Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2009 February 23

= February 23 =

Are these references enough to add a new article?
Hi. I would like to create a new wikipedia article for westside church sydney. Nothing to do with advertising, only informative of its history and stucture, similar to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsong_Church but obviously a bit different and no where near as big.

Are these sources/refereces enough for it to be credited of being worthy enough to be allowed to have a wikipedia article?

h**p://www.westsidechurch.com.au/

h**p://www.australianchurches.net.au/church.html?i=184

h**p://achurchesdirectory.com.au/directory/church.php?i=248&cn=westside-church

h**p://www.worthylinks.com/churches/australia-new-zealand-churches/

h**p://www.hnlc.org.au/holroyd-churches/contacts.htm

h**p://www.youtube.com/user/WestSideChurchSydney -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.25.243.2 (talk • contribs) 09:03, 23 February 2009


 * Without having actually looked at the links, I would suggest that they look like they might be ok for providing some information about the church in an article, but would probably not be sufficient to satisfy the notability guidelines, which require multiple non-trivial references in reliable independant sources. To translate that bit by bit, "multiple" is obviously "at least two, preferably a few more", "non-trivial" means "not just a passing mention or a listing in a directory, but actual discussion of the church itself", "reliable" means "not likely to have just made it up or gotten the information from a man in a bar" and "independant" means "not directly connected with the church itself". So the church's own website and YouTube accounts are not independant, and neither would any self-submitted entries to directories. A good reference is something like a newspaper or magazine article on the church, or at least one that devotes several paragraphs to the church. Confusing Manifestation (Say hi!) 23:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also note that no one will own the article about your church, which means anyone who wants to write something critical or unflattering about your church will be able to do so, as long as they can provide reliable sources to support their claims. If your church is not very notable, then it probably hasn't accumulated many critics yet, so this might not be an issue for a while. (If your church has been involved in any sort of notable controversy, expect it to find its way into the article here eventually.) When you put information on Wikipedia, you are submitting it to the potentially brutal marketplace of ideas. See the articles Criticism of Microsoft and Criticism of Microsoft Windows to get an idea of the kind of content that appears on Wikipedia but probably does not originate with anyone with a vested interest in portraying a company like Microsoft favorably. Microsoft is something of a special case, in that it is a very large company whose profit-maximizing decisions impact many people, and not always favorably. Thus lots of people publish criticisms of Microsoft, creating reliable sources which may then support the same criticism on Wikipedia. You might also look at other wikis such as Conservapedia which make no attempt to be neutral and might be friendlier to your point of view (depending on which flavor of Christianity you believe). You can create articles about your church on as many different wikis as will allow it, and then observe the different reactions you may get from the various user communities. I cannot predict which wiki you will like best. --Teratornis (talk) 01:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Defense vs Defence
Wiki redirects Defence to Defense .... Should we use defense then to stay consistent? What are the policies on this, if any? (The Pirate Bay Trial) JeremyWJ (talk) 00:27, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * See Manual of Style. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:34, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * To elaborate a bit, Wikpedia guidelines basically say this isn't worth fighting over. Both are valid spellings of the word, and therefore there is no compelling reason to change one to the other.  If an article uses one spelling, continue to use the same spelling already established before you came along.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  13:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Most people look at what the article is talking about. If article relates to Europe, I'd use the British English, and if it relates to the United States, American English, then for Canadian topic I would use the Canadian English. If not constant over the whole Wikipedia, just keep it constant within the same article. -- staka. talk 20:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

creating table
I can't seem to create a table in an article I'm trying to write. When I type in the headings and data using the symbols Wiki automatically produces, the footnote that is supposed to contain the table just shows the same symbols and information (in very non-readable form), not a table. EAFAAT (talk) 01:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Your contributions show only this Help desk edit, so it's not clear where this article is that you are trying to write. It's easier for us to diagnose problems if we can see exactly what you saw when you had the problem. (If you have been experimenting in the sandbox, a better place would be to develop your article in a user subpage such as User:EAFAAT/Sandbox.) However, it sounds as if you are trying to put a table inside a footnote. I can't recall ever having attempted that myself, and neither can I recall seeing such a thing in any article on Wikipedia. Therefore I would guess the MediaWiki software does not allow it. Why you want to put a table into a footnote? There may be another way to reach your goal. Also, what is your article about? Are you aware that Wikipedia has rules for content, and we delete thousands of articles that violate our rules? --Teratornis (talk) 02:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

how do you add citations?
It says citation needed and I found on a official city site where it says it, so yah. I don't get the coding and such. Thank you. :) --207.177.111.99 (talk) 01:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The instructions are in WP:FOOT, WP:CITE, and WP:CITET. If you cannot understand those instructions, tell us the article you have in mind and your source, and someone can tell you how to format the citation. Citing sources on Wikipedia is one of the harder areas for new users to learn, and this leads to an awful lot of articles with "citation needed." --Teratornis (talk) 01:53, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Just make an external link and name it ref 1 or something similar. Someone else will come along to format it. The important thing is that you add it so others don't have to hunt for the source. - Mgm|(talk) 05:42, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

My username
Is it possible that i can have the same username like on the Dutch wikipedia? Do I have to abandon this username or does it needs to be renamed or what? Thanks for the help already :)Meaghann696 (talk) 02:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * See Unified login. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:11, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HBO#History
Hello,

Not sure if I am submitting this to the right place. Sorry if not.

This article has the name of the company wrong.

It was never Time Life but Time Inc (NEVER Time Inc. - Henry Luce banned the period) or, in full, Time Incorporated

Thomas Smith —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.247.37 (talk • contribs) 
 * According to this and this Time Warner pages, the names are “Time Inc.” and “Time Life Inc.” —teb728 t c 05:55, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Moving information from talk to main page?
I received a notice that I had misplaced my information, I was wondering how to move it and where to move it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jesuswithaz (talk • contribs)
 * If you are asking about this edit, it doesn’t belong in the article because it is your personal opinion and speculation. And it doesn’t belong on the talk page because it is not about the content of the article. I am sorry, but I really can think of no place for it on Wikipedia. —teb728 t c 06:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Citations and references not showing at the bottom of the page
Why aren't my ciation showing up at the bottom of the page?

At the bottome of the page it states in red type " tags exist, but no Den dodge  Talk Contribs 18:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Indian Reserves
how can I get a list of indian reserves in ontario specifically Kawartha Lakes area
 * I think that this list is what you need. TN X Man  18:12, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Can I add my self to wikipedia?
I always thought it would be kinda cool to be able to google my name and have a full on wikipedia page come up with history and such with a photo on me. Can I do that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocgraphics (talk • contribs)  TN X Man  18:37, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Generally, no. Wikipedia has a policy on conflict of interest, which basically says that if you have vested interest in the article, it's usually best not to edit it. If you're notable, then someone will create an article about you. You must have received significant coverage in independent, third-party, reliable sources first. TN X Man  18:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict with Tnxman's response) If you are notable then people who don't know you personally will have written about you extensively. Under those conditions, it is likely that other people who do not know you can create a Wikipedia article about you. Unfortunately, if there are not reliable sources outside of Wikipedia that discuss you, then you likely do not merit an article. Additionally, it is pretty much against the rules, known as conflict of interest rules, that you don't create articles about yourself. You can create a userpage (click link for instructions), but this userpage is not in the article space of Wikipedia and will not show up on search engines. --Jayron32. talk . contribs 18:35, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * There are other options such as Wikipopuli and Wikibios. – ukexpat (talk) 19:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

"Fazle Haq"
I have edited this item to indicate that there is no evidence to suggest that Fazle Haq ever profited personally from the heroin traffic. Then (today) I have added a reference which leads to a clarification making the same point which I have posted elsewhere. My reasons for making this clarification are explained in my post -- essentially I have slowly become persuaded by the objections raised to an earlier article of mine by one of Fazle Haq's sons.

I have two questions:

1) I am not sure that I have entered the reference correctly. (I have no experience doing this.) 2) I am not sure that I am within the guidelines by citing a retraction written by myself. But once upon a time this item quoted me to suggest that Fazle Haq deposited his drug profits at BCCI. That is why his son contacted me, and why I have done what I have done.

I am not worried about my security --

Peter Dale Scott
 * 1. You haven't added any reference (see the edit history http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fazle_Haq&diff=271661063&oldid=268983077)
 * You probably shouldn't have removed the reference you did. If you have issues with the reliability of the reference provided you should bring it up on that articles talk page.
 * 2 ? Probably not. see Conflict of interest
 * Bring this issue up on the talk page, citing the source and more info for this retraction you mention. And let others decide.
 * If you do not recieve any replies you could use Third opinion to seek a neutral person to edit the article acccordingly.
 * Comment in the interest of historical perspective it would/might be best to leave the accusations (or whatever they are) in, with any subsequent disprove or clarifactions after the accusations (assuming the accusations were considered notable at the time)
 * It seems clear that part of this persons reason for being in an article relates to this issue. So it is important that the issue is covered. If the person is shown to be innocent later on then let the article say so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FengRail (talk • contribs)

Username Red
My username shows up red, and I have a feeling this is because I didn't confirm the account before the link expired in my email. Is there a way I can ask wikipedia to send another email so I can confirm? I can still sign in, but I don't know how long that will last. I could do it over with another username, I guess, but I'd kind of like to keep this one. Thanks.Manray00 (talk) 19:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No, your username is confirmed. The reason your username shows up in red is because you have never edited your user page. You can check out this page for details. TN X Man  19:14, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * And see WP:RED. --Teratornis (talk) 21:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Page Moved?
I've been editing a new page on the Chuitna Coal Mine Project within my user page as a subpage. I understood, perhaps incorrectly, that the page would not go public until I was ready. I last worked on it Saturday, Feb. 21. This morning the subpage was blank, though I found a copy of the last edited page. However, it appears the page is now public. How did that happen, and are their remedies?

hobig Hobig (talk) 19:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It appears that RHaworth has moved the page from your subpage to the main article space. You may want to inquire on his talk page as to what happened. TN X Man  19:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * (e/c)Actually, it looks like you did create it in the mainspace at HOBIG/Chuitna, if it was userspace, it would be User:Hobig/Chuitna - note that the capitalization is also important. It has now been moved to Chuitna Coal Project so you can work on it there, or you can request that it be deleted by adding db-G7 at the top of the article, then when it has been deleted ask for it to be undeleted to a proper user subpage. – ukexpat (talk) 19:32, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Page moved
Adding Db-g7. Is it enough to add the code to the first line of the article. And can you explain more about ensuring the article is on a proper user page for editing prior to going public?

Hobig (talk) 19:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Make sure you add, that is all that is required. When you created the draft it looks like you did so in articlespace at HOBIG/Chuitna which is why it was moved to a proper articlespace title. When you ask for undeletion, it should be undeleted to User:Hobig/Chuitna - which is userspace, as denoted by the User: prefix. – ukexpat (talk) 20:00, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I've moved the page to User:Hobig/Chuitna. No redirect was left behind. Hermione1980 20:02, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * For the last question, see Help:User page and Help:Subpage. Also read the book at: H:TMM to learn many details of editing on Wikipedia - there is far too much to explain in a short response to a Help desk question, so the answers you get here will necessarily be sketchy. Reading the book will give you the background to know when to start an article as a user subpage, or when you can start it directly in the main article space. --Teratornis (talk) 20:05, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Removing an article to a user subpage
Hi again. Still trying to resolve a small problem. I would like to have an article removed until it is ready. I thought I had set up a user subpage properly, but apparently not. The article was moved to the public domain. This is not critically a problem, but I would have liked another day to add some references. I was told the way to get the article removed was to add Db-g7 to the top of the article. I did, to the first line. Was that the proper place. The article is the Chuitna Coal Project. If not, please let me know the proper format. Than I was told there was a way to have the article undeleted in a properly formatted user subpage, which I have created. Please, a little more information about how to to that.

Thanks, hobigHobig (talk) 20:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Please see my post above in the previous section. Hermione1980 20:05, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Read this chapter:
 * Help:Wikipedia: The Missing Manual/Editing, Creating, and Maintaining Articles/Creating a New Article
 * It gives a detailed tutorial about how to start a new article as a user subpage and then move it to the main article space when you have a first draft ready (to throw to the wolves). As I noted in my reply to the previous section, the answers you get on the Help desk are necessarily brief - often too brief to make sense if you don't know all the background details. Thus a book like H:TMM is necessary. --Teratornis (talk) 20:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * COMMENT as an alternative (and what I sometimes do) Create the article in MS word/ notepad or whatever, whilst you are working on it, and then upload when it is as good as ready. If you have to work on a shared computer why not make use of one of the free file storage faciliies that are offered free with most e-mail accounts - I know hotmail (microsoft) and Google (G-mail) both have them, I imagine Yahoo and others do. I saves you having to be 'on' wikipedia... (Otherwise read the secret manual describe above)FengRail (talk) 20:35, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * At the risk of digressing, I have to ask: when you edit an article offline in a text editor or word processor, at what point do you become frustrated by not having access to wikitext markup? (So you can see your footnotes, infobox(es), navigation box(es), layout, categories, (edit: I can't believe I forgot to mention images) etc. - all the various gizmos that keep the Wikify complaint message away.) --Teratornis (talk) 22:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It doesn't bother me - when working on the text.. I usually find I've missed a } when I add it in though...FengRail (talk) 22:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think OpenOffice has built-in Wiki formatting. – ukexpat (talk) 21:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * That's interesting. ( I haven't looked at OpenOffice for a while. Dare I hope they've improved their DocBook support to the point of usability too? ) If someone really wants to edit Wikipedia articles offline, one can install the Real McCoy: mw:Manual:Wiki on a stick, but that is not the most beginner-friendly option. --Teratornis (talk) 22:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Displaying only a portion of an image in a thumbnail
Is there a way to show only a portion of an image which is stored in the commons as the thumbnail in an article? For example, if an article could use the image [[Media:Beetle_(PSF).png]], but only the rightmost beetle is relevant, is there a way to thumb only the rightmost part (while keeping the link to the image page with the full content and source)? I can download the image, crop, and upload it as a new image, of course, but besides creating a redundant file, in some cases that violates copyright. TarichaRivularis (talk) 20:31, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * No. The MediaWiki software has no provision for that feature. One issue that I can see: what if someone uploaded a new version at a different size? --—— Gadget850 (Ed)  talk  -  21:21, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure that if the image is on Commons, you will not violate copyright by creating a derivative work. Commons accepts only Free content; see commons:Commons:Licensing and commons:Commons:Project scope. Commons requires its users to license their contributions under one of the free licenses (public domain, GFDL, CC-BY, CC-BY-SA) specifically to allow reuse and modification, including commercial use. Wikipedia allows images to have more restrictive licenses, so if an image is on Wikipedia and not on Commons, you would need to check the license before hacking away at a copy of it. --Teratornis (talk) 22:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Both good answers, thanks. The first reply gives a very good reason not to do this, the second a good reason why it shouldn't normally be necessary.  The image I am working with (not my example) is on an older 'no derivative works' license, but it seems clear the right thing to do is look for an image with a fully-free license and then crop it to a new image for the Commons.  Thanks. TarichaRivularis (talk) 19:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Content removal without stated reason
User talk:MZMcBride is deleting others' sub pages if they're titled "secret page" with no reason given or giving the editor a chance to transfer their data from a hidden Secret page to regular userpage. Several of us have lost our information due to this. User adamantly states "discussions have established secret pages are inappropriate". I would understand that but the user is not able to provide where these "discussions" took place. This seems to be a very unbalanced issue. I need my information back. I would have gladly moved these pages to the surface if I was notified and given a chance. And why would someone consider this type of "contributing" a priority?Mjpresson (talk) 20:36, 23 February 2009 (UTC) (undent) Wouldn't it be great if everyone was as reasonable as Jimbo? As the link shows, Jimbo doesn't like userboxes, but he doesn't go around wiping them out, either. Instead, Jimbo tries to reason with people before pulling rank. Participants in this secret user page debate might do well to study the somewhat analogous userbox debate. --Teratornis (talk) 22:31, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * There is currently a discussion about this issue here. You may want to bring it up there. Best, TN X Man  20:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I also tried to generate some interest at the WP:NOT board. May not carry the same short range drama, but maybe it could have some long range policy adjustment effects. — Ched (talk) 21:20, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just a word of advise, MZM is an admin - be very polite, ask very nicely. You'll catch more bees with honey than ya will with vinegar. — Ched (talk) 21:23, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry but this isn't the Bush administration. I don't care if MZM is Jimmy Wales. He's being disruptive and inappropriate. Don't tell me to address admins with deference. They can and have become non admins for disruptive activities. What you just said is the most ridiculous "advise" [sic] I've ever gotten. PS - it's spelled advice, and I don't need yours.Mjpresson (talk) 21:34, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Ched, the admin in question seems to reject your advice. Speaking of bees (while we still can), deleting other people's work without warning them first is a lot like jabbing a stick into a beehive. --Teratornis (talk) 21:54, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * @ Teratornis LOL - yep! Funny part is, I've been one of the ones trying to support the ' yung-uns ' youthful editors' game pages.  I can see I'm gonna have to get a thicker pair of gloves (and maybe some disinfectant).  I guess I'll advise myself not to give anymore advice. ;P — Ched (talk) 22:08, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * And a note to Mjpresson - Ched is not asking you to stand in awe of an administrator, just be aware that you don't have to go in with guns blazing immediately. This is not the Bush Administration indeed - on Wikipedia, we give diplomacy a chance before calling in airstrikes. --Teratornis (talk) 22:15, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You need mine. Don't snap at people who are genuinely trying to help you, and who are only reiterating the principle of Civility.  You're at a help desk manned by unpaid volunteers.  The people who see how you responded to the person offering help this time will remember the next time that you come asking for help.  Uncle G (talk) 02:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * → moving to Tetatornis talk. — Ched (talk) 22:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * One question. What is the problem with fun? What's wrong with the Myspace category things? If there is a reason for them not being here then please state it. The only time thy should ever be deleted by users is when that user cares more for the MySpace other than hey edit more to that than the articles. Chubb  enna  itor  16:20, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

SFRoH Meaning
I am looking for the meaning of SFRoH. It is mentioned in the page for Denis Rake:

Actor at Drury Lane [Source: SFRoH]

It is also listed in the excerpt below:

Adolphe Rabinovitch (section Sources and external links) Sources and external links: 4115 | Adolphe Rabinovitch Michael Richard Daniell Foot, SOE in France. … Notes : The SFRoH site gives 2 or 3 March. 2 KB (306 words) - 16:39, 22 February 2009

Thank you 22:39, 23 February 2009 (UTC)76.91.57.110 (talk) 22:39, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It is likely the Special Forces Roll of Honor, but I cannot find a page on Denis Rake to be sure. -- k a i n a w &trade; 22:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the various conflict, cleanup, etc icons
I'm working on a new page in a subpage of my user page. Atop the article are several panels with icons and descriptions of things that should be done to articles, such as conflict of interest, cleanup, etc. Are these associated with my article as it is now -- I'm judiciously adding references and the like and trying to stay neutral -- or are they their to alert me to the meaning of an icon should it appear within the text? hobig Hobig (talk) 23:39, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I took the liberty of removing them : http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AHobig%2FChuitna&diff=272838229&oldid=272835989
 * Somebody else must have added them when they prematurely published your work - carry on as normal.
 * When you actually put the article out as a page on wikipedia itself other editors might add tags such as these - if they think the article needs improvement
 * The things you saw aren't machine produced - another editor added them.FengRail (talk) 23:46, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * These things are usually called 'tags' - you can read about them here Responsible tagging.


 * I'd suggest adding a lead section though - that's the brief introduction to the topic - this article Chuquicamata has a fairly good example of an introduction.
 * See WP:LEAD and WP:LAYOUT. --Teratornis (talk) 00:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Getting hold of a developer
I need a developer to look at Village_pump_(technical). I have created smaller image files, and I need someone with developer status to update the pictures around Wikipedia.Smallman12q (talk) 23:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know for sure, but if I had to guess, I'd guess that developers are less inclined to look here than on the Village pump (technical). You might find some clues under WP:EIW; that's where I would start looking if felt motivated to try turning this particular battleship. --Teratornis (talk) 00:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * While that link is on logos, it doesn't help me with this. If I can't get a response within a few days, I'll be bold and post a request to jimbo's page.Smallman12q (talk) 01:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * This page lists them. Your best shots for active devs on Wikipedia are probably Brion Vibber, and Tim Starling, both of whom are still fairly active.  --Jayron32. talk . contribs  04:06, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've tried both of them and still no response.Smallman12q (talk) 20:02, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, either wait a day or two, or try WP:VPT or look at the list I linked to above, and find another Dev. --Jayron32. talk . contribs  02:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Well I've already got a thread at WP:VPT and one at User_talk:Jimbo_Wales but have yet to receive a reply. It seems to be a topic no one wants to respond to.Smallman12q (talk) 23:15, 25 February 2009 (UTC)