Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 26

Archive 20

←

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

→

Archive 30

Color in Infobox header!

Hello everyone. I have a small query related to using colors in Infobox. If the Template:Infobox organization, we see that there is an option which allows us to set the background color as well as font color for the header text of the Infobox. I wish to add the same thing (though not directly to the infobox), but with help of some HTML code or styling technique, that can avail me of same feature in another Infobox which doesn't uses this feature explicitly. I tried Template:Font color, Template:Background color, but that doesn't shows up like the one that I have linked. Thanks for any incoming assistance in this regard. VIVEK RAI :  Friend?  17:40, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Vivek, nice to see you back at the Teahouse again. It doesn't look like any of us here have any expertise in template editing. You might want to ask at Help talk:Template instead. Sorry I can't help you more. NtheP (talk) 20:47, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Resolved : I used <div style="background-color:yellow;">Content Here</div> , and it worked like magic. Thanks everyone. VIVEK RAI :  Friend?  15:02, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

What was the infobox you are referring to? I may be able to create a parameter. Ryan Vesey Review me! 15:06, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Consider for example : Template:Infobox university. VIVEK RAI :  Friend?  16:17, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Ouch. ^^ benzband (talk) 16:21, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Do you want to start discussion at Template talk:Infobox university to make sure it would be supported to have the option? I can work on figuring out what would need to be changed. There would need to be consensus prior to any modificaiton. Ryan Vesey Review me! 16:25, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't think everyone would like to have the same styling effect. As far as this is concerned, if everyone (or most of people) like this effect, it can be included in many of such templates. You may call a discussion/RfC on the issue.However, One thing I would to highlight is that my choice of that background color for header and font color is not arbitrary, rather based on the colors used by the company/university/other in their logo or any official colors (if exist). This makes the infobox a bit more attractive. VIVEK RAI :  Friend?  04:26, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Links to tools

In my activities here on Wikipedia, I have found two tools very useful. They are Reflinks and Dab solver. Accessing them seems quite awkward, tho. I have been searching for them by name when I want to use them. Is there an easier way to get to them such as adding them to my toolbox sidebar and if so how would I do that? Gtwfan52 (talk) 21:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Gtwfan! I don't know if you can put those tools in your toolbox sidebar, but my solution is to create a bookmarks folder for any tools I want to use, so I can access them whenever. Someone else may have a better solution than I though! :) Best, Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 21:39, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Gtwfan, you can add Reflinks to your side bar by installing the script at User:Dispenser/Reflinks#User script. As Keilana says you can bookmark the toolserver page and work both gadgets from there - they are both in the tools menu. NtheP (talk) 22:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

How useful are the Talk pages really?

On a high traffic article, I can see how a discussion on the talk page can help reach a consensus. On a low traffic page though... is it all that useful in practice? Do people regularly monitor articles or talk pages somehow or do you have to remember to go back and check to see if anyone has updated the article or talk page further? I read the "Be Bold" motto, but I feel like - in practice - it might be better to run some things by others before making big changes. On the other hand, if no one monitors low traffic articles and there won't actually be any/much discussion, maybe I should just go for it. Slightly depressing to see all your work rolled back though. Miklasky (talk) 18:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Miklashy, thanks for stopping by the Teahouse. You make a very valid point and one there isn't a straight forward answer to. Either line you suggest is valid. Be Bold and then watch for results is one way but if the thought that edits might get reverted and you've 'wasted' your time, then posting notices on intent on talk pages, leaving it a few days and then making your edit is the way to go. Being bold is only the first stage in the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, as long as it moves to stage 3 (discuss) and doesn't get stuck in a edit warring cycle of stages 1 and 2 only then it's not really a problem. You can also use the hybrid - be bold, but ensure you leave a decent edit summary and start the discussion on the talk page at the same time. I see from your user page that you've been a long time user but not an editor of Wikipedia. All I would say is don't be discouraged from editing because others may disagree with you. NtheP (talk) 19:16, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Miklashy! I would say that you should definitely be bold and make the change. You might be surprised though, sometimes people watch low traffic pages for no apparent reason and you could start an excellent discussion. If you want to be careful and run a change by someone, perhaps you could also take a look at the history of the page and see if anyone's done major work or edited recently. They would probably be willing to take a look-see. Welcome to the Teahouse! Best, Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 21:02, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! You all are very welcoming. Miklasky (talk) 00:34, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Create a 2nd article

How do I create a second article if I have one already submitted and waiting on approval in my sandbox? Hammerstone2012 (talk) 13:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hammerstone, welcome to the Teahouse. You can just create another sandbox, for example User:Hammerstone2012/sandbox2 and start work in that. There is no limit to the number of subpages you can have (see Wikipedia:User pages#User pages and user space for more details).

I had a look at the article you have drafted on the Brookfield Class Action and as it's an ongoing action I'm not sure what the notability of the case is. You might want to take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (events) to check that your article meets the criteria. NtheP (talk) 15:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

TV screenshot removed by bot on Gloria Allred page

I reread the rules, and my image was a jpg, so see no explanation for removing the image. I took the shot in March of 2012 when Allred appeared on a TV show, and I captioned it that she was defending women's' rights. Seems to me the more recent image, is a good idea. I did not remove the 2007 shot that's already there. KSRolph (talk) 01:05, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi KSRolph. I think you may have a misunderstanding. The bot removed the image markup from the article because the image itself was deleted as a copyright violation. This is the deletion log entry. I can't see the deleted image but I can see the text you provided upon the upload. When you say you "took the shot", do you mean that you actually had a camera in your hand and in person took a photograph of Gloria Alred when she was nearby you somewhere? That would be "taking the shot", so that you would be the copyright owner and would then have the right to freely license it through an upload here. If this is the case, I would contact the administrator who deleted the image (at User talk:Peripitus) and ask why they believed it was a copyright violation. On the other hand, do you possibly mean that you took a screenshot from a television program that was aired? That does not in any way make you the owner of the copyright and it was indeed a copyright violation.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Ah I just realized how boneheaded my answer was. Sorry. I never actually read the section header but only the question. Okay, so it was a screenshot. This no more makes you the copyright owner than if you painted a reproduction of a famous painting and then said you owned the copyright of the image because you painted it, or if you published a book that had the verbatim text from a previously published book, and then claimed you owned the text because you re-typed it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:51, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Name

Hello I signed up with the user name Vallyremusic I would like for my name to be Vallyre when users search for me. What can i do to change it?(Vallyremusic (talk) 23:25, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Vallyre. Go to your preference. On the first page that comes up for User Profile, scroll down to the section labeled Signature. Tick the box labeled "Treat the above as wiki markup." In the field just above, enter the following code [[User:Vallyremusic|Vallyre]] ([[User talk:Vallyremusic#top|talk]]) then click Save at the bottom of the page. Now go preview your new signature (by typing four tildes [~~~~] and clicking show preview). It should now format as Vallyre (talk) (+ a timestamp).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:35, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Vallyre! Welcome to the Teahouse. Do you want your name to "look" different in your signature, or do you want a different name? I *think* what you can do to have a different username is just start a new account called User:Vallyre and stop using the other one, because your account is so new. Fuhghettaboutit has given you great advice on how to change the look of your signature no matter what your username is. heather walls (talk) 23:48, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Vallyre! One other thing you can do is to go to the username change board. This will keep your contributions from this account, everything will just be renamed. I know it can be kind of confusing - it took me a long time to figure out! - so if you need help, feel free to ask me on my talk page or here in the Teahouse. Welcome to the Teahouse and Wikipedia! Best, Keilana|^{Parlez ici} 21:04, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

The page I added was deleted but I cannot understand on what grounds.

I added a page for an artist who has a lot of success in the UK and has exhibited internationally and continues to exhibit throughout the year and every year on a regular basis. I received opposition from the people who monitor new entries based on (I think) on references. The artist has been written about and exhibited in National Institutions and has an established collector base. Despite these credentials I still could not get the page accepted. In terms of encyclopedia of contemporary artists this was genuine entry of significance and yet Wikipedia said "no". My main question is on what level of expertise do the monitors claim when deleting pages on subjects like this? Some of the comments I had in the discussion page were wide of the mark and showed a lack of research or understanding of the art world.Ngrbreeze (talk) 21:24, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ngrbreeze and thanks for stopping by the Teahouse. The only record to go by is the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annya Sand where it appears there were a two main concerns raised. The first was that there was a lack of reliable references to support her notability, although you were looking for offline sources. The second was that the article appeared to be a copyright violation of the biography on Annya's own website, although again this may have been resolved - from the information available it's difficult to tell. I think it looks like you didn't add the references necessary for her notability to be established before the discussion was closed. The people who took part in the deletion discussion and the administrator who closed the debate have to work against Wikipedia policies and guidelines, a knowledge of the art world isn't needed.

If you have more references then I suggest you rewrite the article via Wikipedia:Articles for creation where it can be assessed before publication and if there are still issues then it can be amended without risk of deletion. NtheP (talk) 22:00, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ngrbreeze, I just want to support your effort to create a great article and encourage you to follow NtheP's advice and try again. When you've started something you can ask the hosts here for specific help with it. Thanks for not giving up! heather walls (talk) 23:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi. The text of the deleted article was judged to be a copyright violation. If this is not the case, it might be reasonable to request userfication of the content for you to continue to work on. Going via 'Articles for creation' is a very good suggestion. Keep at it! -- Trevj (talk) 07:04, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

search engine results

Hi everyone. Im sorry if this question appears twice. I hit the "ask my question button" but at that precise moment my router malfunctioned.

My first question is this. Do the questions asked here in the tea house get indexed by search engines? Will my questions show up on search results?

Vandrake (talk) 20:36, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Vandrake, welcome to the Teahouse. This page like many others in the Wikipedia:Project namespace has the magic word#Behavior switches _NOINDEX_ set meaning that the page isn't listed in search engine results. Of course this doesn't stop a person entering a specific search like Wikipedia "search engine results" Teahouse into a search engine and this page being result number 1 but apart but I really have to try. A search like Wikipedia "search engine results" doesn't bring this page up showing how specific the search has to be for it show. Can I ask what prompted you to ask the question? NtheP (talk) 21:33, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi there thanks for the reply!

I wanted to ask if I could create a page for an actor named Vivi Devereaux. But I didnt know if the question would be logged by a search engine which would make things strange if I created the page and then both the question and the page showed up. I ask the second question because I saw him in a play performance and I was very impressed and doing some googling led me to believe that a page here might be a good idea as he seems to have some notability but I wanted to check with people here first. Please feel free to offer suggestions! Vandrake (talk) 22:46, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Very unlikely for both to appear in a search, not that I think it would matter if they did. Good luck with the article. NtheP (talk) 23:13, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

How do I fix formatting on the page?

I have been adding information to the page for the city of Goshen, Indiana. Everything looked good until I added a sister city to the main information box in the upper right. Now that that box has been expanded downward, some things are getting covered up - text is now flowing around the box anymore. Can anyone tell me what I should have done different to keep this from happening?

Bbeachy2001 (talk) 18:41, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hello Bbeachy, and welcome to the Teahouse! I looked at your edits, and they seem fine to me. Maybe it is your screen resolution? Maybe that's why it is making expanding downward. Hope this helps! -- Luke (Talk) 19:59, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Well, shrinking it down does make the problem go away, but that doesn't fix the problem. When I view it at full screen (1680 x 1050), the courthouse picture and the Pumpkinvine Nature Trail picture are both too high on the page - and start to cover up the text above them. Bbeachy2001 (talk) 20:42, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Bbeachy2001! Do they actually cover the text or just push into the next section? The pushing happens because the text in the sections is short and the wiki is designed to work around the pictures. If the text is actually being covered, that is different. What browser are you using? That may give us a clue. heather walls (talk) 21:45, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Good catch! I always use Chrome, and that's where the pictures are actually covering up text. I opened the page in IE 9, and it doesn't cover up the text there. Bbeachy2001 (talk) 22:06, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Creating a (disambiguation) page.

Hello everyone. I am here to seek your experienced help to get me out of a neat problem. I wish to create a disamb. page for two people who have same names, although different professions. How do I go on creating the page. Kindly tell. VIVEK RAI :  Friend?  17:32, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi Vivek. Can we have a bit more information please? What are the two pages that you want to disambiguate called? It makes a slight difference to the name of the disambiguation page. NtheP (talk) 17:41, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

One article is at AfC and while I was trying to move it to mainspace, I found that another article already exists. The name is Jonathan Lomas which currently refers to the sportsman. Thanks! VIVEK RAI :  Friend?  17:46, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, if the one at Articles for creation is moved to mainspace it will need to be called something like Jonathan Lomas (health researcher). As there only look to be these two people called Jonathan Lomas I don't think a disambiguation page is needed but instead a hatnote on each article cross referencing it to the other.

Like this

This page is about the English golfer. For the health researcher, see Jonathan Lomas (health researcher).

on Jonathan Lomas and

This page is about the health researcher. For the English golfer, see Jonathan Lomas.

on the new article. In these examples I used the template {{Other people3}} but there are others that you could use like {{for}}. NtheP (talk) 17:59, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick help. The job is done. However, I shall request your attention towards one thing. In this article about Jonathan Lomas , the golfer; In the results of major championships section where he hadn't played in almost all of the tournaments except 3 or 4. In that case, does it really makes sense to have a table? I think it can be adequately covered with text. VIVEK RAI :  Friend?  05:58, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

First article and secondary sources

Barry Cook and its talk page, the author seems slightly affiliated with the subject and worried about the artile being tagged; they're unable to find secondary sources. My personal look at search results for the subject indicates that there are some third-party sources available, but I unfortunately do not have the time to process them. If one of more active contributors here expands the article and brings it to encyclopedic shape, this would help the article author establish as a contributor at Wikipedia. Thanks. --Gryllida 06:01, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Howdy, welcome to the Teahouse! There are several ways to go about this. One would be to add a {{refimprove}} tag to the article, however this might just worry the creator more. The other thing you could do is contact WikiProject Martial arts and ask them to assist in writing the article. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask! Thanks, Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 16:53, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply, Nathan2055. I don't think I am familiar with how WikiProjects are structured, so I was unable to find a place to leave a request for new article assistance at the page you linked. Please hint to what I can do here (as I indeed wouldn't want refimprove tag as you mentioned earlier). Thanks! --Gryllida 08:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

A suggested tweak for Wikipedia

Occasionally, (not often) when I look up a topic on Wikipedia, the thing I am looking for is not there. Any chance you could include at the bottom of each article a place to put a question. This would automatically be e-mailed to whoever the "watcher/expert" is on that page. If he didn't know the answer, he might forward it to someone else. This way, the articles would be enriched by including topics which the authors probably knew but didn't think of including. Regards William Sorry about posting this here. I couldn't find a suggestion box for Wikipedia.125.239.168.133 (talk) 21:58, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse!

AFTv5 screenshot.

You may have noticed the "rate this page" boxes at the bottom of articles (that is AFTv4). Wikipedia is developing a new Article Feedback Tool (AFTv5) that enables readers to submit their feedback in text form (suggestions, specific edits to an article, etc). This feedback is then viewed by logged-in users at Special:ArticleFeedbackv5 so they can improve said articles. The tool is currently only deployed on 0.6% of articles but should be going up to 10% by the beginning of July and in the long run be used across all Wikipedia articles. Thanks for your question! Cheers, benzband (talk) 22:10, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

William, it's a good idea but it assumes that every page is being watched or has an expert. As no one owns articles on Wikipedia there will be a lot of articles that have no one "caring" for them. It's also partly the place of article talk pages - posting something there is going to be visible to anyone, whereas an email question would only be known about by the sender and the recipient. NtheP (talk) 22:28, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Benzband is correct, Article feedback will have a place to give those ideas on every page. There will be individual feeds for those pages along with one central feed. Response to those is a whole other kettle. :) heather walls (talk) 22:51, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I really like the look and feel of this box; the simplicity factor is dazzling. I assume it would feed into the article's Talk page as well as into a central feed. --Rosiestep (talk) 17:05, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

It feeds into Special:ArticleFeedbackv5 (example: article Cat feeds into Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Cat). Currently there is a link on the talkpage that directs to the feedback page, but the tool is still under development and i've heard there might be a "feedback" tab of it's own, next to "article" and "talk" tabs. benzband (talk) 21:55, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

user names on Wiki?

Hello everyone, Thanks for the warm welcome! Is there any way to change my user name on Wikipedia? I set it in reference to my two fave languages, but I'm thinking maybe something else would be better? Thank you in advance! WikiGnome2012 (talk) 14:00, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Hi EngGerm12. Changing username is a fairly simple process, especially if the username you want isn't taken. Could I suggest WikiGnome2012, it's actually free! To do it, just wander over to the change username page and follow the instructions. If you want to get a different name, which is already taken, there's a chance that's possible too, but there's a bit more complications then... Worm^TT(talk) 14:06, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the quick response, I hope to get to that soon, then. Follow-up question: will all my previous edits be saved under the new user name? I would like to be able to keep track of them in case there was anything I forgot to edit in the articles, so I can go back and continue my WikiGnome work. Thanks in advance!WikiGnome2012 (talk) 07:47, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, your previous edits would be saved under new username. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/wiki/Changing_username "On request, bureaucrats can change user account settings and article histories such that all previous edits of a given user are attributed to the new name." --Gryllida 11:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

How do I start a new entry on Wikipedia?

I wish to start a Wikipedia entry but dont don't know where to start64.26.116.245 (talk) 17:01, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

64.26, welcome to the Teahouse. Great to hear that you want to create a new article. The place to start is Wikipedia:Articles for creation where you can develop your article and ask for, and receive regular feedback on it. All this is in a safe area so your article won't be deleted because it's doesn't meet Wikipedia standards. There is a helpful guide on how to write your first article at Wikipedia:Your first article or of course you can always ask back here for any assistance. NtheP (talk) 18:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey! Unfortunately, IP addresses cannot create articles. You might want to go to Articles for Creation if you want to create an article. Hope this helps. -- Luke (Talk) 01:33, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Red link shows up in my template

Hi folks, I have used a template to create User:Jssteil/sandbox/Portal_Main_Page.

If you notice, at the top of the page, there is a red link, and I cannot figure out where it is coming from.

If one of you more experienced editors can take a look and let me know how to fix it, it would be much appreciated.

Jssteil (talk) 04:42, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jssteil, welcome to the Teahouse! That particular template doesn't seem to exist, where did you get it? :) heather walls (talk) 05:00, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I cannot remember where I got the template from...I found it sometime last week, liked it and socked it away to work on later(i.e., tonight). It looks like a change that was made seemed to have fixed it... Jssteil (talk) 05:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jssteil, portals may not work in user space. I followed Step 2 in Wikipedia:Portal/Instructions and created User:Jssteil/sandbox/Portal_Main_Page/box-header (hope you don't mind) but nothing happened. Do you want to try moving the portal to portal space? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank your for the input guys! This "Portal" already exists in Portal space Portal:Human Health and Performance in Space...the page in my sandbox is me revamping the existing portal's landing page in the comfort of my own sandbox. Do you suppose the message will go away once I implement the changes on the "real" portal page? Jssteil (talk) 05:24, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Heather removed the header template so it should be ok. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:30, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! Jssteil (talk) 15:00, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

How do I get someone to respond to talk I left

I left a question on an article talk page here at this link Talk:The Little Red Book (study guide) and wondering if I could get someone to review my question. Should I be asking this question of the person who created the article? Not quite sure the link I posted in this question will work as posting here is different than on a talk page. Anyhow the article in question is a stub titled The Little Red Book (study guide) Thank you all. Ț♥ttØØdẄ♥itre§ 04:08, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I shouldn't worry too much at the moment. People rarely respond immediately. I see the author of the article is a regular, active editor so wait a few days to give them an opportunity to respond, before going to 'plan B' (which, like you suggest, could be to leave a message on their Talk page). The article seems to have lots of problems, particularly with lack of sources, so it is good to see you are taking an interest in improving it! Sionk (talk) 11:38, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, I did leave them a message on their talk page. Did not wait as long as you suggested but just now saw your response. Thanks again. Ț♥ttØØdẄ♥itre§ 22:24, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

How to download large amounts of pictures?

I'm working on a project that will require me to download large amounts of pictures from Wikipedia. I've been trying to find some advice about the best way to do this without breaking any Wikipedia rules or guidelines, but have had no response to my question on the help desk. I have heard that using "Wikix" [1] is the best way to do this, but some people have reported being blocked from Wikipedia by using the utility. Can anyone here advise me on this matter? Thanks,Nozzleberry (talk) 01:04, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Nozzleberry, hi and thanks for stopping by the Teahouse. The only reference I can find to anyone being blocked is a single unsigned suggestion of this happening dating from 2009/10 (it's here if you want to see it). The only suggestion I can think of is to raise what you want to do at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard and see what response you get from the admins. NtheP (talk) 10:15, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi NtheP, thank you very much for your prompt response! I will certainly try out your suggestion and contact the Administrators' notice board. I'll be sure to stop past the Teahouse again if I have any problems in the future!:) Kind regards,Nozzleberry (talk) 11:30, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

the page I added is not showing

Hi there - I created an article for actress Katherine Kingsley over one month ago and is is still not appearing when searching for her name. I have not been informed that it has been denied and it shouldn't be as it fills all requirements of notability and referencing etc. Is it just a matter of waiting a bit longer?Katherine Kingsley (talk) 17:26, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Katherine, welcome to the Teahouse. You did indeed create a page about Katherine but as it was on your User page and you are using the same name I think it's been taken as a page about yourself (side issue - you aren't Katherine Kingsley are you, but just a fan?). The article probably meets the notability criteria for actors but I think it would be worth submitting the article via Wikipedia:Articles for creation to get a second opinion, certainly I think the references need to be made clearer. There are a good set of instructions on how to do this at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners You can submit the article to Articles for creation by adding the code {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article page.

I have to say the copyright status of the photos is more concerning than the notability of Katherine. I see one of the photos File:Katherine Kingsley. Photographer Antonia Couling.jpg is listed for deletion because it doesn't contain any information about its copyright and the other three which you say your own work all appear on Katherine's website. When you upload them and say they are your own work you are saying that you own the copyright on the photo, i.e. you took the photos, not that you were responsible for uploading them. This is a common misunderstanding so don't worry if it is one you have made, it can be remedied by obtaining permission from the person who does own the copyright. It's the same with the photo credited to Antonia Couling - if Antonia took the photo then she owns the copyright so without her permission to use the image on Wikipedia, a violation of her copyright is occurring. I hope the pictures can be used as they are excellent images but we need to ensure they are being licenced correctly.

Please come back if you want any more information or can supply more information which will enable us to better help you. NtheP (talk) 19:23, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

New member trying to submit/references/citing

Hello, I am very, very new to Wikipedia and confused with some things I am trying to do.

I am trying to make a page for an actor that is not represented on Wikipedia. I was declined yesterday for lack of reliable sources and notability.

I watched the video tutorial, but I do not have a 'cite' button on my toolbar or any visible means of downloading reftools.

I tried manually citing within the text, with footnotes below, but the code wasn't working.

I simply made a References heading and listed many links to articles and notable websites and resubmitted. I can't tell whether I've been declined again or not, it looks like I was declined again overnight 5 hours ago, but the 'waiting review' is still up.

Thanks, Joannabookworm (talk) 10:33, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey Joanna, and welcome to the Teahouse! Sometimes, the "Cite" dropdown menu doesn't work for me either. When this happens, I lust use a citation template and manually add inline citations. You can go to Wikipedia:Citation templates to view a list of citation templates to use. Try bypassing your cache to make the "cite" menu appear again. Hope this helps! -- Luke (Talk) 14:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Joanna, to add to Luk3's answer, there is a really good help guide about adding references at Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners. For the content of references you want to look for good articles in the mainstream media or at least the specialist stage media. A lot of the references you have just show that he was in certain productions etc and to establish his notability more than that is needed, it's why is he somebody Wikipedia should take notice of? NtheP (talk) 19:31, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you so much everybody. This is all wonderful. I'm sure I'll get it together. My eyes are bleeding from all this code :)

Joannabookworm (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:12, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

I want to change the titles of 2 photos that I incorrectly named.

I uploaded photos to Commons but used the wrong description on 2 of them. I incorrectly used the word "Centenary" instead of "Jubilee" on 2 photos that I uploaded to Commons in the files "West Lakes Shore".

If anyone can help me to fix the names that would be appreciated.

Kokoda BillKokoda Bill (talk) 21:00, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kokoda Bill, welcome to the Teahouse. You need to go to the files on Commons and add {{rename|newname.ext|numeric reason|text reason}} to the files. The numeric reasons are described at commons:Commons:File renaming but I think you will want to use 3 for misnamed files. Once you've done this a Commons adminstrator will carry out the renaming for you. NtheP (talk) 21:19, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks but I must confess I do not no where I add the {{rename etc to make the alteration. I don't even know how to get the upright line between the words rename and newname, so you can see I'm not good at this editing. Any further help would be greatKokoda Bill (talk) 22:15, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

This is the link to your contributions on Commons. On each file you want to change the name of add the code above - you can copy and paste from this page if you want. On US keyboards the pipe symbol "|" is entered using Shift + \ NtheP (talk) 22:23, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks that was very helpful. I've done the necessary editing, but could not have done it without your help. Thanks again Nthep — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kokoda Bill (talk • contribs) 04:19, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Adding photos

Hello! I am trying to add a new photo to the Camera Obscura band page but it doesn't seem to work. How do I post pictures on this site?Cyresire (talk) 14:20, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Cyresire, Welcome to Wikipedia. You can upload photos via Wikicommons here. Follow the prompts, and make sure that you are aware of the copyright status of the given image. -Cntras (talk) 14:39, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

What Cntras said :) Feel free to come back to the Teahouse if you're having any problems. The directions can get overwhelming or confusing sometimes. Usually, if you took the photo, you should be okay to upload it. If you didn't, you have to get permission from the owner of the image (the photographer, record company, whatever). If you don't get written permission, and send it to us (let me know if you need to do that and we'll explain how) then it'll get deleted. Hope we helped =) Sarah (talk) 14:42, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

How to remove deleted page?

I created a page which was deleted. My question is 'how do I completely remove that page?' so that when anybody visits, nothing appears, not even the deletion notice.

182.178.89.214 (talk) 11:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Answered at Wikipedia:Help desk#How to remove deleted page? where you also posted. Please only post in one place and keep discussion there. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:00, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi! Welcome to the Teahouse. It's actually okay that you posted it in two places - I know sometimes it's hard to get an answer quickly enough and new editor's often get lost in the sea of help spaces :) It looks like Prime has already answered your question - but yup, sadly, we can't do anything. Just wait a few days and I'm sure it won't be easy to find on Google, etc. Besides, if it's deleted for say, notability reasons, a lot of people might not be looking for it (at this point!). Thanks for visiting!! Sarah (talk) 14:41, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

rss feeds

How do I use a Rss feed to watch a podcast? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.253.102.1 (talk) 17:29, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse, this page is about help with editing Wikipedia and your question doesn't appear to be about that. You could try asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing and somebody might be able to help you. NtheP (talk) 20:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

How does one cite documents(pdf) or pages(html) that have been removed but are still available in google cache? Through webcite?

There are a number of documents that I want to cite for an article but they have been removed from the website but can still be found in google cache. Can I cite from google cache, and if so, how do I cite them, considering they might disappear from google cache any day.

Thanks

Sesamevoila (talk) 06:29, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Sesamevoila, welcome to the Teahouse. Take a look to see if the pages you are interested in have appeared in The Wayback Machine at The Internet Archive. If they have then you can cite them from there, templates like {{cite web}} have specific parameters to support archived web material. NtheP (talk) 17:04, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Sesamevoila. Just a further thought - if it's a UK site, you can also take a look at the British Library's Web Archive, which also has an excellent search feature. Moswento ^talky 08:41, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments...unfortunately these dont show up in the wayback machine...neither is it a UK site. The only source I have is Google cache at the moment'... Sesamevoila (talk) 06:52, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

how do I find my answer to the question I asked earlier today? Myle Disability...

summary of talk; does disability claim @ ssdisability law center .org exist? 184.183.160.197 (talk) 23:17, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello. When you asked this question, if it was on Wikipedia where you are editing now, either you did so while logged into an account, or the IP address provided by your internet service provider changed between then and now (which is not uncommon). In any event, this is your very first edit to Wikipedia using you current IP address configuration, so I cannot glean what edit of earlier today you are referring to, and a search of "Myle Disability" returns no results. Can you clarify your question?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Dishonest edit summaries

During the past few days I have seen several examples of misleading and even dishonest edit summaries being used to disguise or misrepresent the true effect of an edit. Is this just par for the course and has to be tolerated, or is there something that can be done to attempt to bring the perpetrator to book, and attempt to get them to desist? Ornaith (talk) 12:51, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello again, Ornaith. Since you didn't provide any examples I can't comment on what you have in mind. I will say, though, that if you're referring to summaries written by an editor with whom you've had a dispute in the past it's probably best to just let it go. GaramondLethe 17:00, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

There seem to be several editors who demonstrate conflict of interest. Hide their intentions with many tiny edits, false statements in edit summaries, and undo stuff that updates replaces wrong old info. Usually changes fit Follow the Money. Lobby for elimination of editors who degrade wiki. They have been easy to identify. I listed three (in my personal experience and opinion) below.32cllou (talk) 00:57, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

PS I wrote much of the same here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia_Signpost/2012-07-02/In_the_news and will provide specific history upon request.32cllou (talk) 00:59, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Here please look http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prostate-specific_antigen&diff=500890623&oldid=50089016832cllou (talk) 02:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Here misrepresentation in edit summary. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Prostate-specific_antigen&action=history It's not about the nyt at all.32cllou (talk) 03:07, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Why is nationality British for Higgs when he is English ? James Watt is recorded as Scottish

There seems to be a reticence to record English people as English. Stephen Hawking is recorded as British when he is actually English. Alan Turing British - no English, John Logie Baird - Scottish - surely British ? I can go on 81.159.78.173 (talk) 08:36, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

There is no consensus for how to describe British people. See Wikipedia:Nationality of people from the United Kingdom. It's only an essay and not a policy or guideline. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:29, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Generally I would say people's nationality should be described as it is described in the sources, including how the subject identifies themselves. But in these modern times when nationalism is being revived with a vengeance, its a controversial subject! Sionk (talk) 11:53, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

For many English people they see themselves as British first, whereas Scottish people generally see themselves as Scottish first and British second. This is laargely to to British Politics and the history of the Union of the countries that make up the UK of GB. (GsyFootball (talk) 13:01, 5 July 2012 (UTC))

Can you direct me or provide, and how do I reference a TED video?

So, I couldn't sleep initially last night having watched this news on induced birth harm to children http://abcnews.go.com/Health/birth-37-38-weeks-linked-lower-math-reading/story?id=16683067#.T_MJqPVLFh6 since that's what prob happened to my neighbor wonderful kid but slow development and had scary breathing probs first year. Both prob due to induced like 34 weeks. I remember reading a newspaper article reviewing Journal published research finding respiratory harm.

How can I get the Pediatrics and OBGYN Journal articles mentioned on the ABC show? Can I cite the ABC report to say states (Oregon and Arizona) and hospitals are moving to limit induced births to if there's proven high risk otherwise to mothers, or at least 39 weeks into pregnancy?

Been fixing prostate cancer and found this TED presentation. I want to ref the video as easy listening entertaining for users to absorb lots of high end research facts. How do I reference this clip? http://www.ted.com/talks/dean_ornish_on_healing.html32cllou (talk) 16:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)32cllou (talk) 16:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

32cllou, hi and welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to cite those journals, you'll have to track down which publication they appeared in. The article from Pediatrics is this one (I think), if you have or know somebody with an Athens account you can access the article for free or else it's a subscription case ($12 for 2 days).

You can cite the ABC report if indeed it says what you say but from reading the link you gave above I don't see anything saying that some states are moving to limit induced birth. If it said that in the video report then you need to cite that video not the article you linked to above.

I think citing the TED video is fine, Dean Ornish appears to me to be a Reliable source, indeed there is a specific template to help you do reference videos called {{cite video}} and I see from the page the video appears on that the transcript of his address is available in a number of languages so pinpointing the bits you want to refer to should be even easier. If you want to reference this in the article on prostate cancer that my only caution would be to make sure that it's relevant and not just added as a homily on Ornish's methods. NtheP (talk) 20:18, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Passing along a tip I learned here: if an article you need is behind a paywall, WP:RX may be able to help. GaramondLethe 20:24, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

There is a list of citation templates at Wikipedia:Citation templates, you put those between the <ref></ref> brackets after you have inserted relevant information into the article. I can't find the guideline just now, but there is one that says that you should side the source where you got the information. You got the information from ABC, not from the journal, so it's best to cite ABC. ABC is a reputable source so yes, it can be cited. --Vera (talk) 20:26, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Great stuff. I will be editing soon with your help.32cllou (talk) 16:22, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

PS I mixed up articles, with the TED Ornish info to go into prostate cancer and PSA test wiki articles, and another newspaper (not the ABC) article info for induced birth re arizona and oregon moving to limit >39 weeks going into the childbirth article. I found the Ornish journal published research on reversal of prostate cancer (and probably breast).32cllou (talk) 16:28, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

PSS absolutely informative and entertaining so I thought to put it here for you all too:

http://www.ted.com/talks/dean_ornish_on_healing.html 32cllou (talk) 16:31, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

For medical content our reliable sources guideline is here WP:MEDRS. TED talks are not typically reliable sources for medical content. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (please reply on my talk page) 01:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Should I resist the temptation?

I signed-up to Wikipedia to attempt to improve and expand upon its coverage of subjects close to my heart. However, as a result of modifying certain other articles after following a couple of tempting Wikilinks, and a certain other editor treating those contributions of mine with contempt, I find myself, as if sucked into a vortex and unable to escape its suction, compelled to attempt to defend my views about what those other articles should contain; even though I have no synergy with, and no real interest in, the subjects of those articles! Am I typical? Ornaith (talk) 14:00, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ornaith! Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry you're having a hard time. It can happen to new and experienced editors alike! I'm quite passionate about a number of specific topics, and one thing I learned to do - try to find more obscure subjects, or subjects that aren't covered in Wikipedia that much. For example - I like to write about art, so I've tried to find people and subjects that aren't well covered, therefore I get to avoid any drama editing pages that might be watched by a lot of people (i.e. "contemporary art"). Try to think of things we really need improvement on - and of course, if it is something that is popular, talk about it on the talk page and be patient. Wikipedia can be a little weird, but, having good conversation and working through things is good. It's frustrating, as I said, but, be patient. And if you have any problems - drama, issues, or concerns, you can let me know on my talk page and I'll help you find the right people to help (We have Wikipedians who are devoted to meditation!). Thanks for editing, and trust me - you'll move past this! Sarah (talk) 14:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

...and yes...resist the temptation to get insane about it. Take a break and move onto something else perhaps :) Sarah (talk) 14:37, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

I am the editor who has been giving Ornaith a "hard time". The underlying reason is that Ornaith has been trying to replace wording that appears in source documents with his own wording thereby subtly changing the meaning of the text so that it no longer reflect the meaning of the source documents. I have tried to explain the differences but he appears to be too stubborn to accept my explanations or to consult either the sources cited or sources of his own choosing to clarify the situation. In short, he is not reflecting what the sources say. I have unfortunately had to threaten him with a 3RR ban because of the way in which he is conducting himself. Martinvl (talk) 15:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Why don't you supply an example, including the original wording, my new wording, and the source? Then Sarah and others can judge for themselves whether it is my wording, or the original, that misrepresents the source. How many reversions have I made? How many reversions have you made? Ornaith (talk) 15:49, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

This looks like a content disagreement on two articles Stone (unit) and Kilometres per hour. It looks like both of you have posted at the relevant article talk pages and that is where the discussion needs to take place - not here. If you have reached an impasse and anything more is going to turn into an edit war then please have a look at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and some of the processes outlined there. Posting the concerns at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard will, hopefully, bring you some more attention for other editors who may help you to resolve the issues. NtheP (talk) 16:20, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm? Another newish account causing trouble over weights and measures. Perhaps a sock puppet investigation is needed?--Charles (talk) 20:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to all who offered advice, particularly Sarah's wise sounding words. :-) I'm not sure if the cryptic response from Charles was an allegation, a humorous aside or an in-joke. I'm not sure either whether to continue to try to get the "other editor" to engage in a reasoned discussion and perhaps see some merit in my opinions for improvement, taking the advice of Nthep to seek "dispute resolution", or listening to the wisdom of Sarah and forgetting the whole thing and moving to pastures new. I'm a bit of a perfectionist, and am not sure if I have the willpower to abandon the articles, and leave them in what I believe to be a misleading state though. Ornaith (talk) 11:46, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

H1N1 vaccination is linked to Guillain–Barré

Doing research recently, companies that produce the H1N1 vaccination mentioned in their online literature, about side effects, that infrequently people have a life-threatening reaction to the vaccine and develop Guillain–Barré Syndrome. In the Guillain–Barré Wikipedia article, I saw not even soft mention of this, except referring to some clinical trials in China. This problem is under-reported, and though I understand one must soft-peddle it, I believe some mention should be made. What do others think, I usually don't take forays into this kind of article. KSRolph (talk) 03:01, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi KSRolph. I think might be worth a short mention but not more than that and done carefully, with the weight the medical community has given it, which is apparently, based on what I've just looked at, as there being a possible link based on two studies indicating a slight incidence increase, with most studies showing no link at all. Since I did some research for reliable sources, I might as well provide the results. For an overview, from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, see: here ("In most studies, no association was found, but two studies suggested that approximately 1 additional person out of 1 million vaccinated people may be at risk for GBS associated with the seasonal influenza vaccine.") I also found this and this. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:58, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

font change

How does one change the font of text here on wikipedia?Mr.Magikpants (talk) 00:09, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Hey Mrmagijpants, and welcome to the Teahouse! According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Text formatting, you shouldn't change the font in the main namespace, for example, United States. You can, however, change the font on your user pages. You can use the <span style> tag. For example:

<span style="font-family:Palatino;">Test 123</span>

turns into:

Test 123

You can view a list of font families here. Hope this helps! -- Luke (Talk) 01:55, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Footnote detached from block quote

Hi folks, I've been editing the Arthur Upham Pope article. I added a block quote at the end, but I don't like how the [1] reference appears on a separate line. Is there a way to fix that? Is this a good use of a block quote? BTW, is there any point in putting in hours on Wikipedia to bring in information that's already available on another online encyclopedia? Also, I should have inquired here before changing the article name by copying and pasting. I forgot that there's a "Move" option hiding under a little triangle. Is someone here an administrator who can take care of the history merge? HarZim (talk) 22:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi HarZim! To answer your first question, simply change </blockquote><ref name="Iranica" /> to <ref name="Iranica" /></blockquote>. This effectively moves the footnote into the blockquote itself.

The issue I'm finding with the quote is that it has no context. There is no explanation as to how the quote fits into the flow of the article. I would try something like "Reflecting on Pope's life, so-and-so later stated:". Right now the quote is simply added to the bottom of the article.

Many users go to Wikipedia before other online sources because they like the philosophy behind it, it's comprehensiveness, and/or it's ability by nature to move a reader through many related topics in a short period of time due to the inline "wikilinks" to other articles. Some users see Wikipedia as a way to sort of get a "primer" for research they may be doing, not to use it as a reliable source itself, but to find links to other references that the community has deemed worthy. So, in short, the people who devote a lot of time to the project see these reasons as proof that Wikipedia really does facilitate the education of humanity.

With regards to the merging of the histories, this issue has already been alerted to administrators by the user who added the tag to the top of the article. It should be resolved quickly. For future reference, the proper place to add requests for history merges is at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen, where the request of a history merge between Arthur Pope and Arthur Upham Pope has already been posted (and by the time I submit this, it may have already been resolved).

The last observation that I have is that the article to which you have obviously devoted a lot of time (judging by your contributions) has a large amount of original research, and many claims need to be supported by references. This failure of the article is not your fault, as it existed long before you got there. But, if you are interested in the subject, maybe think about rectifying the problem yourself! Happy editing, hajatvrc with WikiLove @ 00:57, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Cite section on edit toolbar

When i create my first article, there are cite section on edit toolbar. It's make reference more easy. But it's gone now. Where is it? Ivan530Talk 09:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ivan! Do you mean the Wikipedia:refToolbar 2.0? It should appear as a tab in your editing toolbar called "cite", like in this picture:

— benzband (talk) 09:36, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Yes, like that. I just wonder why i can't see it. Ivan530Talk 09:44, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ivan. Sometimes it disappears for me too! I'm not sure why this is, but refreshing the page normally works for me. If that fails, try bypassing your cache, or just try again later. Hope you get it working again - it definitely makes things easier! Moswento ^talky 09:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Enable enhanced editing toolbar	Enable dialogs for inserting links, tables and more	RefToolbar version	RefToolbar style
Off	Off On	RefToolbar 1.0	Cite icon on right
On	Off	RefToolbar 2.0a	{{}} icon in middle
	On	RefToolbar 2.0b	Cite button on right

You can change the settings at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing. benzband (talk) 09:55, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

"Enable enhanced editing toolbar" & "Enable dialogs for inserting links, tables and more" is turned on in my preferences (since i never turn it off). I also have bypass my chace but it still not showed up. Are this bug? Ivan530Talk 10:12, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

It's been an ongoing bug and it is fairly annoying. For my part, I have ProveIt installed and only use it when the cite button disappears. You can install it by going to Preferences→Gadgets→Editing→ProveIt. Ryan Vesey Review me! 16:00, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi. And I've unfortunately had some issues with ProveIt too. I don't know what the best solution is. My personal approach at the moment is to simply include refs - generally within some form of citation template (even if bot generated as a last resort), whichever works at the time. The date formatting seems to be inconsistent between citation tools but I've decided to be less particular about this than I used to be. -- Trevj (talk) 21:09, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Access to expensive sources

I'm back for another cup of tea, I hope I'm not abusing the hospitality offered here!

Any thoughts on this please. After I requested a citation to support a list of assertions in an article, an editor added a reference to an article in the "Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences" journal. The article isn't free to access, and at $25 for a single view, I am not prepared to pay to check that the article does indeed support the assertions. Is anyone aware of any way I can get hold of a copy of the article, or how I can check that it does the job? Ornaith (talk) 06:40, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps you could make a request at Wikipedia:HighBeam.-Cntras (talk) 06:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ornaith, welcome back! Asking questions is not abusing hospitality, it's what we're here for and we are very glad to help. Cntras's link is interesting, maybe someone on that list can check if that journal is available. Good luck, heather walls (talk) 07:16, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

This journal is not archived by highbeam. I'm sure plenty of university connections have access to it through jstor or lexisnexis or what have you. You can probably find someone with access to a database that indexes this journal who is willing to forward you a copy at WP:RX (I think that's the link to it, anyway..) You may be able to procure a copy yourself at your local library. If the original authors of the paper are still alive/active and you can find their email addresses, many authors will be more than happy to send you a copy of a paper if you ask them. Besides that I'm not sure what would work, but one of those should turn it up. If none of those work - although I haven't looked through your edit history to find the specific situation you are talking about - unless it is for something incredibly controversial or something, you'll usually be fine just accepting someones word if they explicitly say an academic journal article supports particular citations. Kevin Gorman (talk) 07:17, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi there! I have access to this journal. Which article is it that you're working on? Loriski (talk) 10:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Loriski. Thanks for your offer of help. I'm looking at the Stone (unit) article, and am particularly interested in getting hold of a copy of [2]<- this journal article document ("Two Remarkable Roman Stone Weights in the Edward C. Streeter Collection at the Yale Medical Library") which is cited in the Wikipedia "Stone" article, to see if I can verify the assertions linked to that journal article. Thanks again. Ornaith (talk) 11:17, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Sounds like you have a solution for this particular request, but for others who may be wondering what to do in such situations, you can also post a request at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request (or WP:RX for short), where editors with access to such journals often volunteer to track down what is needed.--SPhilbrick(Talk) 11:50, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone who has provided hekp with this for me. I have taken up Loriski's offer for now, but if the situation arises again, Kevin's and Sphilbrick's idea of using WP:RX looks promising! Thanks again. Ornaith (talk) 14:19, 6 July 2012 (UTC)