wikipedia's rules to him, rather than adding antagonistic edit summaries and demanding that he be censured, would be the most helpful thing to do. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:04, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Paralyzing versus paralysing

Hello all! Here I am, back at the Help desk for the second time within 24 hours.

Anyway, I am currently proofreading Treblinka extermination camp, an article written entirely in British English. There is a quote in the article that uses the word "paralyzing", which is the American spelling of the word. I understand that the MOS says not to change quotes to make them consistent with the rest of the article, but here are two reasons why I think that doesn't apply here:

1. The MOS justifies this recommendation by saying that articles are prone to flipping back and forth between different national varieties of English. This is not the case with Treblinka. I have put considerable effort to make sure that the entire article uses British English (which is ironic, considering that I'm American, but it was 2/3 British English and 1/3 American English when I started, so I went with British).

2. Second, the MOS's other reason for this recommendation is because it would require a change in vocabulary. However, it's just a change of spelling, not an entirely different word.

I was going to be bold and change it, but I felt a little uneasy going against the MOS when it explicitly states that quotes should not be changed to make them agree with the national variety of English used in an article. By the way, the relevant quote is the first block quote in the "Operational command" section. AmericanLemming (talk) 11:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I am firmly with the MOS (WP:ENGVAR) in agreeing that one should not change the spelling in a quote. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:58, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Well, that's why I asked. I looked up the original quote on Google Books, and paralyzing is the original spelling. I guess I'll leave it be, then. Thanks for the quick response! AmericanLemming (talk) 12:02, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I concur, quotes should not be modified.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:22, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Concurrence here too. Spelling should remain the same in a quote as it is found in a source for that quote. Bus stop (talk) 14:00, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

@AmericanLemming: Strongly agreeing with those above, I do not see it as an ENGVAR issue at all, but part of an absolute duty to faithfully treat and not in any way misrepresent a third party's words when we are purporting to reproduce them.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:33, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

I totally agree. Quotes should not be altered unless an editorial alteration is marked, such as to add context. For example, If Jane Doe is denouncing Joe Blow and wrote "I am totally opposed to what he said." we might quote this as "I am totally opposed to what [Blow] said." if needed to make it clear who the quote refereed to. There is never a good reason to change spelling in a quote. If there is an out-and-out error, add "[sic]" don't correct it. I also think that words in a quote should normally NOT be wiki-linked. DES ^(talk) 14:39, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Whilst agreeing with you regarding the original question, which is not a spelling error, some of the more general comments above appear to contradict MOS:QUOTE which states "trivial spelling and typographic errors should simply be corrected without comment." Arjayay (talk) 17:40, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

You're right that this is different than a spelling error (and I think not changing the original is more obvious here than for a spelling error), but I think the MOS is wrong about spelling errors (and punctuation) on this as well. I'm thinking of posting a thread about it soon.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Airbus A380

Dear Sir / Madame, I read frequently your page about the airbus A380. Very well done, congratulations. My only question: why since Emirates added an order of 50 more a380 on november 17, 2013 to make a total of 140 planes, why are they nowhere mentioned on your page conserning since? Thanks for correcting! Luke (Belgian living in Thailand) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.53.85.67 (talk) 12:43, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Presumably because it's not on the official list at http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/backstage/orders_deliveries_table/November_2013_-_Airbus_Orders_Deliveries.xls ? They will hopefully soon catch up with what was announced at http://www.airbus.com/newsevents/news-events-single/detail/emirates-orders-50-additional-a380s-boosting-fleet-to-140/ --David Biddulph (talk) 13:04, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia page

How do I know if my Wikipedia page has been accepted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.219.175 (talk) 14:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

If this is a page drafted via Articles for Creation, visit it, if it has been accepted, it will have been moved to the main article space. If you tell us what article it is, we could help better. DES ^(talk) 14:42, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Featured articles

I have been here only a few days. Following hyper links led me to something called featured articles. I feel my prose and citation searching hobby can stand me in good stead in improving featured article prospects. How do I get to know where to find such articles? Is there a list or a category I can use to reach such articles? 14:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zewix (talk • contribs)

Any article is a possible featured article! For the ones closest though, you'll want to take a look at Good Articles, as these are the quality tier below featured. Samwalton9 (talk) 15:06, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Wikipedia:Featured article candidates lists articles currently proposed for featured status, and describes how the process works. Wikipedia:Good articles lists articles which are well on the way, but still need significant work to achieve featured status. You might choose some of those to work on. DES ^(talk) 15:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

red shouldered hawk

I have some nice photos of a red shouldered hawk. I would like to share them with you and users. Ed SmallwoodJesmallw (talk) 15:19, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Special:Upload Wizard is the best place to upload them, then see WP:IMAGE on how to use them in articles. --Mdann52talk to me! 15:25, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, assuming that User:Jesmallw took the images himself or otherwise owns the copyright.--ukexpat (talk) 16:54, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

... and within Commons, the images can be added to the category Category:Buteo lineatus. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:42, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Edits to Crowdfunding

Hi Wiki

I justed added some facts about crowdfunding in Denmark here Crowdfunding in the section about crowdfunding in Scandinavia (sweden and norway) and a few minutes after you removed it. Why did Wikipedia remove it?

/Frederik

FrederikSogaard (talk) 16:41, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

FrederikSogaard, it seems that Noq considered your links promotional and your edit unhelpful. I advise that you discuss the reasons why you feel that your edit is a good one on Talk:Crowdfunding. I also suggest reading our guideline on external links and on external links to avoid. Note that external links, unlike wiki-links, should generally not be placed in running prose. DES ^(talk) 16:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Referred Blame:

Referred Blame: Placing blame on someone other than the responsible party. i.e. my friend's ex-wife is always blaming him for things that happen when she has the kids. Case in point: She left the kids in the car to go get some milk at the super market and they got into a fight. ( Seven and Five year old boys ) The older boy knocked the younger boys front teeth out with a punch to the chops. When she called him to tell him about it, she blamed it on him............... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bfischer1011 (talk • contribs) 16:49, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia?--ukexpat (talk) 17:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Clearing a denied article from Sandbox

Good morning, Could someone please tell me how to Archive an article that was denied from my sandbox, so I can write another article? I looked up how to archive and article, and I thought I did it correctly, but was unsuccessful. Sorry for the inconvenience, Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Realstonesquared (talk • contribs) 17:01, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

If you refer to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/MrPAWS by Snow it does not need to be archived, nor is it in your sandbox, nor will it block you from creating other articles in the articles for Creation space or in your sandbox or your user space. If you want Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/MrPAWS by Snow deleted, simply add {{db-author}} to the top of the page. If you intend to try to improve it further so that it will be accepted, you may do so at any time (although if it sits unchanged for 6 months or more it may be deleted under WP:CSD#G13). DES ^(talk) 17:16, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Or are you talking about clearing out your sandbox. If you are you can place {{db-u1}} at the top of the page and an admin will delete it. GB fan 17:19, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

... or you can simply delete the redirect from there, and then (if you wish) replace it by whayever new content you want in your sandbox. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:35, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Adding writers & authors to the Jamaican page

I have tried to add my name to the Jamaican born non resident page, as a writer and author residing in Canada as a Citizen. Gerald A. Archambeau author of "A Struggle to Walk with Dignity-The True story of a Jamaican-born Canadian"2008. I would like to be added as a Jamaican living in Canada since 1947. With my thanks, for your help. Gerald. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerald A. Archambeau (talk • contribs) 17:51, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

The usual practice for adding people to such articles is that they must have an article about them on Wikipedia. By the way, I havwe moved the content on you user page to a user sandbox, which seemed to be a more appropriate place for it.--ukexpat (talk) 18:25, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like a conflict of interest. You should avoid adding information about yourself to Wikipedia. Generally speaking, if the public thinks you are a noteworthy person, they will add you. I recommend you read more at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Thanks! Skarz (talk) 18:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Year of the Five Emperors

Reference help requested. I have a cite error in my work on the Year of the Five Emperors page and cannot find it, could you please help me? Thanks, 129.255.228.95 (talk) 18:46, 18 December 2013 (UTC)klemm8

Sorted - you (unnecessarily) repeated the names of the three references at the foot, opening each line with <ref> but not closing any with </ref>
PS please don't use the "Help me" template on article pages, only on user pages. Arjayay (talk) 19:06, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

PPS the whole point of naming a reference, is that the second time you use the reference you just use the name, without having to repeat the entire reference again. Please see "Same reference used more than once" in Help:Referencing for beginners.Arjayay (talk) 19:13, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Has my article been submitted?

Hi! I am so sorry, I am having trouble understanding whether or not my article has been resubmitted. It was declined due to my sources. The article is Max Muscle Sports Nutrition. Any help would be appreciated... thank you! Lboureston (talk) 19:22, 18 December 2013 (UTC)Lindsey

The article is not currently submitted. To do so, add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page. Samwalton9 (talk) 19:35, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Submitting it would however be a waste of time. You need to demonstrate from third-party reliable sources that the organisation concerned meets the relevant Wikipedia notability guidelines. Without this, the article will simply be rejected again. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:44, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict) When you made this edit you deleted the afc template (and the previous decline reason) which included the button to click to re-submit. I have restored it, and cleaned up the reference formatting (you confused the title and work parameters in {{cite web}}). However I suspect this would still not be approved as it now stands. (I would decline and I do some reviewing at AfC.) Of your 4 citations (after I combined duplicates) three are to purely local coverage at individual stores, and one is an interview with the company founder. The local coverage is of little or no help in establishing notability. You need significant coverage in multiple independent, published, reliable sources. Articles that discuss the company as a whole in some sort of business or general circulation publication. Not blogs, not press releases, not directory listings, not coverage of ordinary events at individual franchises or branches, but substantial coverage of the company as a whole. DES ^(talk) 19:48, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

How do I compare 2 different articles/talk pages with each other?

--78.156.109.166 (talk) 20:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Go to Special:ComparePages and fill in the page names. You can leave the "revision" boxes blank if you want to compare the latest revisions. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:52, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Header Vandalism [NSFW]

Abkhazia

Instead of a normal donation header I'm getting a different message with a picture that really shouldn't be on Wiki - Where do you report this? Is it suitable here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.24.156.64 (talk) 20:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Template:Native name was vandalised but has been restored. To see the fixed version you may have to bypass your browser cache. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

What´s with Venezuela page?

What´s with Venezuela page? there is pornography in there. HOW WAS THIS APPROVED??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.8.58.70 (talk) 20:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

As above: Template:Native name was vandalised but has been restored. To see the fixed version you may have to bypass your browser cache. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:10, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Kenya article has been hacked, pornographic bad bad

It appears the Kenya article on your site has been hacked.

Please correct ASAP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.215.239.111 (talk) 20:58, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

As above: Template:Native name was vandalised but has been restored. To see the fixed version you may have to bypass your browser cache. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:10, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

What´s with Venezuela page?

What´s with Venezuela page? there is pornography in there. HOW WAS THIS APPROVED??? ARE ALL COUNTRY PAGES HACKED? THERE IS A DIK IN THERE!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.8.58.70 (talk) 21:01, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

As above. It was not approved; this is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit", and sometimes bad stuff gets through. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:12, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons-related problem

I just finished writing Fitz W. Guerin. I want to link to the photo gallery in Commons, but it's under the misspelling Fritz W. Geurin. I haven't done anything over there, so could somebody get the ball rolling? Also once this is fixed, would I add the template as follows: {{Commons|Fitz W. Guerin}}? Clarityfiend (talk) 21:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Looks like the Commons cat needs to be renamed with the correct spelling. I'll make the request.--ukexpat (talk) 21:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

 Done - request made.--ukexpat (talk) 21:53, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:06, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Problem with Odyssey timeline

Dear Wikipedia,

In reading the article on the Odyssey, I noticed this timeline problem. The first sentence below is fine, but the second adds 10 years to Odysseus' journey. Not sure why this hasn't been noticed by others, but I tend to see things like this - probably what makes me a good proofreader. Anyway, if the Odyssey begins 10 years after the Trojan War, then Odysseus' epic journey back to Ithaca would've taken 30 years, not the 20 we know it was.

Found in second paragraph at the opening of the article, and accurate - "It takes Odysseus ten years to reach Ithaca after the ten-year Trojan War."

Found in the first sentence of the Synopsis: Exposition, and the problem - "The Odyssey begins ten years after the end of the ten-year Trojan War" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Duse42 (talk • contribs) 21:13, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

No. Maybe it's not clear, but it's consistent. The Odyssey begins 10 years after the war, and recounts what happened to Odysseus in the 10 previous years. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:35, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Nearly ten years of the return journey is told via a narrative flashback, a literary device that is occasionally known as a Homeric flashback. It is also known as beginning the story in medias res. The original poster's inference of an apparent discrepancy is correct, but there is no discrepancy, only an ancient use of a literary device. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:12, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Senior citizen

I want to start a page on sr..citizens of India, covering all states. How do I start a new page. Or do I have to always append to a page. Also Pl give the basics of entering data to wiki page, I played on sandbox. Thanks. Thanks, 151.228.96.52 (talk) 21:47, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Please follow the process set out at WP:AFC.--ukexpat (talk) 21:53, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

christopher english walling

wrote an interesting article - with many, confirming reference points - saw it here for several days & now can't find it.

help???

chris walling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.55.210.207 (talk) 23:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

You were not logged in when you posted here. Are you User:Christopherenglishwalling? That account created User:Christopherenglishwalling/sandbox. If you log in and click "Contributions" at top of any page then you can see your edits. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:40, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

That page is indeed interesting, but please be aware that it would take a lot of work to make it suitable for a Wikipedia article. DES ^(talk) 23:44, 18 December 2013 (UTC)