Revision as of 07:42, 17 May 2014

• WP:Y
• WP:HD
• WP:HELPDESK
• Help:DESK

• For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
• Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
• If your question is about a Misplaced Pages article, draft article, or other page on Misplaced Pages, tell us what it is!
• Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
• For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
• New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).

• Skip to today's questions
• Special help services
• Archived discussions
• How to answer

May 14

Added Hard Hat Records to the list of record labels

Hello, I have attempted to add our record label name Hard Hat Records, a Reg. Trademark, to the list of Misplaced Pages Record labels, but I have been unsuccessful in doing so, please tell me what I am doing wrong. Hard Hat Records is an old well established record label.

Thank you for your assistance,

Bobby Lee Cude,Hard Hat Records ,Reg Trademark — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hardhatrecords (talk • contribs) 01:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

You shouldnt be adding content about your company directly to articles because you have a conflict of interest. In order to be successful at adding content about your company you should provide reliably published third party sources about the company and its relevance to an article on the article's talk page for a neutral party to evaluate and determine whether its appropriate to include or not. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 01:30, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

It was added to List of record labels. This is just a page for splitting up the list into smaller sections. It would go on List of record labels: A–H after we have an article. Notability would need to be established and that is done through writing the article. You should not write the article or do any editing concerning Hard Hat Records as you have a conflict of interest. Note:I have blocked the username as it is a corporate name GB fan 01:34, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Added closing brackets to a link in the preceding, to correct its formatting. --ColinFine (talk) 08:03, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

United states senate missing from your page

hi you have a U.S. senate candidate missing from South Dakota

he is an independent candidate running out of Black Hawk SD

WWW.claytongwalker.us — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.107.152.182 (talk) 01:35, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

if reliable third party sources have given this candidate significant coverage, then you can help improve the encyclopedia by adding information. If they havent then we dont become a publicity arm for the campaign. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 02:46, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

See also WP:POLITICIAN - not every candidate for political office is notable.--ukexpat (talk) 13:38, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Unbiased Information?

Whenever the term 'objective' or 'unbiased' is identified with an on-line site I begin to to question whether that can be appropriately labeled as such. That applies both to the contributions and editing. It is not necessarily whether the content is questionable but the way it is written. I would say that most of the content of Misplaced Pages has a liberal bias to it. The way the articles are written certainly are. I have yet to find the content of any of the biographies I have read being made from a more conservative, or alternative point of view. Rather there seems to be a leaning toward a lack of objectivity. There are very few writers that can leave out their personal biases. Objectivity is very rarely possible. I find myself bombarded by point of view discrimination in the biographies I have found on this site. Therefore I find myself less informed by what I have read because the point of view of the contributor. I can no longer count on Misplaced Pages for accuracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:8:A400:B03:A454:365:8BCB:84E1 (talk) 01:39, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Do you have even a single example to demonstrate your point? AlexTiefling (talk) 01:54, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

If it helps, we have BLP, NPOV, and other policies that deal with how to write more objectively. - Purplewowies (talk) 02:39, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

You may prefer Conservapedia to Misplaced Pages. It is not affiliated with Misplaced Pages, and does not have a liberal bias. Maproom (talk) 06:26, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Mobile view turn off

How does one switch off the mandatory mobile view on Android devices using Opera? —Xojo (talk) 02:15, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Should be a link somewhere near the bottom to go to desktop view, but depending on your version of Opera, it may not want to take. - Purplewowies (talk) 02:37, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I use the Desktop link now, every time I make a WP query. How do I get the desktop view automatically, first thing, without having to scroll to the bottom of the page and choose the Desktop link, directly from my query or directly from following a link to WP? —Xojo (talk) 18:50, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I find Chrome to be a better browser on Android - I even occasionally edit WP on my tab - but not my phone, its screen is simply too small. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:11, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I also find Chrome a better browser. Right now, Opera is a poor, crippled, brain-damaged imitation of Chrome, which, nevertheless, for a variety of reasons, I must use--thus the question about Opera rather than Chrome. Is there a way using Opera Android to get the WP desktop view directly and immediately? —Xojo (talk) 18:50, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

What is this page?

What is this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.111.57.104 (talk) 03:33, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello. This page is a help desk for people who wish to use or contribute to Misplaced Pages. If you have another question, ask below by editing this page again. You can make test edits at the sandbox. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 06:09, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

maharashtra

your wait for the sarkari deparment reqwastaed in maharashtra fo job iin which to apley for in job. the of goverment in taking .<ref name=deriyo group=dehradun>{{cite journal|last=subhash|first=subhash|coauthors=goverment|title=the goverment|journal=education|date=1/5/2014|volume=managment|series=line -1|issue=looking after|page=1|pages=1|doi=event|pmid=vnns|url=htpp//www.goverment|accessdate=13/52014}}</ref> — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.19.212.13 (talk) 07:02, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 4 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Misplaced Pages, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Misplaced Pages 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.Template:Z25 -- John of Reading (talk) 07:33, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Fixing a Title

I would like to capitalize a letter in the title of an article I started - Muskrat french. How do I capitalize the 'f'? I have been unable to change the title. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlaforest (talk • contribs) 07:09, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

You do this my moving the page to its new title: see Help:How to move a page. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:35, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I have moved the page to Muskrat French. Maproom (talk) 07:58, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

secondary or tertiary sources

Hi

I have an article that has been refused on this basis:

This biographical article relies on references to primary sources. Please add references to secondary or tertiary sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful.

The article is about a music band from 30 years ago and they did not feature in any encyclopedias etc and so am not sure what sort of references would be suitable. there are references to a BBC interview that can still be viewed/listened to via the internet.

I can add references to music paper articles but some of which no longer exist (e.g. New music news) and some do (Music Week) - would these be suitable as sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidpapworth (talk • contribs) 10:32, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Paper articles are OK, as long as they refer to the band in a way that suggests it did something notable, rather than merely exist. From the sounds of things, this mysterious band from decades ago which didn't feature in any enyclopedias maybe shouldn't. They can't all be moderately famous. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:38, May 14, 2014 (UTC)

Citing pdf files

When I find a useful source via Google in the form of a pdf file, I sometimes have great difficulty finding a suitable url to include in the citation. For example, today I have cited a paper "A defense of the caridoid facies; wherein the early evolution of the eumalacostraca is discussed" in the article Eumalacostraca, but if I click on the link, I get an error 404 message. Can you advise? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:27, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Seems you had an ellipsis where a bunch of gibberish should have been. I've replaced the gibberish, and it works for me. Give it a go? By the way, thanks for indirectly teaching me what a lophogastrid is. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:37, May 14, 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that works for me. I'm glad you learnt something useful! The trouble is, I have had this problem before and I no doubt will again, and I don't know how to sort it out myself. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:18, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

It appears that you are copying the url from the green line on the google results page. If this is too long, google shortens it with an ellipsis. You should instead copy the url from the address bar when you are actually on the page you want to link. You are guaranteed to have the right url that way. SpinningSpark 13:52, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I have had trouble when using the default PDF reader that comes with Windows 8, because it opens as a separate app and there is no URL showing. In that case, I have found that if, while viewing the search engine results, I right-click on the item I am interested in, a list of options appears. In Firefox, one of the options is "Copy link location". Choosing that copies the correct URL to my paste buffer, and then I can paste it into a citation. I haven't tried this with other browsers, but there is likely something similar. —Anne Delong (talk) 14:05, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

By the way, it is preferable not to link directly to pdfs if at all possible, as this will cause difficulties for some readers. For instance it is much better to link to this page (Bell System Technical Journal vol.3) where the user can decide if they want to load the full pdf, the online reader, or plain text versions, or a bunch of other formats. The user may not want to download the full document at all—they may just have wanted the citation information, or the abstract. SpinningSpark 17:32, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll see what I can do. Sometimes it is possible to shorten the url until you get to a page from which you can access the pdf file, right clicking it to obtain the link. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:16, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Password.

I have forgotten my password for logging in to Misplaced Pages. Misplaced Pages has said it sent me a new password yesterday. It didn't. I asked for a new one today and was told that since one was sent yesterday no help can be given until the 24 hours is up. I have still not received a new password. What now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hogbog (talk • contribs) 12:59, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Have you checked your e-mail spam folder? Some spam filters are too aggressive and catch Misplaced Pages e-mails. Failing that, are you sure that you still have access to the e-mail address that you originally submitted?--ukexpat (talk) 13:42, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

@Hogbog - I see you were logged in when you posted the question. I'm not sure but I think if you are still logged in you can probably change your user details without having to first get an email. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

The account was created today only nine minutes before its only edit which was to this page. I assume that is a temporary account for the purpose of asking for help. SpinningSpark 15:08, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Not sure if its been fixed but there was a problem sending Password resets a few weeks ago. It may have raised its head again. - X201 (talk) 15:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Typo in category header

HI,

In attempting to create a new category called "Villas in the United States," in attempting to follow the template I mistakenly created one titled "Villas by United States." How do I delete this incorrectly titled category?

Thanks.

Casoulman (talk) 13:34, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Normally, you can add a speedy deletion template, like {{db-c2}}. But I have already removed the page for you. — Edokter (talk) — 13:43, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Great, thanks!

Casoulman (talk) 13:51, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Restrictions on who can edit a page

I am creating a page for a Professor and want to only have certain information on the wiki entry. Other sources are editing the page constantly and taking down or adding detail that is not necessarily wanted. Rather than having to update the page regularly to regulate - can put any restrictions on who can edit the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.61.159.84 (talk) 14:17, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

No, neither you nor the professor have any right to "regulate" the content of the page. Anyone is welcome to edit it as long as the content they add is properly sourced. The only specific protection the subject of an article has is stipulated in the WP:BLP policy. Attempts to "regulate" the article content will be regarded as unconstructive editing for which you could be blocked. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:25, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No, there are not. But among the people who usually should not edit a page are the subject of the page, and their friends, relatives, colleagues and employees. This is an encycylopaedia, not a directory: we have articles only on subjects (including people) who meet our requirements for notability (generally, that independent reliable sources have written about them), and the articles are neutral and confined to information from reliable published sources. If you are working for the professor in question, then you have a conflict of interest, and you are strongly discouraged from editing the page - you are welcome to make suggestions on that article's talk page, but neither you nor the Professor have any say on what actually goes on the page. --ColinFine (talk) 14:30, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Question about lead sentences in Misplaced Pages articles

Many – perhaps most – Misplaced Pages articles begin with a lead sentence that contains the BOLDED title of the article. For example, see 2014 World Snooker Championship. However, every so often, I see "hidden comments" within an article's editing space that state: "<!-- Per MOS:BOLDTITLE and WP:SBE, neither the article's title nor related text appears in bold. -->". For example, see 2014 Soma mine disaster. So, what's the deal? And which is it exactly? If indeed that's the Misplaced Pages policy (that the article title should NOT be bolded in the article's first sentence), then why does that occur in nearly all articles? And why do some editors – seemingly arbitrarily – select a minority of articles to enforce this "rule"? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 16:11, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

It shouldn't be arbitrary, per MOS:BOLDTITLE

• If the article's title does not lend itself to being used easily and naturally in the opening sentence, the wording should not be distorted in an effort to include it. Instead, simply describe the subject in normal English, avoiding unnecessary redundancy:

The example they then give isn't bolded. Also the MOS doesn't have to be followed if doing so yields an awkward result.AioftheStorm (talk) 16:28, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Also explained at Misplaced Pages:LEAD#Format_of_the_first_sentence.--Shantavira| 16:34, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:05, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Insurance Policy

I have an insurance policy From The Union Central Life insurance Company from Cincinnati, Ohio and i am looking for a phone number to call and find out if the policy still exsist. Can You help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.125.23 (talk) 21:04, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6.9 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Misplaced Pages, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Misplaced Pages 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. Dismas| 21:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Anyway, Unioncentral.com has their contact details. DuncanHill (talk) 21:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

add external link to my Misplaced Pages biography

my question is how do I add an external link to my biography on Misplaced Pages?. The link is an INET video of me giving a seminar at the University of Chicago — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.178.168.202 (talk) 21:38, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Add an entry to the talk page of your biography explaining what you want adding, and why, and someone without a conflict of interest will review it and decide whether it merits inclusion. Rojomoke (talk) 22:16, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Reference in a foreign language

Is there a tag to attach to references which are in a foreign language? DuncanHill (talk) 22:01, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

You are not required to, but if you use a citation template like

{{cite web | last = | first = | authorlink = | coauthors = | title = | work = | publisher = | date = | url = | format = | doi = | accessdate = 14 May 2014 }}

you can add in the parameter

| language = 

anywhere in the template and then either type the name of the language or the language code (en, de, ru...) into the parameter. Altamel (talk) 22:59, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks - there's a reference in an article I've got my eye on which is in German, and no translation has been provided. I'll see if I can add a language field to the citation. DuncanHill (talk) 23:52, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

If you are adding a reference to a source in another language, it might be a good idea to quote the relevant text from the source, and perhaps even add a translation (marked "Translation added"). --ColinFine (talk) 18:08, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

To add to Colin's advice, the guidance is at WP:NOENG. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:12, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

May 15

Bare URLs

What exactly is a bare URL? When using Reflinks, I stripped down the URL of a newspaper to enter it into the edit text thus: the address in the address bar was "http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2619398/Comedy-super-agent-managed-Jonathan-Ross-Michael-McIntyre-died-heart-attack-snorting-cocaine-inquest-hears.html" which I cut down to "http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2619398" to make a bare URL (and it worked for Reflinks). But what about "http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/science/index.cfm?SciencePageID=55", for example, or "http://www.infowars.com/howard-stern-on-alex-jones-vs-piers-morgan-debate/" or https://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/complicity/article/viewFile/8737/7057? Those were addresses that came up in the address bar for three items picked randomly from Google. I wouldn't have a clue how to turn those into bare URLs. I looked up WP:BARE URL and it doesn't say anything about the sort of stripping down I did, it just seems to suggest that the whole address in an address bar is a "bare" URL. Is that right, wrong, or what? -- P123cat1 (talk) 01:15, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

That's correct. They are bare. Bare just means without extra text or markup or anything. So whatever is in the address bar. Something like <ref></ref> would not be bare because it also contains some plain text. But all the links you provided are bare. Dismas| 01:31, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

You say, "So whatever is in the address bar". Just to be absolutely sure, if I had inserted the full address in the address bar "http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2619398/Comedy-super-agent-managed-Jonathan-Ross-Michael-McIntyre-died-heart-attack-snorting-cocaine-inquest-hears.html" into the text, it would not have worked because "Comedy-super-agent-managed-Jonathan-Ross-Michael-McIntyre-died-heart-attack-snorting-cocaine-inquest-hears" is "plain" text? --P123cat1 (talk) 09:11, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Comedy-super-agent etc is part of the address. You can spot them because they don't contain any spaces. As soon as you see a space you know the URL has finished. e.g. The added bonus with that address is that it ends with .html which is a big giveaway and something you could look for. - X201 (talk) 10:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Also you can always put a link you're unsure about on your user page/sandbox and run reflinks on it there as a test. - X201 (talk) 10:15, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that is clear now. .--P123cat1 (talk) 11:42, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Portal:Current events

Someone has entered an event on this page which is not inside the box for any date. I don't see where the new date box comes from so I don't see what went wrong.Rmhermen (talk) 01:18, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

 Fixed with this edit. The stray text was transcluded from Portal:Current events/2014 May 15, which didn't have the box template. Thanks for bring it up! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:14, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Bibliography template questions.

Hello, I recently created a template for references in the article The Rules of the Game. I have a lot more handwritten notes that I need to edit and transcribe. The template is accurate for all of the books that I used to takes notes, but I was wondering if and how I could use the same template for notes that are derived from a DVD. Specifically from the Criterion Collection DVD, which includes both Special Features and Linear Notes. Just hoping for some suggestions. Thanks.--Deoliveirafan (talk) 02:01, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Deoliveirafan, thanks for your contributions! To answer your question, I'm afraid that {{sfn}} is only for books. If you want to cite a DVD, use <ref>{{cite AV media|...}}</ref> instead. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 02:45, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Factual Error

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I keep fixing a line in the introduction of the "Cotopaxi" article. I'm an undergrad who studied abroad in Ecuador, studied their geology, climbed and studied Cotopaxi, and according to most geological survey's definition of "active" (having erupted within 100yr) it's considered (and has been for a long time) the world's largest active volcano. I've reedited this multiple times with multiple sources to back up my edition but it get's reverted back each time. Either some other user is eager to alter this fact or I'm wrong (doubt it, based on the overwhelming consensus of geologists on the issue) or it's simply an unknown or disputed matter. In any case please check it out. I'd appreciate even a "disputed claim" header somewhere, even though it basically all boils down to semantics and the definition of active. Nevertheless, the people of Ecuador and most AMerican geologists acknowledge Cotopaxi to be the world's tallest "active" volcano, and I'd like the article to reflect that fact haha. Thanks much! JD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.211.106.134 (talk) 02:20, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi JD - I'd take a look at talk page of Cotopaxi, and see what has been previously said about it. The user(s) reverting your edits have cited the talk page as having the reasoning behind the reversions. If you disagree with whatever is on the talk page, you may wish to start a new topic there to discus the issue, and let the users who reverted your edits know that you wish to discuss it on their respective talk pages. You can see the history of the article by clicking the "View history" tab at the top of the page (or just click here). ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:32, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Other sources quite obviously disagree here. This is a perfect example of why we have a neutral point of view policy — when sources disagree on the question, we teach the controversy instead of accepting one position and rejecting the other one. Project policy demands that we mention the dispute, so with that in mind, the best thing is to say basically "Some say it's highest, and some say it's Ll..." Nyttend (talk) 05:18, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

It is unclear to me what it is that you are disputing. Do you believe that Llullaillaco is not taller, or that it is not an active volcano? Maproom (talk) 07:20, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

He's disputing the identification of Llullaillaco as an active volcano. Nyttend (talk) 11:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Ok. In that case, the current state of the opening paragraph seems an excellent compromise. Maproom (talk) 13:09, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I am one of the people who do reverts, and by the way, if we're getting into credentials, mine are a Ph.D. in chemistry who has studied volcanic plumes and ashfall for much of the last thirty years, and I bloody well know the literature. It is quite easy to dig into the literature and come up with numerous citations (for example, regarding Sabancaya, definitely higher than Cotopaxi and illustrated with a photo of a more recent eruption than Cotopaxi's in the WP article) that utterly convincingly refute the contention that Cotopaxi is the world's highest active volcano. This contention is outdated (it appeared in stuff I read as a kid 50 years ago) and no longer reflects, in any way, the current state of understanding in the volcanological community. When information on a subject becomes outdated, it should be replaced by more modern information, possibly with an historical note. That's the way this subject is. -- Bill-on-the-Hill (talk) 13:42, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Correction to date of birth

Vince Lester Former member of Australian parliament Born in 1939 not 1929 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.91.227.155 (talk) 03:53, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

 Done. Found , which supports this and added it to the page. Thanks for the note. Connormah (talk) 04:04, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Searching articles created

Is there a way of searching the articles I have created that shows results sorted by importance and/or rating (stub, start, C, B, etc)? Hack (talk) 03:58, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

You can get a list of articles you have created sorted by date here. I don't know of any way of sorting the list by article class or importance other than a . SpinningSpark 15:37, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Inter-wiki links

I am editing the article Talgo, a Spanish train manufacturer. However, I found that the term is ambiguous, and it means both the company as well as a type of train produced by the company. I found that the current page in English wikipedia, talking about the company, links to the wrong wikipedia pages in Catalonia, German, Spanish, Euskara and Nederlands Misplaced Pages pages, since they are articles about the type of train, instead of the company. In these wikipedias, there exist two related articles, one about the company and one about the type of train. The current English wikipedia page should link to the former rather that the latter.

I tried to edit the links at the English wikipedia page but it was said that an error occurred, no matter I tried to edit the links directly or I tried to removing them first. Can anyone help?

The articles that should be linked are:

• Catalonia: Patentes Talgo
• German: Patentes Talgo
• Spanish: Talgo (empresa)
• Euskara: Talgo (enpresa)
• Nederlands: Talgo (bedrijf)

The articles (concerning the type of trains) that should be linked to each other but not to the current English page are:

• Catalonia: Talgo
• German: Talgo
• Spanish: Talgo
• Euskara: Talgo
• Nederlands: Talgo

Thanks, Salt (talk) 10:03, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Fixed at Wikidata. I clicked "Edit links" at Talgo to get to the Wikidata page. There I clicked "Edit" at the enwiki entry, clicked "move" and entered Q1100969 which is the Wikidata ID I got to from de:Patentes Talgo. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:59, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Copying a Misplaced Pages article

Is there any way, apart from printing out or taking screenshots, of saving a copy of a Misplaced Pages article before starting to copy-edit it? It would be very useful to be able to compare the original version as a whole with the final edited version. I find using the "User Contribution" and "View history" pages extremely fiddly to work with when trying to see the original state of the article. There seems to be no way on these pages that the whole of the article can be viewed in its original state, or perhaps I have missed something. --P123cat1 (talk) 15:30, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

In broad terms, the whole of the article can be viewed in its original state just by clicking the relevant link in the history. The foregoing has its limitations, in that changes to embodied templates or images will mean that what we see now isn't the same as what would have been seen at the relevant time in the past. Perhaps I don't understand the question which you are asking? Are you saying that you want something equivalent to diff but showing the difference in how the page is rendered rather than difference in the wikicode? If so, I doubt whether it is possible because it will be rendered differently for different readers. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:00, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Just to make that clear, clicking on the date of the version you want in the history will show you the old version of the article. SpinningSpark 16:05, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "original state" - If you mean, the article as it stood before you started carrying out incremental alterations, then try opening the article in two separate windows, before you start editing, and only edit one window (that can be harder than it sounds). The unedited version will remain "as was" until you refresh or re-load that version of the page, whatever you do to the one you are editing. In many browsers e.g. IE, you can set the two versions side by side for line by line comparison - I often do this when dealing with lists including red and green links - you can de-link the red ones, and re-link the green ones, very easily. - Arjayay (talk) 16:14, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I am new to Wiki editing and onscreen work (not editing) and have used your method in a limited way, Arjayay, (I have IE) but cannot edit a whole article in one sitting, so have to save before I can come back to it, which means losing the "original" version, i.e. the article as it stood just before I started working on it. I want to be able to see the text of the whole article, in one clear run, as it was before I started on it, and it is the wording rather than the wikicode that I want to see. I don't mind if it is one of the diff versions in the "View history" pages, because I can set that beside the final version in normal view. How do I pinpoint the version in the diff list that will give me that clear run of the "original" article from beginning to end? I looked at the Wiki Help on the history pages but it didn't help. If you can find the version I am after, could you tell me what you pressed ("curr" or "prev") and the date and time? --P123cat1 (talk) 18:40, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

You mean like this ? (Go to "history", find the date you want to see, and click on the date), or like this (go to history, find the dates you want to compare, click the circle in front of both and click "compare selected versions")? Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 19:05, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Perfect! Problem solved. Both versions are useful. Thanks. --P123cat1 (talk) 20:18, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

User:182.225.181.183's recent edits

182.225.181.183 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Would someone who understands the subject matter please review this IP's recent edits. The have made some edits to articles, including changing articles into redirects, that do not appear to me to be correct. I am a lawyer not an economist so I don't have the confidence to edit or revert further, though I did roll back the edits to List of countries by distribution of wealth which did not appear to me to be appropriate. Thanks.--ukexpat (talk) 15:31, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I reverted the other (as well as the removals of the redirects on the navbox) on the basis that the redirect was undiscussed and the articles aren't really duplicates so far as I can tell, so the summary on the redirect was unclear. - Purplewowies (talk) 19:12, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Recent changes of articles in category

How can I view all recent changes of articles in a certain category including articles in all subcategories.

For example, if I use Special:RecentChangesLinked/Category:Video games it only shows changes of articles of the main category but not of articles in subcategories. --Fluffystar (talk) 16:29, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

@Fluffystar: I don't think there is a way to do this, but for the example you give there is a workaround. Most video game articles have been tagged by Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Video games, so their talk pages contain a link back to the project page. Thus you can use Special:RecentChangesLinked/Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games to see the most recent changes to any of them. You may want to filter that list to show only articles. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:11, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Article Gone

My article on Green Status Pro is missing or deleted. I think? It is not in the deletion list and there is no history. I just disappeared after being published and waiting for approval for over a month. It looks like it was never there? Any help would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steven correia (talk • contribs) 19:59, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

This is the only edit your account has saved. I guess you refer to Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Green Status Pro which was created by User:Steve Correia. It is still waiting to be reviewed. There is a large backlog. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:07, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

However, it is likely to be rejected when it is reviewed unless some serious work gets done to it in the meantime. I predict that it will be rejected for either or both of "reads like an advert" or "references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability. Please follow the links for further information on how you could improve the submission. SpinningSpark 20:28, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Elaine Brown Misplaced Pages Page

Elaine Brown (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I have attempted to edit the Misplaced Pages page regarding my mother Elaine Brown. My edits are not accepted and I would like to take down the page to replace with accurate information. I've made several attempts to remove the bigot-based accusations, unfounded sexist attacks and libelous agent provocateur racist inaccuracies. From small errors (Misspelling my name and having my grandmother's name incorrect) to fabricated lies in the fashion of J. Edgar Hoover. I would like a reply about removing the page entirely or edited to reflect reality. If that is not possible I would like to know why not, and who is the author of this page of lies, slander and error so that I might address them directly. If the coward will not discuss this page with me, nor take it down, I would like to know my options for dealing with this type of hatred for women of color, and why Misplaced Pages would promote this kind of hatred of black women.

20:25, 15 May 2014 (UTC) --Ericka88 (talk) 20:25, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Please discuss the substantive changes on the article's talk page, Talk:Elaine Brown. In the meantime I have removed the completely unsourced section.--ukexpat (talk) 20:33, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the question of who the author is, it may have been more than one person who added the information you consider inaccurate or unflattering. To find out who, in order to discuss the situation, you can click on "View history" at the top of the page. You can click on any date to see a past version, and if the problems are not present in that past version, you can click on "diff" and then "next edit" until you see the questionable edit or edits in a "diff" (Added text appears on the right side).— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:40, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Please also be aware, Ericka88, that this article is now being discussed at the Biographies of living persons noticeboard and most editors commenting there agree that the article has had serious problems. Cullen Let's discuss it 21:20, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Yuri Kovchegov and formulas

I added a research section to the above article, but I have difficulty to move the formula from reliable source to the Misplaced Pages page. I think either the site is protected or I just don't know how to put it into Misplaced Pages. Can someone please help me? Will appreciate any advise.--Mishae (talk) 21:36, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

The article on Yuri Kovchegov is not protected. Misplaced Pages:MATH gives guidance on how to use the <math> tags which Misplaced Pages uses to format mathematical formulae. Maproom (talk) 22:14, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Presumably, this is a WP:copyvio, even if it was apparently added by the organisation?

I'm working on Scottish Ballet, adding references. I've just discovered that the section on their Headquarters is a copy from here. Presumably that's a copyvio even though it was apparently by the copyright owner? If so, I'll probably revert it to the previous version and use the link as a reference, probably added a few points.--Otus scops (talk) 22:09, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

You seem to be asserting it is a copyright violation to copy from one version of a Misplaced Pages article to another. If you are asserting material was copied into Misplaced Pages from an external source, please specify the external source. Jc3s5h (talk) 22:15, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Google finds the same text here. I will delete have deleted the section as a copyvio. Maproom (talk) 22:20, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Sorry - I've fixed the "here" link above (to their own website). Thanks Maproom - I've no idea if britishdanceedition wrote it or copied it, but presumably it's a copyvio even if it originated with ScottistBallet.co.uk? Looking a bit more at their changes, they appear to have changed quite a lot, removing some historic information. I'm tempted to reinstate the historic information too.--Otus scops (talk) 22:24, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Material copied from elsewhere is generally a copyvio, even if the owner of the copyright is the one doing the copying, unless they have explicitly donated it. Material copied from another website is not often appropriate in tone for Misplaced Pages anyway. --ColinFine (talk) 08:46, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Is there a way to see the former content of deleted articles?

Is there a way to see what content a deleted article included? Thanks in advance. Voyaging 22:15, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Only administrators, checkusers, and oversighters can view or restore deleted content. There are a few options for regular editors, though:

• If you'd like an article's content restored to your userspace, you can make a request at Misplaced Pages:Requests for undeletion (assuming the deleted content wasn't an attack page, copyright violation, etc.)
• If the article was fairly established and was around for a while, the Wayback Machine may have an archived copy of the page.
• Deletionpedia.org may also have the article; I'm not sure how inclusive Deletionpedia is, though, or if it is even active anymore.

Hope this helps. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 22:21, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

This is very helpful, thanks! Voyaging 22:23, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

The original Deletionpedia has shut down (Superhamster's link is dead), but has been reincarnated here. SpinningSpark 00:59, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

There's nothing I know of that we can do about sites like Deletionpedia but it and some others like it enshrine copyvios, defamatory attack pages, utterly incorrect, unsourced biased information, hoaxes, blatant advertising, utterly non-notable subjects, mixes of the all of the above and more. There's good reason deleted content is not accessible to view here and these end runs should be burned to the ground with extreme prejudice, should not be linked to and we should not be giving advice about where they are.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:34, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Editing the Definition of a Circle

I am new to Misplaced Pages and it's provided me with much knowledge. My query concerns the definition of a circle. A circle is defined as; a point revolving around a point(Misplaced Pages;Circle;Definition). I felt the need to add to the meaning by describing a circle as; the shortest distance between two points, whereas those points remained an equal and opposite distance apart. In the formal meaning of such an elemental geometry, it is important to be precise. Certain aspects of science have the need to be updated. Even though I have no formal references, I ask you to put the latter meaning to the test as it describes more scientific aspects of ratio's and geometric patterns. An example includes a tetrahedron, which has no centre point, yet when it revolves at a balanced rate to form a sphere, there is no point revolving around a point. The circular definition must be more elliptical as the second, updated description provides, Thank-you Fridayjunior (talk) 23:32, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure that your definition is either 'precise' nor particularly clear - but in any case, Misplaced Pages is based on material which can be cited to published references. We do not include contributor's own definitions. AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:44, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for identifying a poorly written part of that article. I've added the definition from Euclid's Elements. It's stood the test of time.LeadSongDog come howl! 01:46, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

May 16

Getting rid of an error message

I keep getting "AFCH error: user not listed" when I go to my user page. How can I get rid of it. (I'm not particularly interested in being an active AfC reviewer.) Clarityfiend (talk) 00:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Somehow the gadget must have been checked in your preferences. Go to your Preferences > Gadgets and uncheck the box for AFC. Dismas| 00:08, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:20, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Citation needed notices

I put a "citation needed" notice on an article recently. I put it on to be "polite" -- in truth I do not know whether the statement I marked is valid information lacking a source OR whether it is "fantasy information" for which no reliable source exists.

It is a specialized subject. I cannot fix this myself as I would not know how to find a reliable source in the field.

I suspect the article does not get much attention from editors and that the citation needed notice could linger for a long time unnoticed and unattended to. Is there an appropriate way to raise a concern about an article to a higher level of visibility?

Thank you, CBHA (talk) 03:02, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

To editor CBHA: One way to do this is to raise the issue on the talk page of a related WikiProject. Article talk pages often have notices stating that articles are related to certain Wikiprojects; you should start with those. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 06:14, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

How do I make triplets in the score element?

I was experimenting with the <score>...</score> tags and suddenly came to a question: how to make triplets? It doesn't have anything on triplets at the score help page, but it did have a link to the notation documentation. Going there, it told me to use this:

\tuplet 3/2 { b4 b b }

or the like. (The specific thing I was looking at was here.) So I used this, but it just displayed an error message when I tried it. Help please? Eman235/talk 06:43, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't know anything about Lilypond music markup but if Wikimedia has implemented it anything like LaTeX for math markup then you can expect to find only a specific subset implemented. The error message would suggest that the \tuplet command has not been recognised and is thus not implemented at all. Always possible that it is implemented under another name but one could spend forever trying to guess what it is. However, I did manage to produce a triplet by switching to ABC notation if that's any help to you.

See ABC notation for more information. SpinningSpark 08:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I don't know music notation but mentions \times. Does that do what you want:

PrimeHunter (talk) 09:02, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

From the looks of it, the fraction needs to be the other way up:

AlexTiefling (talk) 12:39, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Cool, everyone. Thanks. Eman235/talk 03:00, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

ADDENDUM: I just tried that out. It worked fine until I added a key -- go ahead, write:

<score> \key g \minor \times 2/3 { g'8 f' g' } <score>

(take out the nowiki tags of course) and it displays an error message. Eman235/talk 03:27, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Article Submission and Approval

I submitted an article on wikipedia , its not approved yet. Whom should I contact, how to check on that? Its been more than 2 months .Its says it'll only take 23 weeks though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.141.49.54 (talk) 07:15, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

You just have to be patient, there are a lot of articles to review and they are all done by volunteer editors. However, if you provide a link to the page (or just tell us its title) we can take a look to see if the submission has been done properly (and maybe give you other advice). SpinningSpark 07:25, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

The only other edit that you made from User:14.141.49.54 is Great Online Shopping Festival. What article did you submit? -- Jreferee (talk) 09:47, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Warfarin

Company Misplaced Pages Page

I have been requested to write a page about a company on behalf of them on wikipedia. It would just be a basic description of the business, when it was founded and what they do etc. Would there be any issues with this before I commit to this to ensure neither of us have an issues due to this request.

Thank you

Rachend (talk) 10:50, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

There are a couple questions that you need to answer. First, is the company notable enough for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Our notability standards for companies can be found at WP:CORP. Second, are you disconnected enough from the company to be able to write a neutral article about them? You may have a conflict of interest there. See WP:COI and WP:NPOV to read about our conflict of interest and neutral point of view policies. Dismas| 11:54, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I am completely disconnected from the company no relationship to them at all. Had not even heard of them before. As for notability that is a tough one to determine. I have online news articles related to the company detailing when they were set up, why etc. and a very vague article on an award they were given. Does this make them notable enough or would more be needed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rachend (talk • contribs) 12:31, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

If you have never heard of this company, why are they asking you to write about them? You state above that you "have been requested ... on behalf of them ", which strongly suggests that you are a writer for hire. In that case, if they are paying for your writing services, you have one of the strongest conflicts of interest possible with Misplaced Pages, and would be very strongly discouraged (emphasis in policy) from editing a page about the company. Yunshui _水 12:40, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Would the page still end up being removed even if it stayed neutral due to this? I am new to writing a page such as this so would like to know 100% what can and cannot be done. For example if I chose not to accept payment and do this anyway for them would there still be conflict? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rachend (talk • contribs) 12:52, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Your best bet would be to use a talk page to offer other editors appropriate sources and information about the company, and then let them do the actual writing. That's what's meant by the prohibition on paid editors 'directly editing' a page in which they have a conflict of interest. You can certainly help, but you don't get to choose how the page actually gets written. Of course, all this presumes the company is sufficiently notable in the first place. AlexTiefling (talk) 12:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Just to be clear, there's a difference between articles that merely establish the existence of a company and those that establish its notability. The line between them can be fuzzy. A local newspaper talking about some new company that just started in a local industrial park doesn't establish notability. A mention in a magazine such as Wired or Forbes saying that company X exists and sells Y doesn't count towards notability. But if Wired or Forbes or something else of that caliber does an entire article on that specific company, then that helps notability. Dismas| 15:25, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

• Just to note, it might be better to put a request and whatever information and sources you actually have up at the Paid Editor's Noticeboard. That would at least allow a starting point for discussion to see if the company in question meets notability guidelines. Silverseren 02:01, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Daniel Craig

Can anybody explain why this Image:Daniel Craig 3, 2012.jpg "presents Daniel Craig in a disparaging light"? The caption for the image in the article says "Craig at the Skyfall premiere in Sydney, November 2012", but User:Trisha Borsagi changed photo where he pictured at the Academy Awards in 2009. Cybervoron (talk) 11:39, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

As far as I and at least three other users can tell, it doesn't. There is an ongoing discussion on Trisha Borsagi's talkpage where both I and another administrator have asked her to explain her reasoning; that may well be the best place to debate the issue. Yunshui _水 11:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I, for one, understand Trisha Borsagi's point. Daniel Craig's eyes and mouth in that picture do not exactly make for an appealing picture. But I'm not going to get into an edit war over it. JIP | Talk 17:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. People rarely look good when they're caught in the middle of saying something. But to say it is "disparaging" is a reach. Dismas| 17:23, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Sertoli cell tumour

Hi I have only made small edits to Wiki in the past. However I've come across a page (Sertoli cell tumor) that is confusing and inaccurate. It needs to be heavily edited. I'm finding the help pages to be very confusing about how I should do this. Unfortunately I don't have time at the moment to research how to edit the page properly. I would suggest that a warning concerning the factual accuracy of the page be displayed.

On a separate note, I found the 'talk' aspect for discussing pages (which is what I tried to do first) to be completely baffling. I could not figure it out at all.

Thanks. AlanWolfe (talk) 12:06, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

What exactly is confusing and inaccurate? Ruslik_Zero 15:57, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Creating a NavBox

Dear editors: This old AfC submission: Misplaced Pages talk:Articles for creation/Hymns of the US Armed Forces seems to be a Navbox. I haven't done any work with these, but this seems fine to me, aside from maybe needing to be broken up into two lines to be less cramped. To make it active, do I just move it into the "Template" namespace? Or is there some other process? —Anne Delong (talk) 12:07, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I think a {{sidebar}} is more appropriate in this case. --Glaisher 12:13, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Four of the five hymns are already in the songs section of Template:List of official United States national symbols which is transcluded on those four articles. That seems like too much overlap. But yes, you could just move it to template space, remove the surroundung stuff so it isn't transcluded on articles, and ensure the name parameter is the pagename of the template (this is needed to make working V T E links). PrimeHunter (talk) 12:22, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

If it became an accepted navbox then it should also be added to the corresponding articles with {{Hymns of the US Armed Forces}} near the bottom of each article. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:27, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining the technical process. It seems from this small sample of responses that it may need to be discussed first by interested parties. Which is the most appropriate Wikiproject to decide if this will be a useful addition? —Anne Delong (talk) 12:41, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

WP:USMUSIC does not appear to be very active. Perhaps the parent wikiproject of USMUSIC: WP:USA --Glaisher 12:45, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

@Anne Delong -The Military history WikiProject would also be interested. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:24, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Wrong state and address

Why does The page for Newton High School in NJ...Say Mississippi??? W/that address?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.44.39.51 (talk) 14:02, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Err.. it doesn't say "Mississippi", and as far as I can see, it never has done - were you referring to something you saw on Google, rather than our actual article on Newton High School (New Jersey) ? - Arjayay (talk) 14:13, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

There are several schools named Newton High School, including the one in New Jersey and a couple in Mississippi. RudolfRed (talk) 16:31, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I suspect this is about a Facebook page, maybe https://www.facebook.com/pages/Newton-High-School/107994562555762. I wish people would say which page they are posting about. Some Facebook pages include content from Misplaced Pages but also from other sources without specifying which content is from where. The wrong state and address is not from Misplaced Pages. I guess Facebook copied it from a source about another school of the same name and incorrectly put it on their page about the New Jersey school. We have no control over Facebook. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:35, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Index of MS-DOS games

The article Index of MS-DOS games links to several other articles, all titled "Index of MS-DOS games (letter)", where "letter" is any letter of the alphabet. Every single one of these articles is alphabetised under its name, making it look like "Index of MS-DOS games" is an actual game title. Shouldn't they all be alphabetised under "*" or something? JIP | Talk 16:59, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Not following you, can you give an example? "Index of MS-DOS games (E)" does not appear anywhere in the list at Index of MS-DOS games (E). SpinningSpark 17:31, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

If you go to the category Category:DOS games, you'll see "Index of MS-DOS games (E)" listed under "I", not right at the start. JIP | Talk 17:57, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

It's because there is no sorting parameter for that category in Index of MS-DOS games (E) or its sibling lists, whereas Index of MS-DOS games is sorted to appear at the head of the category: ].--ukexpat (talk) 20:23, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I would personally suggest that the sorting parameter be something that put the Index of MS-DOS games (E) at the beginning of the 'E' section so maybe ]?Naraht (talk) 20:36, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Newspaper Articles

Are newspaper articles acceptable? One editor on a page I am working on is disputing many of the sources because they are newspaper articles that were printed about a decade ago. The articles have since been archived digitally in such databases as ProQuest, but because this editor can not read the articles personally we have reached a disagreement about whether the sources are acceptable. I've always thought database material (journal articles, newspaper articles) were acceptable.Vuzor (talk) 20:01, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes they are, references do not have to be online to be acceptable. You should use the {{cite news}} template and complete as many of the parameters as possible so that another user can find the paper in, say, a library and verify what it says.--ukexpat (talk) 20:28, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

What Vuzor is leaving out of his narrative above is that the article in question is a BLP and that there are NO other verifiable sources for the content he is starting to argue and edit war over (again). -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 20:38, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I am not trying to edit war (for crying out loud). Asking for the help desk's opinion is not edit warring; why do you approach everything with a battle mentality. Be professional. From WP:SOURCES:

If available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources, such as in history, medicine, and science.

Editors may also use material from reliable non-academic sources, particularly if it appears in respected mainstream publications. Other reliable sources include:

university-level textbooks

books published by respected publishing houses

magazines

journals

mainstream newspapers.

Even editorials and blogs posted in newspapers (see: WP:NEWSBLOG) are acceptable. Academic publications, as mentioned, are the most reliable sources, and they are available only on databases or with subscription. I'd just like another confirmation from another editor that we can use newspaper articles sourced from a database.Vuzor (talk) 20:59, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

The article is a BLP. Different criteria, different rules. If it's not verifiable - especially from more than one source if the only source is unverifiable in itself - then the associated content should go. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 21:33, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

The exact page I just quoted, Misplaced Pages:Verifiability, defines a source as:

The word "source" in Misplaced Pages has three meanings:

the type of the work (some examples include a document, an article, or a book)

the creator of the work (for example, the writer)

the publisher of the work (for example, Oxford University Press).

All three can affect reliability.

Base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.

The same article talks about BLP articles as well, so the same criteria do in fact apply to those articles.

Be especially careful when sourcing content related to living people or medicine.

If available, academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources, such as in history, medicine, and science.

Databases are accurate and reliable. These rules apply to BLP articles as well. The newspapers themselves are very much reliable sources. One editor here has said newspaper article sourced from a database are fine, but in good faith (I'm not trying to edit war and I very sincerely want us to cooperate professionally) I am waiting for a second confirmation. If there is a misunderstanding about the rules by either of us, then it is best that it be cleared up here so we can move forward. Vuzor (talk) 22:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Repeating (because you aren't grasping the concept): a BLP needs to have VERIFIABLE references. An article that isn't accessible is not freely verifiable. If what you were wanting to reference is available elsewhere, then use both the unverifiable and verifiable references. Because one reference is not verifiable, it isn't a good source FOR A BLP and the content isn't appropriate for a BLP. The content you insist on adding isn't verifiable anywhere else but the alleged source. If it's not available to be fact-checked, it shouldn't be in a BLP to begin with. And...this isn't a history, medicine, or science article, it's about a musician. That isn't even an apples/oranges comparison. More like a apples/cars comparison. You really should consider letting this one go - if you want to be professional and cooperative, that is. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 22:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I'd like to hear someone else's opinion before "letting this one go." Newspaper articles are reputable. In fact, this is addressed on the same page, Misplaced Pages:Verifiability. Quick access to the excerpt below at WP:SOURCEACCESS, and also a link to Misplaced Pages:Offline sources, where the template reads "This page in a nutshell: Offline sources are just as valid as online sources."

Access to sources

Some reliable sources may not be easily accessible. For example, an online source may require payment, and a print source may be available only in university libraries or other offline places. Do not reject sources just because they are hard or costly to access. If you have trouble accessing a source, others may be able to do so on your behalf (see WikiProject Resource Exchange).

It's written pretty clearly. I would like another person's opinion.Vuzor (talk) 22:33, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

And once again, you prove yourself unable to just say "Okay, I'll let it go and work cooperatively with someone I don't necessarily agree with". You ALWAYS want someone else's opinion when you disagree with another's opinion that's already been given. You ALWAYS run to notice boards and help boards and open RfCs rather than just editing with others and accepting that your opinion may not be the right one or the only one. This is one of the many reasons why you will never be happy in Misplaced Pages. It's also one of the many reasons why the complaints you file and the RfCs you open garner few to no responses. You still haven't learned from your past mistakes and the advice you've already been given.

Bottom line regarding your unverifiable source is that the following is very clear: "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately". An unverifiable source when it is the ONLY reference available for content in a BLP falls under the category of "poorly sourced"-- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 23:23, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I could ask you the exact same thing. Why don't you let it go and allow these acceptable sources to be used? The MOS itself says they can be used, as did another editor here. You create issues out of non-issues. I simply want another person's opinion. I ask for other people's opinions because you and I disagree often on what can be considered an acceptable source. That is not edit warring. That is finding a solution and reaching a conclusion when neither of us agree on something. Misplaced Pages has provided us with provisions to resolve issues in this way. Could you please set aside your ego this time and let someone else provide their advice. Ukexpat already gave us an answer and that could have easily concluded this discussion, but you argued. In good faith (since one answer isn't enough for you), I request another editor's comment to help us resolve this. Are newspaper articles sourced from a database acceptable? Vuzor (talk) 23:38, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

• Winkelvi, you are grossly in the wrong on this one. Print sources are perfectly acceptable, and meet WP:V, even if they are not available online. This is long-established in Misplaced Pages, and I'm amazed to see you asserting otherwise in blatant defiance of WP:RS and WP:AGF. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:17, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

I have nothing to add to Orange Mike's and my previous comments.--ukexpat (talk) 01:26, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

• I agere with Orangemike. It is longstanding policy that information contained in reliable printed sources, or reliable online sources that charge for access, is verifiable and may be used anywhere information from reliable free online sources may be used. Claiming print sources are not acceptable makes Misplaced Pages editors look like a bunch of book burners, and is an extremely detrimental attitude. Jc3s5h (talk) 01:29, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

• Sources do not have to be available online. Printed sources are perfectly acceptable and verifiable. They do not have to be easily verifiable just verifiable. An old newspaper that is only available on microfiche is still reliable and verifiable. GB fan 01:32, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

It seems you guys are missing my point: The alleged newspaper articles cited, are unavailable without a subscription. They are from as far back as over a couple decades have no reliable source to support them. I've done countless searches to see if there is anything out there that would be a replacement source for the content. Nothing is available. The unavailable reference is a poor source to support content that is contestable. If this weren't a BLP article, I'd be willing to let it go. It's because this is a BLP that I'm standing my ground on this. It seems my opinion is going to be shot down on this. And I'm willing to accept that and move on. What I have a real hard time accepting is that a BLP is being treated like non-BLPs when it comes to verifiability following contestation. You guys are quoting policy, but are forgetting that this is material that is allegedly supported by a source that cannot be found anywhere other than in some secret lockbox article. In fact, it is so hidden that nothing else on the entire world wide web refers to it. Anywhere. If it's only found in one place where you have to have special access to access it, how verifiable is it? How reliable is it? Why does only this one source have it? That smells like a dubious source to me, frankly. And most certainly not verifiable. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 05:01, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Winkelvi, you calling these sources "secret lockbox" articles is ridiculous. They are from ProQuest and other archival institutions which house a plethora of journal article databases and newspaper databases, including content from such publications as The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The New York Times, New York Tribune, Los Angeles Times, The Globe and Mail, the properties owned by Postmedia Network (the largest newspaper publishing corporation in Canada), and many other highly-reputable publications. These sources are used in academia on a regular basis and are certainly appropriate here. It's been mentioned here many times already that newspaper articles sourced from databases are appropriate. The articles have been cited fully (date, author, title, publication, article version, etc), yet you took the liberty of removing them, labeling the content as "poorly sourced," and then putting a big "BLP sources" template at the top of the Misplaced Pages article. You even reverted an administrator's revision of the page, for crying out loud. You appear to be trying to match that content with information from a web search engine, which implies you've misunderstood entirely what reliable sources and unverifiable content are. The meaning of those two terms has already been explained to you on the following talk page: . Vuzor (talk) 05:22, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

WP:VERIFY explicitly says that verifiability does not mean that every single reader must have instantaneous free access to all sources, it says that a verifiable source is one that is availalable to someone. Even a document that exists as a single know copy locked up in Fort Knox is acceptable source, because somebody does have a key to the vault and can be asked to check the content of the document. A hieroglyphic inscription on a ruin in Egypt is also an acceptable source, because there are people who can read it.

If a reader (such as User:Winkelvi) has a good faith reason to doubt the veracity of a cited statement in an article but the source is not accessible to him/her, then he/she should post a request to Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request where someone who does have a subscription to ProQuest will help to verify the questioned claim. We accept sources in any language but obviously all readers are not fluent in every single written language that has ever existed - this further reinforces the point that the modifiers "free/freely" or "easy/easily" do not belong on front of "verifiable" unless they are preceded by "not". Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:31, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, Roger (Dodger67). The most concise and understandable explanation yet on this issue. No insults, no berating, no condescension, AND, it includes a sensible, workable solution/suggestion. You get the "Most Helpful Award of the Day", sir. -- Winkelvi ● ✉ ✓ 07:42, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Reverting Good Faith, No Clue, and Vandalism edits. And Also Twinkle

1. Just recently, I started patrolling edits in Recent Changes. I encountered vandalism edits, which I had reverted and marked it as a minor edit. But does that go for the same if I revert good faith or No Clue edits? Do I mark those as minor edits too? So far, I didn't mark them as minor edits just to be on the safe side.
2. I also have another question about Twinkle. Twinkle was so easy to use to revert edits. There were no complicated steps, plus it brings up the Talk Page of the editor too. But sometimes, the Twinkle toolbar, the (Rollback (AGF)--Rollback--Rollback (Vandalism)) does not show and I have to do it using the Undo button which takes a longer time. Is there a way I can make Twinkle show for every diff? Thanks,TheQ Editor (Talk) 20:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

For question 2, several editors have reported problems with gadgets such as Twinkle in the last few hours. Be patient, and with luck someone will get the problem fixed quickly and then Twinkle will be reliable again. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:50, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

@TheQ Editor: Please note that you are not restricted to rollback (all edits by one editor that are contiguous) or undo (just the last edit); you can also do a manual revert. Go to the history → click on the date you want to revert to → click edit → save page.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit:, I know that but when reverting a good faith edit, do I choose minor edit? I know you have to do it when reverting vandalism but how about good faith or no clue edits?TheQ Editor (Talk) 22:03, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

lowercase title help (such as iPad, eBay)

I've got what I'm sure is a stupid question. I've already made a mess of things, so I hope someone can help. I moved the page IZOMBIE (TV series) to IZombie (TV series), then tried to use {{lowercase title}} to force iZombie. For whatever reason, it did not work, but I could get it to work on the redirect I had created with the move. So I moved it back and tried again (there is something in the documentation for the template about moves/redirects) but I still can't get it right. Help? Thanks a bunch. --Logical Fuzz (talk) 20:43, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Ukexpat and I fixed it by adding {{DISPLAYTITLE:''iZombie'' (TV series)}} to the top and removing the auto-italicising provided by the infobox. /~huesatlum/ 20:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you both so much! --Logical Fuzz (talk) 21:12, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Find a conversation

This was originally misplaced at WP:AN; I've moved it from there. Nyttend (talk) 22:08, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm recalling a conversation that I had with another user, and I want to be able to find a DIFF for a particular comment. Is there a tool to find the comment if I remember the wording, or do I have to slog through all the posts? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 21:50, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I think the best you'll get is the editor interaction analyzer. Put in both of your names and look for the smallest timestamps.--v/r - TP 22:18, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I think WP:WIKIBLAME will do this. I've seen it mentioned like this before for finding where some info entered an article but I've never actually used it. Dismas| 22:52, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

I was generally aware of both of those tools, but neither seem to be able to find posts, specifically posts that might have been deleted. Is there another tool that searches through page versions for keywords or phrases? - Jack Sebastian (talk) 03:09, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

May 17

Centering a table

Hello,

In the Confiscated_Armenian_properties_in_Turkey article, I want the External video box centered within the box. See Mkhitaryan Bomonti Armenian School. I want the External video box centered and all other boxes to be the same for that matter. Étienne Dolet (talk) 00:19, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

See Help:TABLECENTER. --  Gadget850 00:57, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

@Gadget850: That may not work for an External video table. Can you please do it for me? Étienne Dolet (talk) 01:10, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

IF you mean {{external media}}, then try |float=center per that template's documentation. --  Gadget850 01:23, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

@Gadget850: Even when I do that it doesn't work and it still aligns to the right. Étienne Dolet (talk) 06:12, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Opinion needed for article name

This is a rather basic and subjective question to be asking here, but the help desk does seem like the place to ask.

I'm wanting to write an article about this incident. There has been tons of news coverage of it over the past two years and it has had significant policy changes and legal and political ramifications for both the US and Mexico because of it, so the notability really isn't in question.

What I would like the opinion of others for is what should I name the article? I'm not sure if there is a common name for this incident, so I was thinking perhaps I should go with El Patinadero shooting for now? Silverseren 02:09, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Ideally, you should use whatever published sources call it. If they all just write about the incident without using a name for it, a possibility is "killing of Guillermo Arévalo Pedraza". Maproom (talk) 06:23, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

If sources use a variety of names use the most specific unambiguous one and redirect the others - "redirects are cheap". Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:42, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

The article about Nathan (given name)

I added to the article that it only covers the Western name because Nathan is also a common Indian name or part of Indian name and refers to Lord Krishna. I think someone else removed my sentence. If my sentence does not meet Misplaced Pages guidelines then can the information be added in a way that can meet Misplaced Pages guidelines? Misplaced Pages is not only for Western people and the article should also mention the Indian name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.60.121.75 (talk) 05:45, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Everything added to a Misplaced Pages article should be supported by independent references supporting the information. You will need to find places in books or articles explaining what the name Nathan means to Indians, and how exactly it "refers to Lord Krishna". Rojomoke (talk) 06:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

That wasn't too hard:

http://www.modernindianbabynames.com/meaning_of_hindi_boy_name_nathan.htm

http://www.indiachildnames.com/name.aspx?name=Nathan

HiLo48 (talk) 06:38, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict)What you added looked reasonable to me, but was not quite in the style Misplaced Pages prefers for such notes. I have re-added it, in something closer to the preferred style. Maproom (talk) 06:40, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages help forums