Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2011 March 22

Help desk
< March 21	<< Feb | March | Apr >>	March 23 >

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 22

Aria Tesolin - wikipedia page

Hi there, I have just started a wikipage on the above topic and need some help. I'm not sure i did it correctly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IntuiWiki (talk • contribs) 00:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The page is at Aria Tesolin. You need to learn about references; try WP:REF. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I cleaned it up some. Your referencng was removing text from the article so I removed all of the inline references. I agree with David that you need to work on the references, another place you might try reading is, Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. GB fan (talk) 01:26, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Delete a page you made?

I would like to delete a subpage of my userpage and I forgot how. (I made the subpage, obviously) Does anyone know how to delete your own page (not remove the contents, but actually delete the page). Thanks! User:4myself4 21 March 2011 20:40 UTC-5

Add {{db-user}} to the page in question. Bencherlite^Talk 00:42, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Bencherlite is correct. For more information, the process is explained here.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:48, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Offline wikipedia editor

I often draft and copyedit articles that I want to upload while offline in normal word processing software. I am pretty familiar with the wikipedia formatting language and so forth so it's not a massive issue, but is there some sort of software that I could use that could display the text I enter, wikipedia style? Postrock1 (talk) 01:15, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Other than installing a personal version of the Mediawiki software I'm not sure but previewing what you've written is easy if you get used to control (pc) or command (apple) shortcuts. Just have a window open to any random article in edit mode with the content blanked. When you want to preview your offline content, ctrl+a (select all), ctrl+c (copy) → Wikipedia page ctrl+v (paste) → show preview button. Written out as I have this may seem laborious but this should literally be about a three second process.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:29, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I found this, but I don't know how reliable it is or what operating system it's compatible with. Goodvac (talk) 01:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I think we might be misunderstanding each other Fuhghettaboutit, I mean for situations when I have no active internet connection. Trying as you suggested just gets me a page error, unless I'm missing something. Good find Goodvac, but alas the download button on that seems to be broken. Postrock1 (talk) 02:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't know whether anything at mw:Alternative parsers is useful. I haven' tried any of it. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:19, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I asked this on 10 September ukexpat suggested:-

The Word2MediaWikiPlus macros for Word do a reasonable job of converting Word text to Wiki markup, but some post-conversion tweaking may be required. You can download them from Sourceforge.

It worked for me Arjayay (talk) 11:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

According to the documentation here this only works on Windows, but I'm a mac user. thanks for your help though, I didn't know such a programme existed. Postrock1 (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Knife wire cutter

Can you tell me how does the knife blades are used for cut the wires with the hole in it? Thak you for your ilustration. Emilio —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.75.32.50 (talk) 03:38, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I don't know which illustration you refer to. I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 3.5 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. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

contacting the author

Is it possible to contact the person who edited a page last? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.206.46.233 (talk) 03:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Sure, click the "history" tab at the top of an article, and that will give a list of all of the recent editor. Next to each editor's name is a "talk" link, which will take you to their talk page. You can contact them there. --Jayron32 03:46, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The "View history" tab at top shows the page history. You can click "talk" next to a username or IP address to get to their talk page where you can write a message. If it's an IP address then it's uncertain whether they will keep that IP address and ever see a message you leave there. If it's a username which hasn't been active lately then they may have email enabled but you will need to create an account with email enabled to mail them. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

You may find that the most recent editor was a software program making an automatic edit, or someone making a quick spelling correction. You may have to look at the "diffs" in the page history to find the editor who last made a substantial edit. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:19, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Help With Infobox

I have created and infobox. It can be found on my user page. I would like to know how to name the fields like instead of label1, birth_place... Also, I need help with the documentation of it as I really don't know how to do that.Crowned jester (talk) 04:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

You'll find {{Infobox person}} much easier to use than {{Infobox}}. Its documentation is here. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

As a sidenote, you should probably move Template:Crowned jester's infobox to your userspace, as well. ^Avic_ennasis @ 11:09, 16 Adar II 5771 / 22 March 2011 (UTC)

{{Infobox user}} is more appropriate. ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 13:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I have moved the infobox from template space to User:Crowned jester/Crowned jester's infobox and tagged the redirect at Template:Crowned jester's infobox for deletion. – ukexpat (talk) 13:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay thanks! But I will be creating more templates in the future and would like to know how to name parameters. Crowned jester (talk) 14:22, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

You can name parameters using the same technique that Infobox user does. Look at the Wiki source in Template:Infobox user. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:11, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

WP:COMMONNAME

This introduce how to define article name is use Common name, and it recommend how to survey what is common name, use Search Engine. But, This way is maybe original research because surveying itself among wikipedian users then decide that is common name without verify citation. isn`t it? In Korean wikipedia, There is simpleilar Guildlinge still in proposed, ko:user:Sz1161 said that.--Altostratus (talk) 08:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The guidelines at WP:COMMONNAME suggest using a search engine to check which terms are used by "major international organizations, major English-language media outlets, quality encyclopedias, geographic name servers, major scientific bodies and scientific journals". To me, using search engines to find good-quality reliable sources seems an essential part of writing Wikipedia articles, and not original research.

I'm afraid that Google's translation of that Korean Wikipedia page was not good enough for me to get a clear idea of your proposal. Perhaps another of the Help desk regulars can read Korean? -- John of Reading (talk) 11:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Good, your answer is that it. not problem. thx.--Altostratus (talk) 11:27, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Original research is allowed on talk pages and in edit summaries. Claiming inside an article that "The common name is ..." could in some cases be considered original research, but it's OK to name an article partially based on original research about the common name. Articles must be named something even if there are no reliable sources saying "The common name is ...". PrimeHunter (talk) 13:01, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

is there any ground about your this opinion such as en.wiki guildline?.--Altostratus (talk) 14:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

You guys are all confusing the difference between research and original research. If I ask my friends and associates "What do you all call XXX" and then I go to Wikipedia and say "everyone I polled in my own survey calls it XXX." then that is original research in that it is based on data I collected, which is not published anywhere else. If I go online and find what reliable sources like major publications and style guides call XXX, that is NOT original research, because it is based on what is already published. It is perfectly OK to argue that since other published sources use a term commonly, it should be considered a common name! --Jayron32 14:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I and Almost participate in ko:위키백과토론:외국어의 한글 표기 개정안 ko.wikipedians are not confuse the difference between research and original research. but there is just one insistence. That`s it. not all.

But The user ko:user:Sz1161 said, the using reailable source also, is original reserch too. because, there seem so many many same or commonly name (although that is reailable source) but it can just show there is so many same name then it cannot conclude that is Real COMMON NAME. How think you about this insistence? WP:SYN--Altostratus (talk) 14:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

That's plainly rediculous. It isn't original research to report what other sources report. If the sources use two names commonly and interchangably, then see WP:ENGVAR, which basically says, as long as the article is at one of the multiple common names, don't change it to the other equally valid name. If there is only one name ever used, use that one. This isn't complex stuff. I have no idea what situation is going on at korean Wikipedia, but it has zero to so with policies going on here. If you need outside help to break a deadlock, you can get independent review from other editors by filing a request at WP:3O or WP:RFC or any of the other dispute resolution methods listed at WP:DR. --Jayron32 19:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Wirtinger derivatives

Hello, I think I've found a probable bug on the code by editing the entry "Wirtinger derivatives": as you can see, it appear the following error message on the entry page

"Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{Reflist}} template or a <references /> tag; see the help page."

However, as you can again see click the "Edit" button, the {{Reflist}} macro is present in the body of the entry, and also this error message disappears and the entry preview shows correctly by clicking the "Show preview" button without doing any edit. What could it be? This is a task for you, SW boys. :D Daniele.tampieri (talk) 09:27, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I've no idea what caused this. I have purged the page, and it is now displaying correctly for me. How about you? You may have to bypass your cache as well. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The page now displays correctly even for me, thank you John. I'll report all news (good or bad) here. Daniele.tampieri (talk) 12:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Updating References?

I'm trying to work on the article for "Louis Effrat", he has written over 7500 articles for the New York Times and is oft cited.

There are numerous citations of him in the NYT as "Effrat, Louis" all throughout Wikipedia. Is there a bot or an automated way to link these "Effrat, Louis" links to point to the "Louis Effrat" article? He was a man of significance with his face on the side of the New York Times trucks for a long time, and would like the article to stop being in danger or listed as an Orphan.

Thanks for the amazing resource, looking to make it better. Anacreo (talk) 09:53, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Louis Effrat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

I have removed the "orphan" notice, since there are several articles linking to this one. This search only lists 22 pages that contain the words "Louis" and "Effrat", so I don't think it is worth looking for an automatic solution. I've added one link as an example of the kind of edit that you could make. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Or you can use the {{Cite news}} template which displays the reference data in a consistent format. – ukexpat (talk) 13:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Can you tell me more about the world's largest crocodile in captivity, the Chao Yai crocodile, over 6 meters in length and 2450 pounds as of March 22, 2011?

Can you tell us more about the famous crocodile named "Chao Yai" of Thailand? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.54.130.139 (talk) 11:40, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

This helpdesk is for editing help, for assisting people with Wikipedia itself; it isn't a general knowledge forum.

I suggest you;

• Look in Wikipedia - try Largest reptiles and Crocodile#Size.
• If the articles do not answer, try asking on the reference desk, which deals with questions not related to Wikipedia itself.

Thanks,  Chzz  ►  11:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

edited info still coming up in the search tool

I've deleted an incorrect fact from an article, but when I search the key words in the search bar, the search still brings up the deleted section. When reviewing the whole article, the deletion doesn't appear. How do I delete from the search tool? Cissiem (talk) 12:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Please link to the article? I would also assume suggestions in the search bar take time to update, and there isn't anyway (that I'm aware of) to delete what comes up in a search. CTJF83 12:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The search index is updated once a day -- John of Reading (talk) 12:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)The article is presumably Philip Green? The search database takes a little while to catch up. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I think, probably, the user is referring to an external search engine in their toolbar?

Cissiem, if you mean a "search bar" in your browser, then that is probably using Google, Yahoo!, Bing, or some other search engine. They search their own cached information. Those websites periodically re-check pages, including Wikipedia articles, and store the results. That is beyond our control, but they tend to update within few days.  Chzz  ►  13:00, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Shown and hiding Wikipedia principles page

On my User Page I put up a box with Wikipedia's principles using {{Wikipedia principles}}. Is there a way to get wikimarkup to default to being shown rather than hidden / collapsed when a user visits the page? Also, I added a section I call "Useful links." Is there a way to get it to default to being hidden / collapsed rather than shown? I really want to put the emphasis on the Wikipedia principles, not my useful links. Guy Macon (talk)

{{Wikipedia principles|state=uncollapsed}} shows the links expanded by default.

To hide your useful links you could surround them with {{Collapse top}} and {{Collapse bottom}} -- John of Reading (talk) 13:21, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Worked great. Thanks! Guy Macon (talk) 15:43, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

newbie.. please help... thank you and sorry in advance

Hello-

I just created an article on my user page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:VickyLNY/Spatcave_Studios

and I needed help with a few things please: 1- how can I ask for it to be reviewed to make sure it's OK with your standards 2- if it's OK how can I change the name of it so that my username (VickyLNY) isn't included on it and "Spatcave Studios" shows only 3- how can I move it over to the main space so people can search and see it..

Thank you.. I've been reading up on how to this, but it's very confusing to me as I'm not really that computer savvy  :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by VickyLNY (talk • contribs) 13:22, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The page you need is this one, which describes how to request a review, and how to move the page once it has been reviewed. When the page is moved to main space, your user name will no longer appear in its name.

Even before you request a formal review, you should read the Notability section of the "So you made..." page. The article does not yet make it clear how the company is notable enough for a Wikipedia article - the guidelines for that are here. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

thank you for getting back to me and helping me... I will try and submit it for review.. also another question if you don't mind.. I was reading that there are other branches of Wikipedia that might be more suitable for certain articles if they don't qualify for the main site.. how can I find out about that please.. or better yet.. do you have a suggestion for me?  :) thank you again!!  :))) — Preceding unsigned comment added by VickyLNY (talk • contribs) 13:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

There's a list at Wikipedia:Alternative outlets. The site Wikicompany has been mentioned here several times - but note that this is not a Wikimedia Foundation project as Wikipedia is, but an entirely unrelated site. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:49, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

THANK YOU!!!!!!!  :) going to go try and ask for a review now.. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by VickyLNY (talk • contribs) 13:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

New article

I have created an article on the Durban Automotive Cluster and saved it but I don't see it on Wikipedia. How do I know if it has been added to the content on Wikipedia? What has happened to it? There are no comments or responses. When I do a search for it I can't locate it. Please advise. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rested (talk • contribs) 13:36, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

You created the article as a draft on your user page. I have now moved it to a user subpage at User:Rested/Durban Automotive Cluster which is the appropriate place for a draft article. Please take a look at WP:CORP and WP:BFAQ for help with the notability requirements for companies and similar organisations. Then take a look at WP:SYMUD for assistance with what to do with your draft now that you have created it. – ukexpat (talk) 13:45, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

page doesn't recognize references

Hello! I have added appropriate, peer-reviewed journal references to a page, but the page continues to display a message that says there are no references on it. How is that removed? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drrozz (talk • contribs) 13:54, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The message at the top of the page is a template that needs to be manually removed. This is usually done by another editor who reviews the addition of the references. TNXMan 13:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I have changed the tag to "refimprove" (as there are still some unreferenced statements in the article) and cleaned up the formatting a little. – ukexpat (talk) 14:21, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Urdu language

Hi, Wikipedia is in a number of languages, like Persian, Arabic and even in Punjabi but I could not find Urdu language which falls, perhaps, in top ten bigger languages. Would you please include Urdu language in Wikipedia also so that the people who understand English a little or not at all, could be benefitted from Wikipedia. Regards, Muhammad Akhtar <address and e-mail redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.201.185.156 (talk) 14:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello Mr Muhammad, I have no knowledge of the language at all, but is this not the urdu wikipedia? Postrock1 (talk) 15:13, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Here is the complete list of wikipedias at the moment. As you can see, the Urdu one currently has 16,361 articles. --ColinFine (talk)

Infoboxes

Okay, is there any guidelines that states how many infoboxes are to be used for an article? There the thing regarding the Transformers character articles, where people are giving infoboxes for every character's incarnation. I seem to recall there being something that stated that there was to be one infobox per article. But I don't know.

There's also a quandary regarding how much content is to be added in said infobox. Sarujo (talk) 15:51, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

 Checking... I will see if I can find a rule or guideline applicable to this. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 19:49, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I have no specific guideline, but a hint for you. I will drop you something on your talk page. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 20:00, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I gave you a pointer to an article with a more or less similar issue. I hope this is of some help. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 20:26, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Changing a Logo

The logo used on our school page is incorrect and needs to be changed. The current logo is Benildelogo.png‎ on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benilde-St._Margaret%27s page. I thought I got the image uploaded into the gallery, but now cannot find it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carenhansen (talk • contribs) 15:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

You uploaded File:BSM Logo 2010.jpg to Wikimedia Commons. I'm not a copyright expert, but I am surprised to see it marked {{PD-ineligible}} - logos are normally uploaded to Wikipedia itself, not to Commons, and tagged with {{Non-free logo}}. Also the new logo does not match the image on the school's website, so you may wish to check you have uploaded the right file.

To install a new logo in the article, click "Edit" at the top and edit the line that says "image = Benildelogo.png". -- John of Reading (talk) 16:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I think File:BSM Logo 2010.jpg is only part of the logo and is missing the shield element. In any event I have tagged it for deletion on Commons as the school's website clearly displays a copyright notice and I don't think the image is simple enough not be copyrightable. In addition, although permission is claimed, no evidence of it has been provided. – ukexpat (talk) 16:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Small Austrailian Flag ..

Hi, I can display a small UK flag using United Kingdom .. is there an equivalent for the Austrailian flag? .. Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.75.233.178 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

What does {{AUS}} do for you? Does it give Australia? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

But before you start adding it to articles, please take a look at WP:MOSFLAG. – ukexpat (talk) 17:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

If you want a flag without the country name "label" use {{flagicon|Japan}} which gives - .

You can also do it for any country as well as a number of other supranational organisations such as the United Nations - - OAS - - WHO - . Roger (talk) 17:44, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done Thank you very much for your help.

How can I find info opening a cold case file?

Hello,

I have found new info related to my daughter's death. Is there a way to have this case reopened for little or no cost. The Shiff's office doesn't seem to want to do the extra work neccesary. 174.96.223.191 (talk) 17:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

This Help Desk is for questions about using Wikipedia. I am not sure that we can help you here or anywhere else on Wikipedia. Maybe you should talk to a lawyer? – ukexpat (talk) 17:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Also, see WP:NOLEGAL. BurtAlert (talk) 20:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Pastrami

Currently, a user is writing the article for pastrami to become offensive. The page is littered with slangs and profanity and has become absolutely unreadable. Please fix this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.166.76.15 (talk) 18:28, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

You are talking about one edit by an IP editor. You have reverted the edit. I have warned the editor. Nothing more needs to be done here.

 Done - David Biddulph (talk) 18:37, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Preferred, or required way to link to Wikisource for use strictly as a reference.

Hello,

over at Wikisource, I've been discussing with a few other people the proper page to link to as a reference for verification and there does not seem to be a consensus at this time. The two methods are to link to the page in which the text is transcluded from the set of pages (and referenced in the left column numerically): see here for an example; or to link to actual page with the scanned copy of the work (original copy appears on the right, arrows to return to the transluded work in the mainspace): see here for an example. Which is preferred to link to in a reference? I would like to get as much feedback as possible, thank you. - Theornamentalist (talk) 18:34, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Your second link is a redlink, so you may wish to reformulate your question. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:39, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I've fixed the redlink but can't answer the question. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:55, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I've copied this to the reliable sources discussion page; are there any other appropriate places you are aware of where I can receive feedback? - Theornamentalist (talk) 21:47, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

etown radio program article - not an advertisement - rewritten in more neutral tone

Hello,

We have recently edited the "etown radio program" article to reflect a more neutral tone. Since the organization is a nonprofit that does not sell products or services, we are hoping that the tag above the article claiming it is written like an advertisement could somehow be removed, given the edits that have been made in the last two days. If additional edits need to made to help expedite this process, we (the organization) are happy to make them.

Thanks,

Zack Littlefield etown Zradio (talk) 18:53, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

There is still too much "puffery" in the article - eg the lists of performers and guests are, IMHO, too long and should be cut back. I also removed some fluffy stuff from the "Future" section. I also have a question: how can a radio show have 501(c)(3) status? I am no tax lawyer, but that status is for corporations and other such legal entities. So presumably the entity that creates the show has 501(c)(3) status? – ukexpat (talk) 19:04, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

First, please note that whether the organization is commercial or non-profit has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not it reads like an advertisement: the comment is about the tone and content of the article. "I want to tell the world about my wonderful cause" is just as far from the aims of Wikipedia as "I want to tell the world about my wonderful product". The question is whether a dispassionate observer coming to the article would think it read like an encyclopaedia or like promotional literature.

Actually, in my opinion the article in its present form doesn't read like an advertisement; but it's not properly encyclopaedic either. I think there is too much information which is not really relevant to the station: Ukexpat suggests the lists of performers and guests; I would cite the biography of Nick Forster: there is far too much there which is not relevant in an article about the station (and should either be deleted, or moved to an article about him, if he is notable enough). --ColinFine (talk) 00:38, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

possible error in an article

How do I comment on an article without actually editing it?Coolmanoh (talk) 20:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Use the article's talk page. You can access it by following the "Discuss"-link on top of the article. Alternatively, just type "Talk:<article name>" in the Search box. Of course, you can also voice your concern here, I'm sure someone will help you. Enjoy editing Wikipedia! Zakhalesh (talk) 20:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

New unreviewed article

James Mejia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hi -

How long does it typically take for the "This page is a new unreviewed article" template to go away? I have searched through the archives and learned that there is a large backlog, but I'm just curious when I should expect it to go away. It's about James Mejia, a Denver politician who is the front runner for the upcoming Mayoral election. Thank you. CJPowell 22:23, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I have done some cleanup on the article and removed the userspace draft tag. I did put on a tag asking for more references, The article is basically sourced to one article. GB fan (talk) 23:02, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I have added more reference links for more articles. Thank you for the help, and please let me know if you would like me to add more to the article. CJPowell 11:59, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Missing article

Good afternoon. I was working on a page for my father, Karl W. Aschenbrenner, and it took me a couple of months to assemble the bibliography. When I returned, there is no page for him. I also forgot my user name and had to set up a new account. Did that have anything to do with his page not appearing? Any help you can give would be appreciated. My new user name is peteralolaw. Thanks.--Peteralolaw (talk) 23:05, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Did you mean User:El Vereda/Enter your new article name here? Bencherlite^Talk 23:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Entry on the Eastman Kodak Company Wikipedia Page is Misleading and Should be Removed

The following misleading entry appears under the heading "Company History" for the Eastman Kodak Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak

"2011

Kodak is presented with an offer to go private on March 18, 2011 by Sterling Global Holdings. Offering a premium of 46% above it's closing price in an all cash transaction. Sterling Gobal Holdings, Managing Partner is Mr. Al Weintraub from New York.Sterling is a privatly held company who purchases distressed companies. The transaction is subject to Board and shareholder approval. But Sterling has solicited all major shareholders to obtain majority shareholder ownership, in case the board balks at its offer.[citation needed]"

This entry is misleading because it suggests that a tender offer to purchase Eastman Kodak Company has been made. Under the U.S. securities laws, a party wishing to acquire a public company must submit a filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission demonstrating that the party has the capability to make such an offer. (See http://www.sec.gov/answers/tender.htm) No such filing has been submitted to the SEC. See the following link which shows all SEC filings to date for Eastman Kodak Company: http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=115911&p=irol-secfilings

Therefore, no lawful and legitimate offer to "go private" has been made. To suggest otherwise is misleading to current and potential investors of Eastman Kodak and a violation of Rule 14e-8 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (See http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=e9e81d0ff3c93d265acb1f271f391554&rgn=div8&view=text&node=17:3.0.1.1.1.2.81.256&idno=17).

Please remove the reference quoted above immediately because it is misleading and furthers a violation of the U.S. securities laws. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.170.128.65 (talk) 23:24, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the content, just as you could have, under WP:BURDEN. All that you've said above is besides the point, but note that you have not parsed the statute at all correctly in stating positively that there was a violation. There are multiple conditions precedent in its language that you cannot know are true.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:52, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Note that the IP resolves to Kodak's network, so its probably better that they didn't remove it themselves. Nanonic (talk) 23:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)