Help desk
< January 8	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 10 >

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.

January 9

Stelly Stell PROD

Hello. I keep getting this message. This article is about a living person and appears to have no references. All biographies of living people created after March 2010 must have at least one reference to a reliable source. If no reliable references are found and added within a seven-day grace period, this article may be deleted. This is an important policy to help prevent the retention of incorrect material. Please note that adding reliable sources is all that is required to prevent the scheduled deletion of this article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once the article has at least one reliable source, you may remove this tag. Find sources: Gbooks · Gscholar · Gnews recent · Gnews old · NYT · Wikipedia Reference Search Reviewer tools: policy project (Stelly Stell • talk • bio • log) Move: incubate Header: deprod checked checking Footer: +references +external links This template was added Wednesday, 8 January; This article may be deleted on or after Wednesday, 15 January.

Notification of the article's author(s) is strongly recommended. Notification template: ==Proposed deletion of Stelly Stell==

The article Stelly Stell has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this newly created biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

All biographies of living people created after March 18, 2010, must have references.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Spitimas (talk) 03:48, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Click the links! They're there to help you. The article Stelly Stell has no references. You need to add at least one reliable source to that article or it will likely be deleted when January 15 rolls around. - Purplewowies (talk) 03:58, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We understand that creating your first article can be frustrating and overwhelming. Please be aware that the notices posted on the page and on your talk page are there to help you resolve problems that have been identified by either a bot (program) or a human (volunteer). Removing those notices from the article does not make the problem(s) go away; bots have a good memory and humans are hard to fool. This is why Wikipedia uses both to monitor new pages. We apologize if you might be experiencing "information overload" at this point. The bottom line for your situation relates to the links posted by Purplewowies, above [and I have made bold for your convenience]; also see: WP: Notability (people). After reading the information from those two links, if you have any specific questions, please come back here and ask — that's why we volunteer to be here (instead of roaming around in the polar vortex and freezing to death). However, keep in mind the possibility that the topic: Stelly Stell might not be currently suitable as a Wikipedia article; if so, please don't take it personally. ~Thanks, ~Eric F:71.20.250.51 (talk) 05:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Addition of a new name to Wikipedia

I should like to add the name and details of a published author. Can you tell me how I do this please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.30.190.225 (talk) 08:53, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Create an account and head over to Wikipedia:Article wizard. Scarce2 (talk) 10:02, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But read Wikipedia:Notability first, particularly the section about creative professionals. Simply being published does not make an author a suitable subject for a Wikipedia article. You will need to assemble your references to reliable sources before you create an article. It will almost certainly be deleted very quickly if you don't include references that show why and how your subject passes the notability test. - Karenjc (talk) 10:19, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Leroy Dean chambers

Just want to let you know my name is Leroy Dean chambers and not Leroy Edna chambers and I scored 31 goals for altrincham thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.183.128.53 (talk) 10:21, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing out potential inaccuracies with this article. I have changed your name in the article per your request - can't find a source but it sounds more plausible than the previous version and it is a relatively uncontroversial change. The stats for your time at Altrincham are cited to Soccerbase. Can you point us at a published source to confirm the change you want us to make? - Karenjc (talk) 10:42, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of Bollywood films of 2013

Your requiring sources/talk page discussion to change the article is correct and edits made that alter the article without sourcing/talk page discussion can be reverted. The whole "top ten grossing Bollywood films at the Indian box office in 2013" is problematic as it raises original research issues, not news issues, and whether web site sourcing is sufficiently reliable to support the gross amounts, which continue to change over time. We are only nine days into 2014 and I did not find any 2014 news sources discussing top ten grossing Bollywood films at the Indian box office (domestic nett gross in India only) in 2013. The focus usually is on the top 10 grossers abroad (e.g., see Bollywood Files Abroad January 8, 2014), since that is were At best, that subsection can only focus in domestic nett.gross and not additionally go into ranking. If a few of us agree here, I think we can remove the Highest-grossing films subsection in the List of Bollywood films of 2013 article. -- Jreferee (talk) 14:13, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For new artical

Hi, will you please tell me the process, how to write artial and photograph about the person. I want to upload the biography of one awarded teacher. rgds, Prakash Tiwari — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prakashml2002 (talk • contribs) 13:44, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As you have already opened an account, the best way to start is to use the Wikipedia:Article wizard. However, Wikipedia only has articles about subjects that are notable, as defined in Wikipedia:Notability. Unless your teacher has had significant coverage, in reliable sources, that are independent of the subject, it is highly likely that the article will be deleted. For a simple guide of how Wikipedia defines these terms, please see WP:42. - Arjayay (talk) 13:57, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, WP:BTIP lists tips for writing biographies. -- Jreferee (talk) 14:20, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

JOHN HENRY OSHAWA MAYOR CONTENT BEING WRONGLY REMOVED

I HAVE MADE "DIRECT QUOTES" FROM LOCAL NEWSPAPERS OSHAWA THIS WEEK AND OSHAWA EXPRESS REGARDS INFORMATION PERTAINING TO OSHAWA MAYOR JOHN HENRY BUT SOMEONE IS REMOVING "FACTUAL INFORMATION"?? OSHAWA EXPRESS JANUARY 8, 2014 page 1,4 CLEARLY STATE MY ALLEGATIONS ABOUT MAYOR JOHN HENRY AS "FACTUAL AND ACCURATE", WHY ARE THEY BEING REMOVED BY PROFESSOR????? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.252.212.73 (talk) 15:09, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, please do not post in all caps, it is considered the online version of yelling at people, and is quite impolite (see WP:CIVIL).

You have been adding content to this article, much of it quite negative, without citing reliable sources in the article. According to our policy on Biographies of Living People, Wikipedia will not include such content without an inline citation to a reliable source. This is not optional. Such additions are normally promptly removed, as you have found.

You have also removed entire reference sections, apparently because you did not approve of the selections of references used. The solution is to discuss the choices of references, not to remove the {{reflist}} template which makes the entire referencing mechanism for the article work.

Please discuss what you think proper changes on the article should be at Talk:John Henry (politician). Please assume good faith on the part of other editors, not accusing them of being "shills" or of accepting "payoffs". Such personal attacks are simply not acceptable here. Please present specific citations, if possible with online links, to sources that support any content you wish to add or change in the article. If online links are not available, exact date and page number references should be provided, so that anyone can easily verify the statements.

Please remember that Wikipedia works on consensus and collaboration. Thank you. DES ^(talk) 15:35, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

incorrect statement on ALDO NOVA PAGE he was not a one hit wonder please remove negative comment!

I think we should all band together and write Wikipedia and make them remove their reference to Aldo Nova as a 'one hit wonder'...It is an absurd and incorrect reference! and as one of his biggest fans since the beginning it insults me and infuriates me!...here is the opening line on Wikipedia..."Fantasy" made him what some would call a one-hit wonder" It SHOULD READ : "Fantasy made him what some would consider a Genius and one of the most creative and talented people to ever live!" I have already written them! lmc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.23.51.87 (talk) 15:44, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. "All band together" is exactly what we are doing in creating Wikipedia. It is not "their" Wikipedia, it is "our" Wikipedia - which includes you, if you would like to contribute. You are free to edit that article - and you are welcome to do so, as long as you follow Wikipedia's rules and customs. One of the rules is to write all articles from a neutral point of view. You are quite right that the reference to a "one hit wonder" is inappropriate, and I have just removed it (the way it was written, it looked as if that phrase comes from a source, but in fact it doesn't appear to be in the source). But by the same token your "Genius and one of the most creative and talented people to ever live" is not permitted in the article, unless (again) you can find a reliable published source, unconnected with the singer, which says those things about him.

If there are further changes you would like to see in the article, you may edit the article and make them; but (especially if they might be controversial) it is probably best to suggest them first on the article's talk page, and get consensus with other editors. --ColinFine (talk) 16:25, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

War crimes in occupied Poland during World War II: Request for mediation

Two established and competent editors are involved in a protracted dispute over referencing in a GA review. I tried to mediate the argument as best I could, but I am neither familiar enough with the GA criteria nor referencing on Wikipedia to be able to give a definitive opinion on the matter. I ask that any long-term GA reviewers, as well as anyone familiar with referencing on Wikipedia, to comment on the GAN page and help us reach consensus. I am sad that this dispute has so soured the relationship between these two editors, and I think we need several members of the community to step in and help resolve this dispute. This is an urgent matter, and the sooner other editors step in, the better. I would greatly appreciate any assistance you can give us in the matter. Thank you. AmericanLemming (talk) 23:57, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The reviewer has decided to fail the article, so there is no longer any need for mediation; the nominator and the reviewer will go their separate ways. AmericanLemming (talk) 02:06, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The dispute is over referencing styles/variation in citation methods per WP:CITEVAR. WP:CITEVAR requires consensus anyone having a good knowledge of citation methods at the GA level, please help move the matter at Talk:War crimes in occupied Poland during World War II/GA1 forward. -- Jreferee (talk) 13:43, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]