Help desk
< May 12	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 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.

May 13

Contributions page

Is it possible for anyone to read my user's "Contributions" page? If not, who can read it, and how do they do it? --P123cat1 (talk) 01:32, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anybody can read your user contributions by going to your userpage and clicking on "user contributions" under "tools" in the side menu. By the way, there is no need to be rude about other people just because they are not aware of of the principles of Wikipedia. Spinning Spark 02:03, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and apologies for my rude comment, which I have removed. --P123cat1 (talk) 02:13, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@P123cat1: As explained above, anyone can see it. And that comes in very handy especially at pages like this help desk. Say a user comes and asks why all their edits are being removed but doesn't specify what article or edits they're referring to. By looking through their contribs, we can see what article they were editing and then find why the edits were removed. It also comes in handy when dealing with vandals to know what other articles they might have vandalized. Dismas|^(talk) 07:11, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Creating new categories/subsections in a page

How do I create a subsection in a page such as my User page? Also how do I insert images and arrange the page? Warrenkychu (talk) 04:03, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Warrenkychu. You can use the same code for your userpage as you do for articles and any other pages on Wikipedia. If you need to review the code, go to the cheatsheet or the editing tutorial. Just a note about images: Wikipedia does not allow fair-use images outside of articles, so check the image description (you can usually find it by clicking on an image) for anything that says "non-free". If there's something that says that, you can't use it. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 04:30, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Warrenkychu (talk) 04:56, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Change my username please

Is there a way to change my username? The one I set up with was just a spurr of the moment rush and I would like to change it to something more mature can you help me change my current username from fantaman88 to wiremanne123

Many thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by FantaMan88 (talk • contribs) 04:49, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Changing username - though as yet you've not really done anything significant under your existing name, and it would be simpler just to start a new account, and abandon the old one. AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:43, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

your site has double standards

Dustin Lance Black's "owners" won't allow people to add Tom Daley as his boyfriend. But on tom daley's page, black is listed as his boyfriend. how ridiculous this site is becoming. then your admin actually locked black's page.

so i don't know what your site is trying to covey here. why do you contradict yourself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.198.182.185 (talk) 09:46, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No one owns the page. It was semi-protected (so any autoconfirmed user (4 days, 10 edits) can edit the article). It was done to promote compliance with the BLP policy. I don't have the time to really look into the situation, but just because other stuff exists doesn't mean it's okay in either place. - Purplewowies (talk) 09:58, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not double standards, just different people working on different articles and seeing things a little different. Someone was adding poorly sourced negative information about Black so the article was protected so that won't happen. The proper venue when there is a problem with an article is to raise the question in a civil manner on the article's talk page. You can use the {{edit semi-protected}} template to request an edit be the article. If you use that template, please be specific about what changes should be made and give reliable sources to support your proposed changes. GB fan 10:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Let me repeat it one more time. this is very simple.

in tom daley's article, he has dustin black as his boyfriend. but in dustin black's page, it is not "allowed" to add tom daley as his boyfriend.

there is absolutely no reason that you can explain why this is happening according to any of your rules.

this kind of stupid double standards is the reason why no one is using wikipedia as a reliable source any more. and the admin who protected that article should be fired for abusing his power. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.198.182.185 (talk) 11:54, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you've got a reliable source for the information, it can be added to both articles. (I notice that DLB's article currently has such a line, with two sources.) You'll do better if you don't call the entire site names like 'retarded', and if you check that your claims - both about the encyclopedia and about its subjects - are true before launching a complaint. AlexTiefling (talk) 12:06, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

182.185 I added the information to Dustin Lance Black before I responded to your original post above. I am not sure what your problem is now. GB fan 12:18, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you may have misunderstood the page protection. No-one is saying that the addition of Tom Daley's name is "not allowed" (in the past that might have been the case, because Wikipedia doesn't present hearsay as fact, but recently sufficient sources have become available for information to be reported here). The addition of Tom Daley's name was not the reason for the article being locked down - that was due to other violations of Wikipedia's (fairly strict!) guidelines on biographies of living people. As an IP editor, I'm afraid that means that no, you couldn't add the information about Daley yourself - but as GB fan has pointed out above, it has now - at your suggestion - been done for you. Yunshui ^雲 _水 12:20, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

this site is retarded, because it allows the administrators to abuse their powers. such as this one. it is retarded, because when i tried to add the information, my edition was reverted many times. then the admin actually DELETED all my editions for no reason at all!

and for the last few months, many people tried to add the SAME thing, but their changes were all reverted!

who can use wikipedia "rules" to explain to me why my editions were all deleted?

and shouldn't the admin be punished for abusing his/her power? shouldn't that that page be clearned of the protection again?

further, his explicit sex photos story is still not allowed to be added. that happened several years ago. and wikipedia still hasn't added it! and he already won the lawsuit!

and my story of him and Pasadena City College story was also deleted for no particular reason at all! someone should add it, too. you can find plenty of news reports b/w him and PCC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.198.182.185 (talk) 12:46, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked this IP. A review of contributions going back several years shows a persistent history of trolling, and the above reply just ices the cake. Yunshui ^雲 _水 12:53, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Loading a photo to a Wikipedia page

Hello,

I would like to load a photo to the page Peter Wilson Writer Peter Wilson (writer)

Can you tell me how to do this?

Thank you, Leister — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leister Freeman (talk • contribs) 10:54, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you own the copyright to the photo, or it is in the public domain, you can upload it to Commons. Thanks. James^x12345 11:06, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must determine the proper license of the image (or whether it is in the public domain). If you know the image is public domain or copyrighted but under a suitable free-license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure of the licensing status, see the file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy.
If you want to add an image that has already been uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, add [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information. I hope this helps.--ukexpat (talk) 13:03, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Repeating "Cite book" with different page numbers

I know how to use <ref name> in combination with {{cite book}} but I am not sure how to add page numbers when citing different pages in the same book. Iirc, there is an additional little template that adds the page numbers but my search-fu seems to be broken today as I just can't find the help I need. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:31, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think the simplest way to do this is using {{rp}} -- John of Reading (talk) 11:36, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's it! Thanks. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:42, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Assessment tables - Four hundred and four!

Assessment tables used by many WikiProjects have not been working for a week. Clicking on entries in a table produces a Four hundred and four! error message. Who should editors contact to have this rectified? Thanks in advance, XOttawahitech (talk) 12:25, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have posted to Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Index#404 on enwp10 tool. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of most expensive buildings in the world

This List of most expensive buildings in the world doesn't really make any sense, as the "Completed" table sort-of duplicates the table above. It's also part of wikiproject India according to the talk page, which I don't think is valid. However I don't really know where to start with tidying it up, perhaps someone could point it in the direction of a suitably qualified project team? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.146.140 (talk) 12:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Try wp:WikiProject Architecture or wp:WikiProject Skyscrapers? XOttawahitech (talk) 12:41, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see that the list omits the Great Pyramid of Giza, whose construction cost has been estimated as 111 million jugs of beer and 126 million loaves of bread.^[1] Maproom (talk) 13:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

^ Smith, Craig (June 1999). "Program Management B.C." Civil Engineering Magazine.

Partyfine

I created the page Partyfine for a new french record label as information on its formation and activities are rather scattered. Obviously I thought it was importance but likely did not include enough to merit it being considered of importance. How do I go about getting the article back so I can add more content as so it be reconsidered? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dinkydarko (talk • contribs) 13:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What you would need to add is not so much content, as evidence that the subject is notable. As you have pretty much admitted that it is not (yet) notable, I suggest you give up for now. Maproom (talk) 13:42, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I have restored it to Draft:Partyfine if you think you can satisfy Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). PrimeHunter (talk) 13:49, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the replies. I dont think I was trying to suggest that the label at the moment is not notable. I don't think that commercial success should equate to notability. It is notable for its promotion of new French talent and its collaborations between popular producers/DJs and up and coming artists. If you could point me to come more guidance on this, I'll review my submission and decide if I can update to it meet the requirements. Thanks Dinkydarko (talk) 13:58, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Notability", as used on Wikipedia, is not about commercial success. It is defined at Wikipedia:Notability (click on those blue words). Maproom (talk) 16:32, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll read it up before resubmitting. Dinkydarko (talk) 12:41, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also advise you to read WP:UPANDCOMING as far as those up-and-coming artists. --Orange Mike | Talk 12:44, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How do I find users cross-language?

Hi,

I'm looking for users in order to talk about photo usage permissions etc. Sometimes they are really hard to track down. I know of this page: Special:ListUsers

But it only finds users in that specific language part of wikipedia. I want to look for explicit user names on all of wikipedia / media / commons etc. Is there a tool for that?

Thanks, Garfunkel Jansen (talk) 13:56, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You could try Special:CentralAuth. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:01, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, that's pretty good. Thank you. It still doesn't find everything though. I'm looking at a talk page for a user right now (Dkaeuferle), but CentralAuth doesn't find anything at all. Any other tools? Garfunkel Jansen (talk) 14:10, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This finds accounts at commons & dewiki, but the 3 edits were more than 7 years ago. I think that may be where you've been, but I see that you didn't sign your comment at de:Benutzer Diskussion:Dkaeuferle. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:34, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing, that's the tool I was looking for! Stupid of me to forget to sign, I'll update and fix it. I'm looking for a lot of people, working on a educational rpg that's about animals. Lot of work, but this will help me out a great deal. Thanks! Garfunkel Jansen (talk) 14:48, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Primary 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? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Davidpapworth (talk • contribs) 14:15, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes music magazines and similar published sources are ideal. That the magazine no longer exists (in the sense of currently publishing) is of no consequence - physical copies of the magazine almost certainly can be found in libraries and archives. Just be sure to cite the full details of the publication - author, date, magazine title, page number, article title, and soon. If an online archive exists you may add the url as a convenience but it is not essential. However, sometimes such "archives" are in fact copyright violations which must not be linked. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:37, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Deletion of page named "Alere"

Hi Wikipedia, Recently a colleague of mine created a page called "Alere" and it was recently deleted. We're trying to get more insight as to the specific reasons why so that we do not make the same mistakes twice. Here's the specific information we received in regards to the deletion:

· 01:35, 17 April 2014 DragonflySixtyseven (talk | contribs) deleted page Alere (unsalvageable mess - start over from scratch, sorry)

Are there guidelines for staying away from "unsalvageable mess" that we can follow so that if we recreate the page it will not violate this rule or others? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rainboy3106 (talk • contribs) 14:43, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It read like a company brochure and was written by in part by User:AlereCorporate - am I right in thinking you also work for Alere? The version that was deleted can be seen by anyone at [1]. However, User:Helen1023 wrote the first version[2] and I'm wondering if User:DragonflySixtyseven might consider restoring that version. You and your colleague (I'll probably block that account under our username policy) need to restrict yourselves to the talk page I think. See WP:COI Dougweller (talk) 15:24, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UN is advice for User:AlereCorporate if he/she decides to come back.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:23, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reflinks tool

I would like to double-check that I have uploaded the Reflinks tool onto my .js page correctly, as I am having trouble using it. I tried two ways. (1) I went to User:Dispenser/Reflinks, scrolled down to "User Script", clicked on "edit", copied the code there, and pasted it into my .js page. (2) I even tried copy-pasting the code as it appears under the "User Script" paragraph, but that didn't work either. In both cases, I remembered to press Ctrl and Refresh for Internet Explorer (my browser) as instructed. What, if anything, have I done wrong? --P123cat1 (talk) 14:46, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There does not seem to be anything wrong with the code you have installed (I copy pasted it into my account just as you have it on your common.js page and it worked fine). What stage are you having a problem with? Do you see the Reflinks link at the bottom of the tools drop-down menu in the sidebar? Does the Reflinks tool open when you click it? What page are you trying to get Reflinks to edit? Spinning Spark 17:32, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding. Yes, the Reflinks link appears in the drop-down menu you mention, and when I click it, it does open the "Webreflinks" page; the code then fills in OK, but I can get no further. That page should apparently have the "Save" button at the bottom greyed in and the "Show preview" button not, but on mine it is the other way round. (See the screenshots uploaded last week by Dismas on his Talk page; those were his own screenshots and was trying to help me solve my Reflinks problem.) I can't press "Show preview", which I understand is the next step, because it is greyed in, only "Save" and when I press that, the article comes up in non-edit mode with a red message saying "can't process edit due to loss of data", or words to that effect, "please log out, then log in, and try again". Doesn't work. So I am left with a footnote reflecting the bare URL I put in the article's edit page, not a Reflinks footnote. I battled with trying to get it to work in the Addison Cresswell Wiki article, but failed. The footnote #10 there does actually show as a Reflinks one, but I only achieved that by manually copying the code in the Webreflinks box (the Reflinks tool did manage to come up with the right code) and pasting it in at the appropriate spot in the article's edit page and then saving. So the tool is basically only doing half its job. At one stage in my experiments I kept getting a lot of ##s throughout the text and some red error "cite" messages; the Talk page for Reflinks mentions this can happen with older browsers, but my browser is fairy new, Internet Explorer #9 (2011) or #11 (2013), not sure which, so not old. Can you help out, please? --P123cat1 (talk) 00:36, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried with a different browser? Say Firefox or Chrome? Dismas|^(talk) 01:05, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, I haven't, I only have IE, and am not savvy enough to download Chrome or Firefox myself. Wish there was a way of finding out if there was a Wiki user who has IE and can make Reflinks work. That's the only sure way of knowing whether IE is the problem or there is a bug in the tool when it is used with IE, though it does look so far as if there is a basic incompatability there. Am hoping SpinningSpark will come back on this. --P123cat1 (talk) 01:37, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Installing a browser is really rather simple. Firefox is available here and Chrome is available here. And you trying a different browser would tell us just as much as someone else using IE. Dismas|^(talk) 03:51, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just *shudder* used IE to see what would happen and I ran into the same issue that you have where Save was available but Show Preview was greyed out. Dismas|^(talk) 04:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Addison Creswell article no longer has any bare urls so there is nothing for reflinks to do in that article and the "save" option is therefore not offered. I can no longer test directly on that article. In sandbox, however both Firefox and IE11 are working, although in IE you need to press the "save" button instead of "preview", but in both cases you are taken to a normal edit page where you can then save. However, IE littered the article with # characters. IE is apparently a pain for developers, it chooses to do things differently from the rest of the internet and it is quite a frequent problem that things that work on other browsers won't work properly on IE. I agree with Dismas, your best way forward is to try another browser; I use Firefox. You can have more than one browser installed at the same time and they will coexist quite happily so you will be able to go back to using IE any time you want to. Other than that, you can report the problems to User:Dispenser who runs the tool (e-mail is probably best as they do not seem to edit very frequnetly). Spinning Spark 09:35, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dismas, I will try Firefox. Thanks for the link.

SpinningSpark, I did say the footnote is now a Reflinks one and how I managed to make it so. I have taken out the Reflinks code for footnote #10 and left it with the bare URL. (Readers can still access the article from the altered footnote #10.) Could you try it out now, please? --P123cat1 (talk) 13:02, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, there are hundreds of articles that have bare URLs as references. There isn't really a need to make another. Dismas|^(talk) 13:15, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tried it on the article; same result as my sandbox version (but I didn't actually save anything). Firefox does it nice and clean, but IE litters the article with # characters and breaks all the interwiki links. There is nothing we can do to fix the problems in IE. See this help page for reflinks on the toolserver. It seems that if you really insist on using IE you need to disable XSS, there is a link to a pdf (edit: deadlink) on that page telling you how to do that. Other than that you need to talk to the author of reflinks or Microsoft as appropriate. We can't do anything about it on this help desk. Spinning Spark 13:26, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dismas: Installed Firefox and Reflinks works perfectly. You say hundreds of articles have bare URLs. I clicked on the link you gave and they recommend not using them since they are vulnerable to link rot, and I have come across many "dead" links in footnotes when copy-editing. If I had known it was so easy to download Firefox, I could have saved myself a lot of bother!

SpinningSpark: Thanks for the tip about being able to run two web-browsers on the same machine, didn't know about that. I will put a short note on the Reflinks talk page to save others the hassle I had and will report the problem to User:Dispenser, in a short note, not the screeds I have written on it on the Help Desk. --P123cat1 (talk) 15:28, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@P123cat1: I think Dismas meant that you should not have reverted the article to bare url. When he said that there are hundreds of articles with bare urls, he meant there that there are hundreds of bare urls that need fixing, not that bare urls are good, and that you could have used one of them as an example rather than messing up one more article. Spinning Spark 21:11, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, yes. As an example, if I were teaching someone how to slice bread and had many loaves handy, I wouldn't go through the trouble of baking another just to get a loaf to instruct on. I'd pull one of the already baked loaves off the shelf. Dismas|^(talk) 21:26, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! I read it too quickly. My logic is failing me today. I only changed the footnote back to its bare URL so SpinningSpark could experiment, as I did when I experimented with Firefox. I would have been uncomfortable leaving it like that, if SpinningSpark hadn't come back so promptly. The footnote is back as it should be now. I have a question about bare URLs, but think I had better put it as a separate request as this thread is getting very long. Could either of you look at it, please? --P123cat1 (talk) 01:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Trevor Corry

As a new contributor I am finding the procedures very confusing. I thought my article on Sir Trevor Corry was rejected because the references were mostly from original sources. I queried this but I am not sure I actually managed to send it so this is a repeat of the query: Most of the sources are from letters, wills and legal documents kept at the National Archive in Kew. These sources are very reliable, which cannot be said for much of what is published. I have tried not to include personal opinions and have preferred to quote directly from these sources. There is little in the way of published material to draw on which explains why in felt the need to write this article about a very influential and colourful character of his time and to have the article on Wilkipedia. Since writing the above I have found my article in the Sandbox and it has clearly been worked on by one of your volunteers. They have added some more information which is something I always hoped would come of putting the article on Wikipedia. I am therefore not clear if the article has been passed or not. I would like to include some illustrations but so far I have not been able to work out how to so this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by West Marshall (talk • contribs) 14:55, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, Trevor Corry is not in your sandbox, it is an article which anyone can edit.

Secondly, I trust you have read WP:PRIMARY which includes:- "Do not analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so. Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them". My concern is that you have stated "which cannot be said for much of what is published." - you appear to be dismissing secondary sources, because in your opinion/analysis they are unreliable - is that opinion backed up by reliable secondary sources? or is it your original research and/or synthesis based on the primary material? - Arjayay (talk) 15:08, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To add to the reply from Arjayay, User:West Marshall/sandbox is now just a redirect to Trevor Corry. If you go to this link, it will let you edit the redirect, and either blank it, or change to a simple link, or replace it by whatever you now want in your sandbox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David Biddulph (talk • contribs) 15:17, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Having looked at this further, Voceditenore (a very experienced editor) moved it to article space at 09.15 UTC this morning, having resolved many of the referencing and other problems which led it to be refused the first time around. It is now tagged "needs more links to other articles" so it would help if you could integrate it into the encyclopedia by adding such links - if you need guidance on this, please click the blue text in the box at the head of the page. It also needs the dates formatting correctly, which I will do now. - Arjayay (talk) 15:31, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the sandbox and converted the redirect to a link to the article.--ukexpat (talk) 15:35, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Geobox River or Infobox River?

Hello, there is a Geobox | River and an Infobox River. Which one should be used in articles? --Pustekuchen2014 (talk) 15:22, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think WP:WikiProject Rivers would be the best place to get advice about this. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:13, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why evertime I'm adding a photographs they are being deleted the day after?

Hello, I have officially uploaded photographs, given the rights, which have been approved. Now I'm adding these files to different pages to improve the quality of the content of these pages. But they keep being deleted the day after. What do I do wrong? Last exemple with this page : Kimbra Many thanks for your help.

Kindest regards, Anaïs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.254.23.208 (talk) 15:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see anything obvious in the edit history of Kimbra; could you please give us a diff to where you added the photo or where it was deleted? On some other pages I see that your captions included external links to the photographer's website, so things may have been deleted as advertising. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:34, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)There is no indication that any photos have been added to, or deleted from Kimbra in the last month - either from the IP address you are currently using, or from any other address.

Having looked at the edits you have made today, the biggest problem is that you are adding your company name and a link to your website under the photos. This contravenes several policies - not only that we do not allow advertisements anywhere, or External Links in articles, but also that we do not give photo-credits in articles either. The attribution, required under the "Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported" license, is that your name appears on the file page image. Your adding of such links to articles, is, therefore, seen as spam, and whilst some editors will just remove the advertisement, (as I did at Florence and the Machine) others will delete the entire addition, labeling it "Spam" as at Six60. Arjayay (talk) 16:46, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I understand, thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.254.23.208 (talk) 19:14, 13 May 2014 (UTC) Just wondering : does Wikipedia allows article author credit? Why photo credit is considered as advertising? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.254.23.208 (talk) 22:24, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia generally does not give article author credit within articles either. From a practical standpoint, this is because Wikipedia articles tend to have many authors; it would be almost impossible to credit each one. If content is copied from one Wikipedia article to another, credit is given to the original article (not individual authors), and it will be noted on the talk page or in the edit summary (copying within Wikipedia). Similarly, people who wish to use content from Wikipedia, they only need to credit the article (reusing Wikipedia content). Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 02:40, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Booking

DEAR, we received 02 conf for 01 booking please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.50.9.78 (talk) 16:29, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 6 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. - Arjayay (talk) 16:32, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

History merge question

Dear editors: I have asked this before, but haven't received a definitive answer. If a draft article has been created, but not moved to mainspace, and then later a mainspace article is later made, with no overlapping history, by another editor, and not by copy-pasting, is it ever appropriate to history merge the two? Or is history merging intended only for copy-paste incidents? I give as an example these two pages (1) Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Goodnight, Sunrise and (2) Goodnight, Sunrise, but I would like a general answer.

I intend to move content from the draft to the mainspace article and add citations to sources that I found myself. If the history merge is not an appropriate way to preserve attribution I will create a redirect. —Anne Delong (talk) 16:52, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In general, I think the answer would be no, it is not appropriate to histmerge. That would give the entirely false impression that the latter article was built on the former. However, I could see cases where there was absolutely no intersection between the two articles. Say, one article wrote about the tours of a band and the other wrote about the history. If there was no overlapping history, I might merge in those circumstances.

In the particular example you give, I am at a bit of a loss why you even think a histmerge would be useful. The mainspace article largely has the information contained in the draft. You say you have found references yourself for additional infomation? So you are writing from the references, not from the draft article (although the draft may have prompted you to go look) and it would be quite legitimate to add the information as your own work.

For attribution purposes in some cases it may be appropriate to move the draft article to a sub-page of the mainspace talk page and link it in an edit summary to the article. It will be safer there than in draft space. But again, I don't see any great need to do so in this case. Spinning Spark 17:55, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right about that draft; I had intended to keep the wording from the original editor because I hate to see people's work wasted. It probably wouldn't save time and may not be worth the trouble. However, your answer seems to indicate that you were basing it on common sense (a great thing to do, of course!) I was hoping that there was a policy page or at least an essay about this so that I wouldn't always be guessing if I was doing it correctly. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:18, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PV (part of WP:HISTMERGE), perhaps? Bencherlite ^Talk 19:25, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Anne Delong: This is a WP:MERGE issue and the governing guideline is Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. As I indicated above, it would be quite exceptional, and outside the scope of the guideline, to address the issue with the WP:HISTMERGE process. Spinning Spark 10:21, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS, the list of authors method at WP:PATT may be the best solution to your problem. Spinning Spark 10:29, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to you all for the guidance. —Anne Delong (talk) 17:26, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Edit button dysfunctional (possible bug)

I wanted to add a sentence to the page about algorithm, but the edit button did not function. My device uses iOS 6, and I am currently using the default safari browser. Could anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong here, or if it is on the server side, please fix it (or inform someone who can). Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inecrafterz (talk • contribs) 18:55, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Try asking at WP:VPT if you haven't already.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 20:05, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Up loading a picture to change the current "Bhagavad-Gita As It is" article

I have a picture of an older edition front cover (1972) Bhagavad-Gita As It Is (Collier-Macmillan edition) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khnum02 (talk • contribs) 21:16, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That is going to be in copyright. We cannot use copyrighted material except in very limited circumstances. see WP:Fair use. As the article already has two non-free images that is probably already one too many. You cannot upload a non-free image to Wikipedia without a fair-use rationale for the article it is to be used in. Since you currently cannot use it in an article you cannot upload it. The only possible way forward is to discuss this on the article talk page where it might be agreed that your image could replace one of the existing images. Spinning Spark 22:53, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Smith, Craig (June 1999). "Program Management B.C." Civil Engineering Magazine.

[1]