Help desk
< January 28	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 30 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

January 29

How do I add a comment to one particular article?

re http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Killed_on_British_Roads.png

I have studied road casualty data, trends, road safety policies and outcomes for thousands of hours and wish to point out some misleading aspects of the main graph and the annotations.

I have clicked on the Talk header and skimmed through the comments of others, but am unable to see how to add a comment of my own - as opposed to editing an existing comment. I do not wish to spend a great deal of time understanding the intracacies of Wikipaedia as I have so much else to do and there are probably few other subjects to which I could add anything much of value.

Can you tell me in simple terms how to add my comment - and also whether it is possible to type it elsewhere and then cut and paste it to you?

Also - it is far from clear (at least to me) how I wil be able to find your reply! And in a true chicken and egg situation you are unable to tell me where! Except that you could contatc me through my own web site about road safety and the many very serious errors of policy and analysis of the authorities over the last 20 years in particular.

00:25, 29 January 2012 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.155.193.143 (talk)

On the article's talk page, click the 'New section' tab between 'Edit' and 'View history' at the top. Dru of Id (talk) 01:03, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) There seem to be active discussions at File talk:Killed on British Roads.png. (Ordinarily there is not much disscussion on file talk pages.) Or you could contact the creator of the current version at User talk:PeterEastern. —teb728 t c 01:06, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More instructions are at Help:Using talk pages and Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. And just to make things extra confusing, the file itself is really on Wikimedia Commons at: commons:File:Killed on British Roads.png, although the file talk page there has no edits yet. The file talk page there is different from the file talk page here at: File talk:Killed on British Roads.png. It's unfortunate that as someone who is new to editing on Wikipedia, you have learn a large amount of technical detail just to comment on an image file, but that's how it is. Wikipedia is a vastly complex collaboration of millions of contributors, and as with anything else involving millions of active participants, elaborate procedures are necessary to keep everything coherent. --Teratornis (talk) 19:27, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nanette Hassall

This article was deleted today for copyright infringement. The Bot hit on phrases that were organization and position names and I wasn't notified. Where do I dispute this? Pkeets (talk) 00:29, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:DRV —teb728 t c 00:46, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Deletion review. Dru of Id (talk) 00:48, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Pkeets (talk) 02:14, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; refs with no name must have content; Message on Wikipedia Page

I would greatly appreciate your help. I am trying to edit the Wikipedia page for Graham Diamond with two new links to professional organizations to which he belongs and information about a new book that is being published currently. The error as cited in the subject/headline above keeps appearing and despite reading the help pages for editing I do not understand what is needed. The professional organizations speak for themselves. They can be verified by going to the links. How should this be referenced? How should the release of the new book be referenced? In addition some of the old information in the article is asking for citation. Although Mr. Diamond did not write the initial article it is accurate. What references does Wikipedia require? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.72.95.55 (talk) 01:00, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was an extraneous <ref></ref> at the beginning of the article that was causing the cite error notice. I removed it. - Purplewowies (talk) 01:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It appears you attempted to add his active membership in SFFWA; its listing of Current officers does not include him, and I find no members list or search matches there. The information would need an independent reliable source, or may be summarily deleted as unreferenced or self-published source, although if listed on his website, might be neutral enough to remain unchallenged. It was added as a template when no such template exists, resulting in the error message. Dru of Id (talk) 01:23, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly CaAuthor attempted to add, "He was an Editorial Artist at the New York Times for many years." This also was deleted for lack of a reference. —teb728 t c 01:38, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you are CaAuthor (talk · contribs)? I posted a short tutorial on referencing in your talk page. You can also see the longer explanation in Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners.

If that's too complicated for you, you can also just post in the talk page of the article, indicate what information you would like to change, and include a link to the website (just cut and paste it) where we can explicitly verify the information and do the changes for you. Please understand that "personal knowledge" and similar things are known as original research and are not acceptable as sources, since no one will be able to verify it (like Dru of Id has attempted to do). To determine which sources are reliable (and thus usable), please see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources.

I also strongly urge you to read Wikipedia:Citing sources -- Obsidi♠n Soul 01:35, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Most of those error messages have a link to a help page. What can I do to increase the visibility of the help page? ---— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk 01:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno. Some people panic at the sight of big red letters and will be more afraid to touch it again for fear of "breaking" something else (most don't know that changes can be reverted quite easily). Maybe a bot that posts on their talk pages like the signature bot?-- Obsidi♠n Soul 01:48, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Question about whether or not a citation can be used in a specific instance.

If an article says that someone is "very well known among preteen and teen audiences," can I use awards they've won where preteens/teens choose who wins, or would that be a form of original research? I ask because an actor winning an award like that could show that the actor is well known with that audience, but the source (for the award) doesn't explicitly state that. (Now I'm sitting here wondering if I answered my own question or not...) - Purplewowies (talk) 01:33, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You should not say someone is "very well known" for anything, regardless - because, it is not neutral. Instead, it's better to just "state the facts" and let the reader decide their significance. For example, instead of Chzz is a very popular singer, we'd prefer Chzz has sold over a million records %lt;ref....

If the award is worth mentioning in an article, mention the award - but don't use it to infer the person is well-known amongst a specific audience.

An alternative might be to source a quotation from e.g. a newspaper saying the person is "well known amongst teens" or something, and use that (within quotes, with a ref). Chzz ► 08:45, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. I think I'll remove it. When the article (which is Dylan and Cole Sprouse) was peer reviewed, it was included in an excerpt of unsourced statements (and appeared to be deliberately included, since the excerpt started with it, and it's the last half of a sentence). However, the source for the first half of the sentence states that "teenage girls are crazy for" them and that "fans can't seem to get enough", and the second half of the sentence is a more professional-sounding paraphrase of that.

Still, I think it might be better to remove it. Thanks. - Purplewowies (talk) 18:17, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do I see "more hidden content"?

Over on the reference desk, there is a question about Israel that is hidden, along with a "Show" link. When I click show, it expands and I can see the question and some answers. At the bottom there is "more hidden content" in a box, but no "show" link. How do I see the rest of the hidden content? RudolfRed (talk) 03:50, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The user who hid the content probably copied the code from somewhere and forgot to remove the default text. I've removed it for clarity. Goodvac (talk) 03:57, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation, and the fix. RudolfRed (talk) 04:09, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rainbow Rosaries

looking for a place in Kailua, Kona, Hi that makes the Rainbow Rosaries as I have someone interested in purchasing 18 of them — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.8.207.38 (talk) 04:03, 29 January 2012 (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. RudolfRed (talk) 04:10, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

making tables the easy way?

Is there some easy way to insert tables? Like say if I have the data in excel or word (or I can save as tab delimited text). Is there some cut and paste method? I feel like I spend forever with Wikitables and have to put everything in cell by cell.TCO (talk) 05:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you're copying content from Word, you can enable "wikEd" at your gadget settings under "Editing". Then go to editing mode of a page and paste in the Word content. Highlight what you just pasted and click this button: . This will convert everything to wikicode. Goodvac (talk) 05:23, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I will try that. (not right now, but after I do some work. this could help me be a lot more efficient)TCO (talk) 05:42, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's several others; see Wikipedia:Tools/Editing tools#Wikisyntax conversion utilities. Chzz ► 08:21, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

searching foreign Wiki?

Let's say I want to make a stub for Hafnium tetrafluoride. It's well notable. Is there some easy way to search foreign Wikis (all at once) to check for it? Like German Wiki often has chemicals we are missing. Can I search all langagues at once somehow?

You can search a specific language's Wikipedia from the main Wikipedia page: [1]. Just choose the language from the drop-down list. I don't see a way to search all of them in one go. RudolfRed (talk) 06:04, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You could Google for site:wikipedia.org "Hafnium tetrafluoride" - that checks all sites ending with "wikipedia.org", hence English (en.wikipedia.org), Japanese (ja.wikipedia.org), German (de.wikipedia.org) and so forth.

In the case of that specific phrase, there's no hits. A better example is, therefore, searching a botanical name; site:wikipedia.org Musaceae

Of course, this will only show the exact search word - thus my picking the latin botanical name as an example. If you're looking for something like "banana", it's only going to work for languages where the word is the same (such as Portuguese - it'll totally miss e.g. the French article Banane).

You could, however, look at the language links from our article on Hafnium in other languages, and thus some auto-translation (again, Google perhaps) to see if there's anything about tetrafluoride. For example, the language link to Español (Spanish) is "Hafnio", not Hafnium. And for 日本語 (Japanese), it's "ハフニウム" (ha-fu-ni-u-mu).

That may help track things down. Chzz ► 08:19, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a chemical you are searching for, you could try using the molecular formula, as that will be the same in any language. Mjroots (talk) 07:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Britney Spear's Biography

I have noticed that the Britney Spears information is omitting the "Right Now (Taste the Victory)" single by Jive Records in 2001. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.178.49.143 (talk) 08:27, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article on Britney Spears does not include all singles. Instead, we have a separate Britney Spears discography. However, it does not include that single. It seems like it was a promotional release for Pepsi, so I am not sure if its inclusion is appropriate but, if you can provide reference/s to reliable source/s about it, then please make the suggestion on Talk:Britney Spears discography. (ie - was it actually released as a single? it could be discussed on that page)

It is mentioned very briefly in Britney Spears filmography#Commercials. Chzz ► 08:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shapell.org

I notice that User:LFevas is posting dozens of links to shapell.org (Shapell Manuscript Foundation). I thought about leaving a spam warning and reverting them, but this just might be a legitimate site. Any thoughts? —teb728 t c 08:54, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In cases like this, we need to determine whether the site being posted is actually beneficial to the articles in question, and whether it is presented in a promotional way. I have looked at the website and it seems relevant and helpful - we can certainly assume that the user has added the links in good faith. It is possible that they have been worded in a slightly promotional way (I'm guessing that this user has some prior experience with the website, so is likely not to have a neutral viewpoint on it). Where you see the website noted in a non-neutral way, feel free to fix it. I do not, however, believe that this is harmful or overly promotional - you were right to hold back on issuing a spam warning. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 11:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Editing and adding a link (which was from a Social Networking site)

Hi. Edited a page. I won't tell you which one and added a link from a social networking site. I won't tell either. Would I get arrested or be reprimanded for what I did? I really did not mean for it to happen. I won't do it ever again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.206.91.0 (talk) 13:32, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not arrested, but your edit to Sungmin has been reverted. It's good that you now realise that the link is against Wikipedia's policies. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:01, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In the interest of full disclosure, we can very easily see all the edits that have been made from your IP address here, just as you can see all of the edits I've made from my user account by looking at my contributions. Those lists exist for all users; I just want to give you a heads up, as you didn't seem to be aware that these are recorded. Falconus^{p t c} 14:57, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Table of Contents on Live at the Apollo (TV series)

Shamed as I am to admit it, I'm an admin with very little experience in editing tables. I've found this table of contents on Live at the Apollo (TV series), and it is (at least on my monitor) interfering with the infobox.

What do I need to do to correct it? Stephen! ^Coming... 14:42, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

sort of resolved, in that I reverted to the default TOC, rather than use the box that is causing probs. If someone could explain how the table could have been corrected, that would be great. Stephen! ^Coming... 17:31, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see a problem with the previous version; what browser were you using? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:34, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Google Chrome. Small monitor, which might have something to do with it. I dare say if I was using my PC at work which has a wide-screen display it would have looked ok. Stephen! ^Coming... 17:42, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

creating a page for person

Hello, I have seen confilicting information regarding starting a page (article) for a person that one believes merits a page. Can you tell me the steps involved? From what I have read you create the page, and then place it, but I have also read you have to be a writer for wiki. thanks John — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoodKingJohn (talk • contribs) 15:56, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The starting point is to be sure that the person meets the notability requirements for people, and that you have reliable sources which can be given as references to demonstrate that notability. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:06, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are no requirements for you to create a page - you pass the minimum threshold of having more than 10 edits and 4 days of activity. As David said, do ensure that the article you create is in line with Wikipedia's guidelines on notability. Also, if the article you wish to create is about a person who is still living, be sure to read WP:BLP; we have much more stringent guidelines on biographies of living people which will need to be adhered to. If you're happy that your article will meet these guidelines, be bold and create the article. If you are unsure, you could first create a userspace draft or use the Articles for Creation process. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:00, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually you don't need 10 edits and 4 days of activity to create an article. That is a requirement for some other things like uploading images and moving pages. —teb728 t c 00:39, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bad reference (misinterpreted source)

I have never edited wikipedia before and I could not easily find the answer so sory if it is obvious to you: What do I do if I find a source that has been misinterpreted (i.e. it does not really say what it is refered to for saying)?

My guess would be: remove the reference and comment on it on the talk page, but I thought I should check first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Widebased (talk • contribs) 17:58, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest that you go ahead and remove the problematic content, and make sure to put a note on the talk page. If someone disagrees, they may revert your edit. If this happens, do not revert them; instead try to discuss the issue on the talk page. If you cannot resolve it, use the other forms of dispute resolution available. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 18:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't normally remove the reference and keep the statement at the same time. You can consider to use {{Failed verification}} if the statement sounds plausible but would need another source. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mass deletion of security-related articles

A wikipedia user or a bot named "Skier_Dude" (and possibly others - I haven't checked every one) is deleting dozens of articles related to security certifications, and possibly more than that.

Check this person's path of destruction:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Skier_Dude

A sampling of removed articles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Certified_in_the_Governance_of_Enterprise_IT http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Certified_Secure_Software_Lifecycle_Professional http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Certified_in_the_Governance_of_Enterprise_IT http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=(ISC)%C2%B2 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Offensive_Security

...and many, many more. This amounts to wreckless vandalism. Can someone higher up in the food chain undo all of these destructive actions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.72.210 (talk) 18:27, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The articles which existed were deleted (in July last year) under the criterion Wikipedia:CSD#G11, and not by the user to whom you refer. If an article doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria for deletion, it will remain; if it is "Unambiguous advertising or promotion" it will go. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:36, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Book: Disconnected from my Account

Hello,

I created a book -- "Creative Writing" -- and revisited the project several times to add pages and rearrange. Now, the book is not connected to my account; I have the Book Creator tool activated, but set to a new (empty) book, even though my "Creative Writing" book is still there. Any ideas how I can re-connect and regain the ability to edit the book?

Thanks -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlunday (talk • contribs) 18:43, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Go to Book:Creative Writing, and you (or anyone else) can edit it. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:47, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Startling by Each Step episodes

Dear administrators:

I'm experienced edit war on List of Startling by Each Step episodes, because the episode summaries's written in a way that is not irrelavant and even full of grammatical errors and sloppiness. Someone removed my delete template, yet failed to improve it. If no action is made within the next few days, I will again put back the delete template of the page.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 18:52, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you're in an edit war, stop. Try to solve the problem via discussion on the article's talk page. If you can't, then try dispute resolution. WP:DR RudolfRed (talk) 18:57, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did put my inputs and concerns on the talkpage, but they ignores it. This user John of Reading, is the one who removed my template, yet I gets an impression that he didn't even read my inputs and concerns, and never even watched the show before, and just do it because he feels like it.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 19:04, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JoR exactly followed the PROD process, and his edit-summary when he removed the PROD makes that clear. He doesn't need to read the article or know anything about the topic. PROD by definition is only for uncontested deletions, and once someone removes the tag, it's evidence of contesting the deletion, so the PROD process obviously no longer is viable. Your only possible dispute is with whoever first removed the PROD tag. DMacks (talk) 19:14, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The template you used was proposed deletion which can't be placed a second time. If someone contests the deletion (by removing the proposed deletion template) and you still want it deleted you will need to go to AFD (Articles For Deletion) and it will have a full debate. Alternately you could use the cleanup templates to indicate the article needs work.— Preceding unsigned comment added by RJFJR (talk • contribs) 19:16, 29 January 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) You are confused. The editor who removed your PROD template was 99.166.189.43. What John of Reading did was remove it again after you had added it again, which you were not permitted to do, and he explained this, along with the correct process, clearly in the edit summary. The template says very clearly "If this template is removed, it should not be replaced." - David Biddulph (talk) 19:18, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Check the edit history of the article to see who did what when and why. Note how easily many of us (even who have never looked at this article before) can understand part of the issue, because JoR used an WP:EDITSUMMARY to explain his action. NB, you should consider using them as well to help clarify your actions. DMacks (talk) 19:19, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oaky, I've put a nomination of deletion template instead of a deletion template. Hopefully, that's relavant.--NeoBatfreak (talk) 20:57, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I missed this thread. I have fixed up the AfD nomination for you. They are quite fiddly; see WP:AFDHOWTO. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:30, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Account unification

Greetings,

my home wiki is the Czech wikipedia. I already have an unified account, but the English one is not included - I forgot password for my old account and I've succesfully requested its usurpation (see here). Is there a way to include my english account into my unified account? Thanks for reply. --Murúg (talk) 19:47, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to me that your usurpation request for User:Murúg was granted on 21 November 2011, and you are now editing as Murúg. What makes you think your English account is not included in your unified account? —teb728 t c 00:24, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://toolserver.org/~quentinv57/sulinfo/Mur%C3%BAg says that enwiki is unattached. Set the same password for the English and the unified account. Then go to Special:MergeAccount or possibly cs:Special:MergeAccount. Does that work? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:34, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Special:MergeAccount made it, thank You very much, I won't find out without You. :) --Murúg (talk) 11:21, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing dead external links

Pretty new at this (just a couple of grammatical edits), so in an abundance of caution, want to check before fixing some dead external links. Have read a dozen or so posts and articles, and there seems to be some questions about guidelines and a distinction between reference links and those in external links section. Saw tip re: using internet archives, but don't think that's necessary. In short, the intended changes seem completely unobjectionable to me, but I want to make sure that's not just me (this first time).

These are all existing links in external links sections. No new ones are being added, just dead ones fixed. In Database_normalization, First_normal_form, Second_normal_form, and maybe more, there are links to: An Introduction to Database Normalization by Mike Hillyer. They all point to dev.mysql.com and come up 404 at oracle.com. I found an article of the same title at http://mikehillyer.com/articles/an-introduction-to-database-normalization/ which seems a proper replacement. Are these proper edits?

Thank you Don Hammond (talk) 19:54, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia content guideline on external links is quite strict.

As far as I can see, the articles listed in {{Database normalization}} do seem to cover the topic well, and the material in those external links doesn't seem to add much. I have been bold and have removed all four external links from First normal form. That may provoke a reaction from the editors who are watching that article, in which case there will be a discussion at Talk:First normal form. If no one objects I may do the same to the other articles.

If you are not feeling as brave as that, then feel free to update the URL. An article with a working external link is better than one with a defunct external link, at least if the linked page isn't full of advertising or bad advice. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:38, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tax deduction?

Am I able to use my volunteer work here as a tax deduction on a non-profit? CTJF83 20:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to talk to a tax professional about that. We can't give advice like that. RudolfRed (talk) 21:07, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

fraud setup of my name 2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lara_weese_(name)

remove this from your site!! i hv no clue how to work wikipedia and do not want to learn how..

http://www.newspaperarchive.com/People/Lara_Weese.html

u click that link above and it brings up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lara_weese_(name)

explain this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funny1971 (talk • contribs) 20:39, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There has never been a page on Wikipedia with that name. What exactly is the "fraud setup"? The external site you linked to is linking to an article that has never existed. - Purplewowies (talk) 20:47, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, people have added input at the first section you created about this: fraud setup of my name - Purplewowies (talk) 20:49, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is this just a misunderstanding? The newspaperarchive.com link did a search for Lara Weese on Wikipedia and found nothing, perhaps that's been misunderstood. Dougweller (talk) 20:56, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

so let me get this straight..those links don't exist? I just posted them they are there so How do I remove them from your site? O thanks ms Purple for ur in site that was so helpful since i do know that it was addressed but it's still showing.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Funny1971 (talk • contribs) 21:06, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The links are merely to a standard page that exists for anything linked to Wikipedia that we don't have an article on. Enter 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horace_J_Entirelymadeupname' (or another made up link of your own) into a browser and you'll get the same result. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:14, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict):You can link to just about anything you can type in the search box. For instance, I can link to this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iojfop_joiejfjdsok_jiujgjkxc;lkdfif . There has never been an article there, and there will never be an article there. The page is telling you that the page doesn't exist. It's somewhat like a 404 error. If there had ever been a page at the article name you linked, there would be a light red box saying it had been deleted. But the page you linked to (which details that the article does not exist) cannot be removed entirely. That type of page (with no actual article) *shouldn't* be indexed by any search engines. For instance, this search (click here) for the page you linked to yields no results related to that page. - Purplewowies (talk) 21:24, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.newspaperarchive.com automatically makes such links to non-existing Wikipedia pages. Here is an example with a random string: http://www.newspaperarchive.com/People/asifwygfnwyrgfnwyrgfcnyng.html. It makes a link to the non-existing page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asifwygfnwyrgfnwyrgfcnyng_(name). Such Wikipedia url's return a HTTP 404 error as they should. It's an error in http://www.newspaperarchive.com that they don't discover this. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:55, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Help creating article about social action group

I'm a student in University and as a project I need to make a Wikipedia page about a social action group, the probem is I have no idea how to use this site, my teacher told us that there are people who might be able to help us creating our age on the site. I was wondering how I could contact anyone willing to help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steph kobe (talk • contribs) 22:11, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This page on explains how to write your first article: WP:YFA. RudolfRed (talk) 22:19, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But before you set about creating it, you need to read WP:CORP (which applies to all organisations, not just commercial ones), and make sure that your group meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. If it does not, or if you do not include the references to independent reliable sources that are required to establish that it is notable, then your article will quickly get deleted, and you should choose a different project. --ColinFine (talk) 23:01, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please note also that articles must be written from a neutral point of view; they may not be used for promotion of a group no matter how worthwhile it or its goals may be. —teb728 t c 23:47, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

False album page made

This false page was made with information on an album my client Yo Gotti is not making http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_from_the_Kitchen:_Reloaded and we need to know how to have it deleted. Not only is it not a real album, the reference to the article on HipHopDX.com is completely false. http://www.hiphopdx.com/index/interviews/id.1836/title.yo-gotti-speaks-on-his-relationship-with-drake-explains-how-his-difficult-past-has-helped-lead-him-to-a-successful-rap-career No where in this article does he mention such an album project. How can we have this page deleted? Thank you for your time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dovelyone (talk • contribs) 22:23, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for alerting us about this, I have nominated it for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Live from the Kitchen: Reloaded because in my own assessment it is likely to be a hoax. Thanks again, Quasi human | Talk 22:50, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2012 January 29

Contents