Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2010 July 8

= July 8 =

deleted
why was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Movies_with_underage_nudity deleted ? the deletion log search dosent bring anything up  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexsmith44 (talk • contribs) 00:39, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * See here.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:04, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

so thers no deletion log? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexsmith44 (talk • contribs) 01:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, the deletion log entry is here but it just says "see WP:AN/I". I thought you had seen that but were wondering why it had been deleted since that log entry is not very informative. So I simply checked who created the category, went to the history of WP:AN/I for the same day as the deletion, and searched for the user's name being mentioned.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:28, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

can someone send me the article text? I'm doing a report on this subject for a college class and i want to cite some of the films  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexsmith44 (talk • contribs) 02:26, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * There was no article and there was no text. This was a category. Categories work by creating a category title and then the category is populated by people placing articles into the category by posting the code into articles that fit within the category. In other words, a category page has no content itself, other than possibly a description of what it's for, instructions, subcategories and the like. To give you an example, take a look (quite at random) at Category:Slide guitarists. It has 114 articles listed. Now see what content (or, actually  lack of content) makes up that category page itself, here. The upshot of this is that if there are no articles that have the category placement code in them at any given time, it's very difficult to later reconstruct what articles were in the category when it existed. Here, the only way I can think of to ferret out any information on what was in the category, prior to deletion, is to look at the edits of the category creator to see what that person placed into it. This has no mileage here, since this category was deleted exactly 1 hour 55 minutes after it was created.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:23, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

so if it was a category wouldn't  it list films just like Category:Slide guitarists. lists guitars? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexsmith44 (talk • contribs) 05:44, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Yes it would list films, but as was sort of described above, the list isn't actually stored anywhere. The software that runs Wikipedia simply displays in the category all of the articles that contain a particular string of characters. Thus, the category has no retrievable history whatsoever. If I went to all of the articles in the Slide guitarists category, and removed the category text from their source code, you would have literally no way of finding out what used to be in the category without knowing who removed the articles from it. Your best bet would be to find another website with the information, or see if there are cached versions of the page on a web archive that predates the deletion. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:59, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

can you look at the edits of the category creator to see what that person placed into it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexsmith44 (talk • contribs) 06:54, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * You can check that out yourself at Special:Contributions/CrashTestSmartie. You'll have to go through the edits (from before the article was deleted) one by one. Only way to do it. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:09, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

what date did he make it ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexsmith44 (talk • contribs) 07:49, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The same day it was deleted, which you see on the current link to the category. Someguy1221 (talk) 08:42, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Userpage problem
Hello, I've recently started editing again, and unfortunately, have forgotten alot of what I learnt! I made a new userpage, but for some reason, the links in my userboxes are not clickable. I'm guessing it's something to do with the image I am using on my userpage. Would anyone be able to help me fix it? Thanks alot if so. -- Jack ?! 01:15, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh and I need to give thanks to Sonia who gave me the inspiration and permission to create such a userpage! Just wish I could fix it now.. -- Jack ?! 01:21, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The userbox links are clickable for me. Have you tried clearing your cache? Deor (talk) 13:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems to be a Firefox problem. When viewing the page in IE, it's fine. Didn't think to try that. Thanks anyway! Not much more I can do. -- Jack ?! 17:38, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I was messing around with it in preview mode, and for some reason the problem is somewhere in the stack of divs between the icon and tag.  My guess is a DIV is overlapping the userbox table.  If I were you I would try tinkering with it or using another method to achieve the effect you want.  AJ  Cham  17:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Reporting a suspected "sockpuppet"
I think I've found a banned user who has been using multiple accounts. The edits from these accounts are nearly identical based on this sockpuppet investigation. I left a message with the editor who originally reported him (User:Snigbrook) and the administrator who closed the case (User:Tim Song). Neither have responded but I notice registered users have asked Tim Song to investigate suspected sockpuppets. Is there somewhere else I can bring this up or can I only report sockpuppets if I am a registered editor? 72.74.206.197 (talk) 04:28, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I help out in that area from time to time. Who is the editor you suspect and can you provide diffs as evidence? TN X Man  11:44, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Here are the three I've come across.


 * User:Boyboygaga
 * User:Loppoptop
 * User:Budvipd

All of these accounts removed cited statements, blanked further reading and reference sections or simply redirected articles like here. If you look through Sockpuppet investigations/Mynameisstanley/Archive these edits seem to follow the same exact pattern right down to the edit summaries and one-word userpage messages. 72.74.199.90 (talk) 13:02, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * This does look suspicious. I have opened Sockpuppet investigations/Mynameisstanley and requested a CU look in to this, as previous checks have revealed a lot of sock accounts. TN X Man  13:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Allowance of an article about a psychological test.
I like to make an article about a psychological test. There are several articles about existing psychological tests, such as for example an article about the Rorschach test (go to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rorschach_test). However, they do not alow me to make the article about this test for commercial reasons, although this test is freely available on Internet. What should I do to get my article accepted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ad van der Ven (talk • contribs)
 * I think someone already gave you the answer on your talk page. Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:00, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

What about the Rorschach test and many other psychological test on Wikipedia? It seems one is judging with different standards. Finally, on what authority are people deleting articles from Wikipedia. Why is it called the FREE encyclopedia? But I know it is all being said for nothing. The question is NOT who is correct, but who is in power! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ad van der Ven (talk • contribs) 14:52, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It is called “free” because you do not have to pay to read it, or reuse it. It is not free in the sense of anything goes. As to who is in power, it is the consensus of users. If you can persuade enough people that advertising type pages are allowed, then it will be allowed, but you will find that many thousands disagree, so you have your work cut out for you.-- SPhilbrick  T

15:01, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Ad van der Ven - you can write an article about the test. You just can't write an advert for it. We have an article on the Rorscharch test - we don't have advertising for it. Have you got that now. Elen of the Roads (talk) 15:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I suggest you read the following pages carefully: WP:COI; WP:NPOV; WP:SPAM; WP:PEACOCK; WP:BUSFAQ; and WP:CORP. Cheers.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:28, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Translations
I'm a professional translator, and would like to help Wikipedia translate some of its articles into Portuguese. Can I do that? And how? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatamiky (talk • contribs) 11:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You certainly can! There is a page here that lists pages that have been copied from a foreign language Wikipedia to this one. There is also this project which works on general translation issues. Finally, you are certainly encouraged to translate articles from the Portuguese Wikipedia to this one. TN X Man  11:49, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * This isn’t exactly what you want Category:Translators pt-en.  However, you might want to chat with some of the members so this category. Presumably, you want the mirror of this page on the Portuguese Wikipedia, which you may be better at finding that I am, now that you know what to look for, or maybe one of the other members can give you some specific advice.--  SPhilbrick  T  14:57, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh... into Portuguese, not from Portuguese. Whoops! TN X Man  15:03, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Be warned! It is very well possible that your translations are not accepted. What is accepted in one Wikipedia, for example, the Dutch, is usually NOT accepted in an other, for example the English (see also the next issue). Do not make the mistake, that Wikipedia is free. It is absolutely not! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ad van der Ven (talk • contribs) 15:54, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Please stop trolling just because you're bitter about not having your article accepted. Wikipedia is a free encyclopaedia in so much as its content is freely available and reusable, not in the sense that anything goes.  AJ  Cham  16:53, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll give it a try.

Different standards for the Dutch en English Wikipedia?
I have submitted an article on Lottocracy on the Dutch Wikipedia (go to: http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lottocratie). No problmes thusfar. I have tried several times to submit a similar article on the English Wikipedia and it is NOT accepted. It is very strange that these Wikipedias use different standards. Can anybody really help me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ad van der Ven (talk • contribs) 15:01, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, they are different projects; each sets its own policies and procedures. Besides, there is in fact already a lottocracy article in the English-language Wikipedia, so I'm not sure what you're complaining about. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your anser. You wrote: "... there is in fact already a lottocracy article in the English-language Wikipedia, so I'm not sure what you're complaining about." No, there is NOT. The article is about Demarchy, which is quite different from Lottocracy. I could explain the difference in an article about what lottocracy really is, but, of course, this is not allowed in the UK and certainly NOT in a so-called FREE encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ad van der Ven (talk • contribs) 15:46, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You are the only one who has made that assertion, to the best of my knowledge. If you believe (as I do not) that the two concepts are in some way different, then make the case for it on the talk page of demarchy. And I don't know what on earth Britain has to do with any of this, unless perhaps you think this is the English rather than the English-language Wikipedia???? (And any anarchist can tell you, living with freedom means setting standards for yourself and those around you.) -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:53, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I should have linked specifically to demarchy up there; please accept my apology. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:15, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I recommend you stop making these ludicrous assertions. The problem is that Wikipedia has rules, and you need to follow them. If you have good sources that demarchy and lottocracy are different, write the article here User:Ad van der Ven/Lottocracy (just click the link and start writing) and when you've finished, ask an admin to delete the redirect so it can be moved into article space.  Same with your article on the psychological test.  Write an article here User:Ad van der Ven/Internet Attention Test using reliable sources to show that the test is notable, remembering that you are writing an article not an advert.  When you have finished, post back here and whoever is on the board will let you know if the article is now OK to post. Elen of the Roads (talk) 15:57, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You will also need to make a successful case that this concept is in some way notable, rather than so obscure that you felt driven to post that the non-notable book by an unknown author in which the term was coined is available in the Library of Congress. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:15, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * As Orangemike says each Wikimedia project runs pretty much autonomously. I can't really comment on nlwiki's policies as they relate to your article, but looking at it it is quite clear that it is not up to standard for enwiki.  It relies on a single source, which doesn't appear to meet reliable sources guidelines.  Given that you are the author of the source, which is clearly POV-pushing, there is also a conflict of interest issue.  I can't comment on the content of the article as I do not read Dutch and am not confident that the Google translation is a fair representation of what you've written. BTW, in your criticism you've chosen to highlight the word free, but I suggest you also take note of the word that follows it.  AJ  Cham  16:05, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * This goes back to an AfD Articles for deletion/Lottocracy. Dougweller (talk) 17:35, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

What the f*#& happened to this article?
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diego%27s_Hair_Salon&action=historysubmit&diff=369133288&oldid=253747104

It is on the main page at DYK (did you know). It was around since 2008 but was it sneaky vandalism where a junk article was sitting there for 2 years before a real article was written? Or was another article renamed, moved, and new text added (for example, is it like the "Finland" article moved to "Lady Gaga" and the text replaced to be about Lady Gaga?

This is weird! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 15:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * This kind of thing can easily happen when a user develops an article in a personal sandbox – all of the junk edits and previous drafts will remain in the edit history. You can see here that the page didn't become live until 30 June.  I'm not sure if there is a process by which the unrelated edits can be deleted from the page history, but IMO there ought to be.  AJ  Cham  15:29, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

{ec}:I know what he did, because I've seen someone else do a similar thing recently. He started out in his sandbox, writing an article about the Artspace project. Then, more recently, he cleared the sandbox, wrote a new article about the barber, and moved it into article space.--Elen of the Roads (talk) 15:34, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Update: it is indeed possible to remove the unrelated edits. User:The Earwig is on the case. <span style="font-family: sansation, sans-serif;"> AJ  Cham  15:46, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Some editors, like User:AgnosticPreachersKid, edit that way in sandboxes, and it's not necessarily a bad thing; but it does create some goofy-looking edit histories. After all, sandboxes are for messing around in. I don't know that there's a way to write software sophisticated enough to handle something like that, so I figure we just need to be aware that this can happen. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:48, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

font
hi there; for the past few weeks, wikipedia comes to me with weird, tiny font, mostly unreadable. nothing has been changed on my computer, and all other sites are fine. any idea what i can do to restore the old, normal font so i can read wikipedia again?

if you can change your font for your answer, it would help; if not, i probably won't be able to read it. thanks, m..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.244.233.94 (talk) 16:03, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * You may have accidentally changed your zoom settings. If you're using Firefox, try pressing   (zero, not O). <span style="font-family: sansation, sans-serif;"> AJ  Cham  16:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * FYI, the same shortcut also works in Internet Explorer. <span style="font-family: sansation, sans-serif;"> AJ Cham  16:18, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes Question asked here for quick response
it says "If the edits under review are appropriate, the reviewer clicks the 'accept' button. If not, he can revert the obvious issues, and their fixed version will be considered checked and accepted instead." do i Use a simple "undo" or Rollback feature or does it matter? Weaponbb7 (talk) 16:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It does not. Reverting vandalism or unconstructive edits can be done as normal. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  16:21, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

audio file
i want to hear a speech given by prof.shivajirao bhosle on ramdas swami —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.195.78.104 (talk) 17:16, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure to what you are referring. Is there an article at which you are looking that has an audio file? TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  17:29, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Moving half an edit history?
Hi, I drafted a new version of Shinan District at User:Noraft/Sandbox/4. I'm about ready to move it to the location of the current article, and it occurred to me (belatedly) that cut-and-paste moves are frowned upon. However, a wholesale move of the page will take with it (in the edit history) what was in the sandbox before (a different article I was working on). There's no way to have an admin move an article and part of its edit history, is there? What should I do? ɳorɑfʈ Talk! 17:46, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * An admin can split the history, as shown above. However, the problem with cut and paste moves is that it makes proper attribution more complicated, as the page history and therefore list of contributors is lost.  If you are the only contributor to this page I don't think a cut and paste move is really a problem, unless you are particularly keen to retain details of each edit you made. <span style="font-family: sansation, sans-serif;"> AJ  Cham  17:55, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm the only contributor to the sandbox article, so shouldn't be a problem, then. Thanks! ɳorɑfʈ  Talk! 18:57, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Filmography
All I want to do is add to the filmography for Thomas Gibson. He was in Eyes Wide Shut, playing Carl (a motion picture which came out in 1999). While I am proud of myself for finding something to contribute to Wikipedia, I can't spend more time trying to figure out how to add this small fact. Can you post it for me, or tell me how to get it in the right place, with the right format? Thanks.Nicholm (talk) 18:35, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If you have a reliable source for the information, you can add it to the article (with its source); or if you're not confident in doing that, put a note in the article's talk page asking somebody to. If you cannot find a reliable source, you may not add the information, and nor may anybody else unless they find such a source. See WP:V. --ColinFine (talk) 18:59, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * One easy way to do it is to click on the "edit" link to the right of the "Filmography" heading, then copy one of the existing entries, paste it in the appropriate chronological position, and replace the title, date, etc., with the information for Eyes Wide Shut. If you want me or someone else to do it for you, just say so. Deor (talk) 19:03, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I just went ahead and added the entry, since the filmography needed some copyediting as well. Deor (talk) 00:45, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

What to do about offensive or soapbox material on a talk page.
What is the appropriate response to offensive material on a BLP talk page, i.e. the bottom of Talk:Cliff_Lee? What about soap box material not useful to the article on a talk page, i.e. everything at Talk:Freedom? What about useless or offensive material on a talk page, a personal attack or a racial slur, tho I have no example of such a page. 018 (talk) 18:51, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * From the BLP guidelines for non-article pages - "Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced and not related to making content choices, should be removed, deleted, or oversighted as appropriate." I have therefore removed the last section from Talk:Cliff Lee.
 * Your other examples are less clear-cut; there are guidelines at No personal attacks. If the text is merely "useless" than I think it should stay; it may eventually be archived. -- John of Reading (talk) 19:33, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

If it has nothing to do with the improvement of the article it can and should be removed as per WP:FORUM. --Saddhiyama (talk) 20:01, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * This is a template you may like to paste on top of the talk page before you remove text:  Lova Falk   talk  20:07, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks all. 018 (talk) 20:59, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Using excerpts and images for third party articles?
I am a freelance writer/editor of online content and at the same time new to this world of writing for a living. I have to do a lot of research for the clients I work for and 90% of the research I do online the other 10% is done with physical media at he library etc... Anyway that is the background of where I am coming from. The actual questions are: 1. Can I use excerpts and/or images from Wikipedia in the articles I write? 2. If so what how do I need to go about using these items so I do not end up doing something which is either an infringement on copyright rules or considered bad form? Please mention all the accepted ways if there are more than one.

I plan to add links and give Wikipedia the credit it rightly deserves with any and all of the excerpts/Images I end up using, unless it would be better for Wikipedia that I not do so as I often do not know where my articles may wind up and therefore cannot guarantee that a plagiarist or spammer may end up taking and using my work and the last thing I want is for Wikipedia to be cast in the dark shadow of unscrupulous Internet "entrepreneurs".

Thank you for your time and have a great day.

P.S., I have searched and read some of the FAQs, but (some researcher I am) have not found anything either definitive and all encompassing regarding this matter and at the same time written in layman's/simple terms. And I am also writing this to have it on record for others to find and make use of honest lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neilmaclennan555 (talk • contribs) 19:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * See Reusing Wikipedia content, which explains the matter more fully than I could here. I wouldn't worry about people making nefarious use of your/our work; as long as you've given credit where it's due, that would be their problem. Deor (talk) 19:31, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for that man much appreciated —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neilmaclennan555 (talk • contribs) 23:45, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

BLP - Nuno Lupi (Reliable sources)
Hi! Do you know that there is an infinite number of good musicians, writers and artists whose names never appeared in the type of "reliable sources" mentioned by Wikipedia as an example? You are killing wikipedia.

Please delete my contribution (Nuno Lupi). Thank you.

Sótão de Madeira —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sotaodemadeira (talk • contribs) 21:00, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi! Why don't you try and find some sources instead? Lova Falk   talk  21:05, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Additional options:
 * Check out the other wikis in Category:Music on WikiIndex. Some of them probably accept a wider range of content in their topic areas than Wikipedia does.
 * Create some reliable sources, by finding journalists in the mainstream media or recognized academics who will write about some of the infinite number of good musicians, writers, and artists about whom not much is available in the mainstream media currently.
 * Note that Wikipedia is not friendly to many different types of niche interests. That's why people have set up thousands of other wikis catering to nearly every niche interest. For many people it is probably a mistake to edit only on Wikipedia while ignoring all the other wikis. There is too much interesting material we cannot get to stick here. Wikipedia is great for what it does, and for everything else you need to look elsewhere. --Teratornis (talk) 22:12, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Changing an article name
I created this page a few weeks ago with little understanding of the naming conventions for biographical articles. I would like the article name changed from [Wilma Oram Young] to Wilma Oram, but I am not sure how to do it. Oram was her name during the war and it is the name she was known by to her fellow veterans. Similarly it is the name of her service record and so it is the more appropriate article title than using Young. Any help in changing the name or instruction on where i should go to do so would be much appreciated. Mellen deadrock (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC).
 * See WP:MOVE for the mechanics of changing an article name. See WP:DISAMBIG, WP:HATNOTE, and WP:REDIRECT for instructions on cleaning up any confusion that may result. See Naming conventions (people) for the relevant guideline. I wouldn't think the article title is as important as making sure the lead section clearly identifies the person and explains the name change. --Teratornis (talk) 22:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Some excellent advice above. For better or worse (since now you won't have the opportunity to learn by doing yourself) I took care of it while that was being written.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:25, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

advertising on wikipedia
Is it appropriate to use wikipedia for free advertising? I noted that a local hospital when googled had a link to wiki. When I looked at the reference I noted that it was essentially and advertisement.

``` —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.47.141 (talk) 22:35, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It is absolutely not appropriate. WP:NOTADVERTISING and WP:SPAM are just a sampling of the many pages which address these matters. If a page is patently advertising, you can mark it for speedy deletion by placing the template db-g11 in the article. Can you tell us the name of the page you are here about? By the way, this site is called Wikipedia, not wiki. A wiki is any website using wiki software; there are thousands of them.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:02, 8 July 2010 (UTC)