Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2009 February 6

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.

February 6

When an article has been flagged as "this article was written as an advertisement" or "this article does not have references," and I have fixed these problems, how do I get rid of the flags?

QUESTIONS

HOW DO I "SEND" THIS QUESTION  ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wishtoknow (talk • contribs) 00:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Just the way you did. You successfully sent the question. —teb728 t c 00:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

But next time don't use BLOCK CAPITALS. Algebraist 00:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Quotation templates

Resolved

 – ukexpat (talk) 14:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm looking for the big, blue quotation mark templates. Where do I go? --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 00:14, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

You mean {{Cquote}} and {{Rquote}}? We have a whole category of them if that's not what you're after. Algebraist 00:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 00:19, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Complaint

I just discovered that my son was reading this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pegging_(sexual_practice)

He claims that he selected a random article and got this one. Is this the sort of information that a child should be randomly exposed to on your site? —Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnBeelam (talk • contribs) 01:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Please see the site disclaimers, which include the Content disclaimer. Calvin 1998 ^(t·c) 01:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

You might also want to question whether your son really did "randomly" select the article. The random article feature isn't as random as you might think. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 02:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I highly doubt he landed upon that article randomly, but its possible. Besides, children might be exposed to porn pics on this site even if they are viewing the Tin Tin article (as articles are vandalized often, and vandals generally use bad words and images to degrade articles). See Wikipedia:Advice for parents. –Capricorn42 (talk) 03:19, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

You may find this useful too: Wikipedia:Wikipedia CD Selection. --Teratornis (talk) 05:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

• This might be the right moment that have an age-appropriate discussion with your son about what you consider normal sexual behavior and what you expect of him based on your family values. If you have a open discussion about it now instead of trying to hide information about sex from him, he's more likely to ask for your opinion on other matters in the future. It's all about trust. - Mgm|^(talk) 05:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Good advice, but I think that's about as far as we should go with the family counselling. – ukexpat (talk) 14:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

backgrounds and graphics

I cannot see my graphics or background colors! What should I do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.239.232.45 (talk) 02:13, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Try switching browsers and see if this helps any. ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 18:37, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikifying

I have just edited my first article, about Mayapple Press. I have two questions:

1. I believe that the Speedy Deletion tag has been removed, because I added appropriate supporting materials, but I am not sure. Can you confirm?

2. I have formatted the source page so that the news citations are much easier to read. I do not have time or patience to read all the endless documentation, since I don't expect to write a lot of articles - from time to time in the past I have corrected something written by someone else, and I didn't go into the source code level to do that. I have a modest amount of experience with HTML from about 10 years ago, so I was able to figure out the news cite format by looking at an existing page. Today I looked at a more professional page to figure out at least a little of what wikifying might entail. Would you look to see whether there's anything else I need to do to meet Wiki standards? It's quite a simple article, and I don't expect to make it much more complicated.

A little hand-holding would be much appreciated and might result in my being a more active Wiki member. Since I corrected factual errors in two previous articles, I think I could be of use.

Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kerman45 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

1. An administrator removed the speedy tag with this comment: indicates at least some importance, so not a speedy.
2. I think it meets the basic formatting standards.

One concern, though, is that you appear to have a WP:COI with the subject; so please read the conflict of interest guidelines. Thanks for your other contributions as well, I see the {{welcome}} template is already on your talk page :) –Capricorn42 (talk) 03:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

bingo rule

Does the first person to meet the complrtion of the current game being played and saying "bingo" win the game —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.203.19.220 (talk) 02:34, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Have you tried the miscellaneous section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

And see buzzword bingo. --Teratornis (talk) 04:57, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

How do I remove an image I uploaded to Wikipedia?

I have duplicate images that I uploaded to Wikipedia? How do I delete one? It makes no sense having the two there.

Also, can there be lesser numebr of things (and links) to do when contributing/searching/questioning in Wikipedia? For example, just to post this question required extensive search for the link where questions could be posted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saildew (talk • contribs) 03:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Go to the File page that you want deleted and add {{db-g7}} at the top; an admin will delete it. –Capricorn42 (talk) 03:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I have deleted the duplicate image as requested. About your search for where to post a question, once you click on "Help" in the sidebar on the left of every page it says down the bottom "Help desk – questions on how to use Wikipedia" - could you elaborate on your problem on finding the Help desk?--Commander Keane (talk) 03:56, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is extremely large and complicated, with many thousands of distinct operations and features a random visitor might want to use. Making Wikipedia "easier" really means making it easier for one specific user, by moving the features that user happens to want to the top of the pile, and then burying the thousands of other features that user does not need. However, if we optimize Wikipedia for one user, it will not be optimal for lots of other users. Wikipedia has 48,354,063 registered user accounts, people from all around the world of every age and background. I am pretty sure no one layout for Wikipedia could be exactly what all of them want, since all of them want to do different things. Instead, Wikipedia has the arrangement that satisfies the people who have the capability to arrange Wikipedia. Since the people who design Wikipedia are experts at using Wikipedia, Wikipedia's design tends to cater to experts. I've thought it might be interesting to try to design a Skin for new users, but that might need more customizability than what MediaWiki's skin feature provides. If we want computers to be truly beginner-friendly, we'll just have to wait for computers to pass the Turing test, which will give them fluency in the user's idiolect (did you know each person speaks their own unique language, which is slightly different than anyone else's?). You need a computer that can figure out what you are trying to do, based on whichever way you describe it, and then the computer can translate that into the incantations necessary to get the job done. At the moment, the only way to get that level of service is to hire a human expert to serve you (and they tend to charge consulting fees of $100/hour and up). In the meantime, you can create your own set of useful links on your User page. Lots of Wikipedia users do that, because there usually won't be one standard page on Wikipedia that lists everything you need in just the way you like. To get the list you want, you have to write it yourself. --Teratornis (talk) 04:55, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Same List

List of companies of Taiwan and List of companies of Republic of China are almost the exact same list. What do I do? Should I delete one of them??? impactF=_{check this} 04:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Merge List of companies of Republic of China (which has the shorter edit history) into List of companies of Taiwan, then turn List of companies of Republic of China into a redirect to List of companies of Taiwan. – ukexpat (talk) 05:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

• Be aware that this could spark a row over whether Taiwan is a part of China. I would request outright deletion of the shorter entry (because it's duplicating material) and replace it with a list of companies on mainland China. (or delete only the duplicating entries from the list if it leaves you with something, the remaining ones should be checked) - Mgm|^(talk) 05:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Translation please

can someone translate 'enahe ke tavale' to english.. i dont have any idea which language it is. I guess its dhivehi.. language of maldives —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.13.139 (talk) 05:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

You could ask on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language. Also see Wikipedia:Language recognition chart. --Teratornis (talk) 05:24, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Embedded links leading away from an article:

Hello, on the article titled List of ambient artists, there are two links that seem as though they should not be there... all other highlighted links lead to wikipedia articles, but these seem to be acting as spam to lead to personal websites. Would it be acceptable to delete these? They are:

33Dollars + An On Bast

Thanks, Canadian Girl Scout (talk) 05:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Removing the links would be best, since external links are not normally placed in the body of the article. If it is necessary, include them under an "External links" section. Cheers. Chamal ^talk 11:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists#Lead and selection criteria says:

• Each entry on a list should have its own non-redirect article in English Wikipedia, but this is not required if the entry is verifiably a member of the listed group, and it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future.

I agree that the external links mixed in with the article links is kind of ugly. A better solution would be to create new articles for the two artists, if they meet the notability requirements for musicians. But that would be some work, and the new articles might not stick. Someone evidently took the easy way out by externally linking them. That's kind of troubling, because it tends to mask the need to create proper articles on Wikipedia, which red links would indicate. But some users hate red links too. If these two artist entries are not notable enough for their own articles, I guess we'll have to remove them. The inclusionist (i.e. pack rat) in me hates to delete information, even crufty information, so I sympathize with the pain of the user who added those links, when he or she discovers they went poof. --Teratornis (talk) 11:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

The external links can be placed within HTML comments, and the corresponding name be made a placeholder for a future article. Jay (talk) 14:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

file wont upload or search

user page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ChiangMai2552

my upload page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ChiangMai2552

I am not very familiar with Wikipedia and simply want to upload a text file.

I have created and formatted the page to my satisfaction. I also went through the procedure for upload, and Submit, and it said it would be visible immediately.

Th problem is that when I search for the title name or any page with the title name, I get a page saying there is no page in Wikipedia.

The search term I am using is 'Futronix' but it says there are listings only for 'Futruno'.

Can someone help me to make this page findable

ChiangMai2552 (talk) 07:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

• It's not showing up in a search because it's on your userpage and I recommend you keep it there for now, because it doesn't follow various key rules. Articles are supposed to be verifiable with references to reliable sources and you should take care to write from a neutral point of view. More specifically, the one link you provided is to a text that doesn't cover all of the material you put in the article. Instead of saying it has links to other articles you should specifically mention them all. - 131.211.211.53 (talk) 08:43, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
• By the way User:ChiangMai2552 is your userpage, the upload page is at Special:Upload, but it is not supposed to be used for uploading articles. Articles are written by writing directly into a text box or copy-pasting a pre-written text, not through uploading. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:46, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia is unlike anything most people have used before. If you are not very familiar with Wikipedia, it can be perilous to assume it should work the way your experience with other computer systems causes you to expect. (Wikipedia can be sort of the antithesis of the principle of least astonishment; sometimes it seems we strive for the most astonishment.) The key difference is that in most systems, there is a clear concept of authorship. For example, when you write a document with a text editor program on your computer, the computer will normally save your document when you give the "save" command, and your document will stay on your computer until you decide to change it. On Wikipedia, the "Save page" command does not quite mean the same thing. It really means to save your contributions to Wikipedia's revision control system, but any other user can edit your contributions, making your work unrecognizable in the latest revision of a page, and administrators can delete pages altogether. Wikipedia deletes thousands of new articles by new users for failing to comply with our complex and largely unguessable policies and guidelines. A very common incorrect assumption about Wikipedia is that it should be simple to create a new article - that's what I thought too. But it is not simple. There are many things you need to know before you can write new articles that have a good chance to stick. Learning all these things requires a lot of work, which may be hard to justify if you only want to create one article. Wikipedia works better for people who want to spend a lot of time here, read lots of our manuals, and make lots of edits to lots of articles. I'm sorry this is not a very easy answer, but that's the way it is. A simpler way to get started on Wikipedia is to make small edits to existing articles, and then watch what other editors do to your edits. In addition to the links given by the helpers above, you should read WP:LAYOUT, WP:COI, WP:CORP, and WP:BFAQ, and take the WP:TUTORIAL. Reading the manuals is key to working productively on Wikipedia, because the manuals help us predict what the other users will do. While Wikipedia has users at every level of experience, the users who effectively control Wikipedia are extremely familiar with the manuals, so if you follow what the manuals say, you are more likely to succeed here. --Teratornis (talk) 11:24, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

• Newbies don't need to learn all the rules to create an article. For example, formatting is something anyone can later fix for you. What you should do, is read Wikipedia:Avoiding common mistakes And Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion. If you know those, the chance of the article sticking is already a lot better. - Mgm|^(talk) 13:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

• Shouldn't Special:Upload give an error on attempting to upload a .TXT file? As per the original post, the upload went fine. Jay (talk) 14:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello please read

hello i didn't mean to edit the paul o,grady page it was and accident what will happen im realy scard —Preceding unsigned comment added by Riuh2 (talk • contribs) 11:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

If you were the unregistered editor who edited Paul O'Grady today then just stop making such inappropriate edits and nothing further will happen. BT Public Internet Service will not be contacted about those edits. In case you don't know what the edits did, see the page history [1] and click "prev" next to the edits. They removed a lot of information and added some things inappropriate for an encyclopedic article. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

In addition, everything that someone does can be removed or reversed, through the use of a few tools available in the page's history (undo link, for most cases). Don't be scared to try out editing, but keep in mind that vandalism or test edits on the mainspace is not welcome. Use the sandbox for test edits. Cheers. ←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 18:33, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Capitalization of lists?

I have a trivial question that I can't find an answer to in the Manual of Style. Should items in a bulleted list (such as a "See also" section) be capitalized or not? Gnome de plume (talk) 14:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I would venture that ordinary rules of English-language capitalization should be used; i.e., only capitalize the proper nouns. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:38, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

As per Wikipedia:List#Bulleted_lists, "As a matter of style, list items should start with a capital letter." Jay (talk) 14:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. That's just the kind of clear statement I was looking for. Gnome de plume (talk) 15:50, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Errors on page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map13.jpg

1. Pertinent page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map13.jpg

2. The problem is that this map is NOT a work of the United States Federal Government. It is a work of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

3. What is now on the page, under Licensing

Licensing

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States Federal Government under the terms of Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 105 of the US Code. See Copyright. Note: This only applies to works of the Federal Government and not to the work of any individual U.S. state, territory, commonwealth, county, municipality, or any other subdivision. This template also does not apply to postage stamp designs published by the United States Postal Service since 1978. (See 206.02(b) of Compendium II: Copyright Office Practices).

4. What should be on the page, under Licensing

Licensing

This work is not under copyright. However, when using or reproducing the map, please credit as follows: Sevon, W. D., compiler, 2000, Physiographic provinces of Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Geological Survey, 4th ser., Map 13, scale 1:2,000,000.

5. Verification: web page of the Pennsylvania Geological Survey at http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/

6. Category at bottom of page is wrong (NOT United States Government maps)

Platystrophia (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I've listed it here. However, can you explain what you mean when you say that it it "not under copyright"? I don't see anything on the website to that effect. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:27, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't yet know how to respond to a previous posting, so here's a new one. The map under consideration is not copyrighted; it is in the public domain. However, we do ask that credit be given when the map is used, and that is what I provided in my previous post. There is also a higher-quality version of the map at http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/maps/map13.pdf Platystrophia (talk) 15:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

To respond to an existing post, just click the "edit" button next to the section heading. By what virtue is it in the public domain? Does Pennsylvania automatically release its work into the PD, as the federal government does? Or was it actually released as such at some point? It's certainly eligible for copyright, and its copyright doesn't appear to have lapsed. Sorry about all the questions; I just want to make sure we get it right this time. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

A Pennsylvania legislative act removed copyright from publications of the Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey (Pennsylvania Geological Survey). It is the act of June 25, 1997, P.L. 347, No. 39 (71 P.S. Sections 954.1-954.4). It is on the web at http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/billinfo/bill_history.cfm?syear=1997&sind=0&body=H&type=B&bn=924 Platystrophia (talk) 16:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I've amended the image's page. Have a look and tell me what you think. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 16:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. It looks good, although I did a little bit of editing. Thanks for the speed at which all of this was done!

Now how do I reply to you on your page?

Platystrophia (talk) 18:21, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Click the "talk" in my signature. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 18:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Sadly, the state law does not appear to actually grant permission for us to use the material: it does not place the material in trhe public domain and it does not grant a license to copy. It merely rescinds the requirement on the department register a copyright. The material is still copyrighted even though the copyright is not registered. We can probably stretch a point here and claim that since the law has a stated intent to make the material available, we are treating that stated intent as a license. -Arch dude (talk) 03:18, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Can it be considered spam?

Hello,

I've just noticed that a user has been adding hundreds of articles about various radio programs, with links to his website where he sells recording of these programs. It's clear he's doing that as a form of advertisment. However, since the articles are reasonably well written and sourced, I suppose they can't just be deleted.

What's the policy in that case? i.e. in the case where somebody adds hundreds of links to his website but yet provide apparently useful articles? Can the links be deleted? Should the articles be reviewed for their notability?

Any suggestion would be welcome.

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurent1979 (talk • contribs) 15:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I would consider that spam. The best place to report widespread spamming like this is WP:ANI. If you do report it there, please provide links to some of the relevant articles. – ukexpat (talk) 15:30, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Strip the articles of any spamlinks and template the spammer. Nominate any articles you consider non-notable in the normal manner; tag the others for proper sourcing, POV or other problems. The programs don't become non-notable just because of spammer involvement. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:20, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

more racism on wikipedia

someone renamed southarfrica to Niger. Someone has to deal with these vandals. And we should fund a project to sue each and everyone of them. That will teach them not to mess around on the internet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.61.233.71 (talk) 16:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

You're kidding, right? I am usually prepared to assume good faith but I don't think anyone will rise to this troll-bait. – ukexpat (talk) 16:10, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Just signed on! New to asll these things,althow I am old.

I was looking for a couple of Solitair games, Klondike and Spider, Windows is supposed to include them with all computers. While checking Windows the reference to Wikipedia came up. I still want to dpwnload these two games if you have them. I sure can't find them except to pay 20 or 30 $ for them . I thought this was one of your items. Gosh you are to big for me, you got everything.. 1024outthedoor16:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1024outthedoor (talk • contribs)

Have you tried the Computing section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps.  – ukexpat (talk) 17:09, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

No, Wikipedia is not a host for games. We are an encyclopedia. --Alinnisawest,^{Dalek Empress} (extermination requests here) 21:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

There is any Alert ir a change were made in my article

How can I restrict the article content? Or if is not possible, there is any way to alert if a change were made in my article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abcccc19853 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

It's very easy to get alerts when the article is edited - simply click the "Watch" tab at the top of the article, and it will be added to your watchlist. "Restrict the article content"? Nope, sorry. Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia anyone can edit (with the rare exception of protected pages) - and you can't "own" articles as such anyway. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 17:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

(e/c) No you cannot prevent changes to articles you have written as you do not own them. However, in limited circumstances Admins can protect pages for a limited time as described here. You can add any article to your watchlist to keep abreast of changes made to it. – ukexpat (talk) 17:54, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

fresh start

I would like to start under a fresh username, but I think that if I create a new account, I will be tracked down by an admin and indefintley blocked for socking. 82.26.190.247 (talk) 21:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I wish someone would reply. 82.26.190.247 (talk) 21:11, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I think that it's good for an IP to join, because many editors don't trust an IP. I think that if you join, it'll be OK as long as you don't use your IP for vandalism. Queenie ^Talk 21:23, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

OK. 82.26.190.247 (talk) 21:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

If you previously had a Wikipedia username but wish to start anew, please read this. --Alinnisawest,^{Dalek Empress} (extermination requests here) 21:39, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

WIKI BIO of JOHN ORDRONAUX

Hello. I have just registered with Wiki to add content and edit the above bio.

Two questions;

1. Why are most of the paragraph spacings missing, although these show up in the editorial amendment box?

2. I have added four primary source references but do not know how to make them conform with your system. They appear as a continuation of the main text.

Thanks, William (WFM495) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wfm495 (talk • contribs) 21:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Looking at John Ordronaux:

1. Instead of the <br />s, just press enter twice.
2. See Wikipedia:Footnotes.

--—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 21:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

username

i need to change my username. i didnt realize that it would be the name of the page i would like to build. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MusiccircusMelodytent (talk • contribs) 21:42, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

See WP:CHU. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 21:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Article names are not related to your user name. User:MusiccircusMelodytent is your user page and not a part of the encyclopedia. You can use the page for a draft but a user subpage like User:MusiccircusMelodytent/Sandbox may be better for that purpose. If you want to write an article then see Wikipedia:Your first article, but also see Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations if it's about an organization you are connected with. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:45, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Also, you can create pages with different names to your username. Type the name of the page you'd like to create in the search box to the left of the page, then click on Go. You'll see a link that you can click to create the page. Regards, Matt (Talk) 02:47, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requested pictures/Science

When uploading pictures to this, do they have to be photos, drawings or can they be either? Queenie ^Talk 21:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

They can be anything as long as they're i. useful and ii. released under a free license or into the public domain. To meet the latter requirement, they must be free for any person to reuse for any purpose, with only the requirement of attribution retained. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 23:51, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Queenie ^Talk 17:00, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

quick question on core policy

Hi. Apologies if this question is answered somewhere else, I've been looking for ages. If an article goes against the core policies, where minority point of view takes precedence despite long discussions on the talk page and inability to refute any claims of core policy breach, what can be done? I've read about mediation, but it seems to suggest being about getting people to reach agreement (which has sofar failed), rather than an independent administrator having a look, seeing the core policy breaches, and ammending as neccesary. My question is, if core policies are being breached, should resolving this take precedence, or should reaching an all-party agreement take precedence at the expense of the core polices being diminished? --Razorlax (talk) 22:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

There are escalating levels of dispute resolution: WP:DR. – ukexpat (talk) 22:16, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ukexpat, thanks for the help. I know about the escalation process, my question was really to ask if ensuring a mutually agreeing compromise takes precedence over the core policies? --Razorlax (talk) 13:55, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I think the core policies take precedence, so consensus should be reached based on them, unless of course there is a good reason to ignore all rules. – ukexpat (talk) 15:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Duplicating a German Wikipedia article in English

I am reasonably Web savvy but I have never published a Wikipedia article.

A German fellow I met traveling last year has contacted me and asked my help in creating a English version of his current German language Wikipedia article

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joscha_Remus

I would like to do this but before I start I would like to get some general advice before doing so.

I used Google Translate to translate his entire page and it came out pretty good. With just a little editing I think it would be fine for publication. It would seem that that would be a quick and easy way to publish an English version but I just don't know.

Please advise. Fatfenders (talk) 23:43, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Are you able to read German at all? I'd be leery of assuming that an edited Google translation was accurate unless I could at least read the source material. Other comments:

• make sure he passes our general notability guideline for inclusion before you create the article.
• if you create the article, make sure to include a mention in the edit summary that it was translated from the German article, along with a link to it (this is so the work of the German article's authors' is properly attributed per the license contributions are released under).
• the German article doesn't appear to be referenced. Try to reference all material in the English article (to German sources if necessary) per our policy on verifiability. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 23:50, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for that, but... If he already has an article at de.wikipedia, wouldn't it have already met any required criteria?

And again, can you give me any general guidelines for using the (Google) translated (and then edited) page as input to the English version? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatfenders (talk • contribs) 00:03, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

To your first question, not necessarily - Wikipedias in different languages have their own policies and guidelines, and I'm not sure what the German Wikipedia's inclusion rules look like. To your second question, I'm not precisely sure what kind of guideline you're looking for. I presume your first step well be to paste the edited Google translation into Joscha Remus. A good second step would be to add some citations to sources. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 00:11, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

• To add to that: it's impossible for regular editors to check all incoming articles. It is quite possible for your German friend to have created something that should've been deleted under some policy, but hasn't been simply because the article hasn't been noticed yet. It sounds like you should read WP:BIO to make sure the person meets inclusion criteria. - Mgm|^(talk) 00:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Links under WP:EIW#Translate may be useful. Also, we have a {{Translate wikipedia}} template which can display the Google translation of an article from another language Wikipedia, for example:

• Translate de:Joscha Remus to English

The Google translation is readable, but a few sentence are unclear. It looks like you cleared them up in User:Fatfenders/Sandbox. --Teratornis (talk) 21:50, 7 February 2009 (UTC)