Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2013 March 8

= March 8 =

Slanderous article
We have an article on Wikipedia that used to accurately describe our Soccer league in our town. Recently I checked the article to find that the rival league in town had posted slanderous and negative statements about our league on our Page as well as there page. I know this because the same user CityScape4 had edited both pages in the history. I also know this person is on the board of the rival league. Our page is Quesnel Mixed Soccer Association

I have already re-edited this page as it was slandering my name and the associations. In saying that I haven't edited their page which is Quesnel Fun Soccer League

I understand that anyone can edit on here but I would not like my name to be associated with such negativity and blatant lies in which makes me look bad as well as our association. The article was edited out of bitterness and anger. What I am wondering is if it is possible to remove user CityScape4 from being able to edit our information on our wikipage?

Thankyou for your time 70.77.121.246 (talk) 00:09, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I have tagged both articles for speedy deletion pursuant to WP:CSD.--ukexpat (talk) 02:18, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Should Hypothetical types of stars be a list?
Dear editors: Sorry to keep pestering you; I really am reviewing some pages without asking for advice! I found this page Hypothetical types of stars in the New pages feed. It isn't just a plain list, but all of the information is taken from the articles that it links to. The articles all have references, although a couple need the references turned into citations. Does this article qualify as a list in Wikipedia, and if so should it be called "List of Hypothetical types of stars" ? Also, should I tag it for lack of references if the references are all on the individual pages in the list? &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 00:15, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Looks like a WP:LIST to me, but the folks at WP:ASTRONOMY may have a view too.--ukexpat (talk) 02:37, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Someone please revert this vandalism on Germaine Greer
Randomly browsing, then came across this vandalism on Germaine Greer's article. It inserts lore from the Elder Scrolls game series into her biography. I wanted to revert it myself, since it only takes a few clicks, but the new Automated filter annoyingly won't let me edit it for some reason. Someone logged in, please correct it ASAP. --203.84.180.42 (talk) 01:34, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh and check the contributions of the IPs involved. Seems to be a bunch of Australian antifeminist trolls, and this isn't the first time they did this. Blocking may be in order.--203.84.180.42 (talk) 01:37, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * ✅. I don't have time to look at the filter in depth, but I imagine some of the legit text you were restoring is similar to text commonly used by vandals, and the filter simply isn't smart enough to know. It sucks being a false positive, I know.  Thanks for letting us know. I'll check their contribs now. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:40, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There are quotes from the subject in the restored text which trip the vulgarity vandalism filter. Rmhermen (talk) 02:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * That's what I thought too. Anyway, thanks for the help. Cheers.--203.84.180.42 (talk) 02:51, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

vandalizing
Stop the Vandalizing OK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.92.53.102 (talk) 02:37, 8 March 2013 (UTC) wh ever you are out stop it
 * What is your question, this just appears to be random? TBrandley (what's up) 02:39, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * For more information about self-reference, see strange loop.  ~:74.60.29.141 (talk) 05:39, 8 March 2013 (UTC):~

History of Russia: Lenin Stalin Picture has inaccurate caption/description
History of Russia

If you look closely at the picture of Lenin & Stalin described as "Lenin and Stalin at Gorki (1922", you will find a small discontonuity that indicates that this picture was fabricated or edited. Take a look at Lenin's legs. Now look at Stalin's. See it?

It is commonly believed that this picture was produced by the Stalin regime in order to legitimate and make sense of Stalin's accension to power. Stalin here is seen as the natural succesor to Lenin, through their illustrated "intimate relationship".

Stalin and Lenin may well have never been in Gorki together. But if anything, I don't believe this picture should be used in the context it is in, unless of course that context was "Stalin's rise to power through media manipulation". — Preceding unsigned comment added by GWizz23 (talk • contribs) 09:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Can't say as I can see anything there, myself. However, what you and I can see in the picture is pretty much irrelevent - if you can provide reliable sources proving that it's a fake, then we can do something about it, but no-one's going to make such changes based purely on your say-so. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  09:51, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't see any flaws in that picture. Maybe if you do provide a reliable source just like Yunshui said we could change the picture. -- Ushau97 talk  contribs 10:01, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Heres a reliable source:

Review Tamara Machmut-Jhashi (Oakland University)of David King. The Commissar Vanishes: The Falsification of Photographs and Art in Stalin's Russia. http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=2514

"Another famous photograph, of Lenin and Stalin seated together outdoors in Gorki during Lenin's illness, is unquestionably a fake. Taken from different sources, the two images are crudely joined in an effort to bolster Stalin's position in the critical period during Lenin's illness in 1922. King includes the subsequent works that exploited the image of the two in the photograph. In an aptly titled section, "The Stalin School of Petrification," King reproduces two large scale sculptures based on the falsified photo. One, completed in 1938, depicts the two men seated on a bench engaged in conversation. Lenin seems to offer wise counsel to the future leader, who sits in rapt attention. The other piece, displayed in 1949 at a large exhibition entitled "Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin in the Visual Arts," now depicts Stalin standing, towering over the seated Lenin, clearly in a commanding position. No subtlety in the message here, neither is there evidence of the pockmarked skin, shriveled arm, or Stalin's actual five-foot, four-inch frame." --GWizz23 (talk) 12:23, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=542790583"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by GWizz23 (talk • contribs) 12:17, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

do you sell ipads 4 if so how much is it in the duty free airport in the uk
how much are the ipad 1 2 3 and 4 duty free in the airport — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.5.221.49 (talk) 11:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 4 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. Roger (talk) 11:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Try the Wikipedia Reference Desk where they can probably answer your question. Thanks ツ Je no va  20  (email) 11:11, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I made a mess at AfD, please help me fix it
Please take a look at my most recent contributions. I used twinkle to nominate an article for deletion but I was actually on the article's talk page when I did it so Twinkle placed templates and posted various stuff all over the place incorrectly. I'm afraid when I tried to fix it I ended up compounding the mess. Help! Roger (talk) 13:15, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You fixed the article and its talk page, I've fixed User talk:Dinomite and Articles for deletion/Log/2013 March 8, and the unwanted AfD page has been deleted. So I think all done here. -- John of Reading (talk) 13:38, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * User:Ultraexactzz also helped to mop up some of the fallout. Thanks! Roger (talk) 13:47, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Another reason why Twinkle is so invaluable.--ukexpat (talk) 13:51, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Edits / email
I have received a number of emails commenting on edits I have made to articles on Wikipedia. The trouble is, I have never made any edits or contributed to Wikipedia. I have only ever visited this site for reference. What gives? It seems to me that these emails should be directed to whomever actually did write on or contribute to these pages... none of which I have ever visited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.190.230.62 (talk) 13:21, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Someone using the same IP address as you has made several edits to Wikipedia, most recently to the Dean Sullivan article. I expect that the emails relate to those edits. Maproom (talk) 13:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Emails? Are you saying you recieved actual email from someone @ Wikipedia sent to your own email address (which is not known to anyone here at Wikipedia)? This doesn't make any sense because as an unregistered user your identity and/or addresses are unknown to Wikipedia. Roger (talk) 13:55, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I expect the IP user just meant talk page messages, and didn't know what to call them. Lady  of  Shalott  14:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Who are these emails coming from? The only way I can see that Wikipedia can have an email address for you unless you've registered as a Wikipedia editor and given an address is if somebody else has registered and accidentally (or maliciously) given your email address as their own. If that is the case, you ought to be able to find out which editor the mails are intended for: I don't recall whether the username is in the email, but if it isn't you can look at the history of the articles edited and find out who it was. Then you could put a message on their UserTalk page (don't try to send them an email: it will go to you!) --ColinFine (talk) 14:42, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Russian stress marks
Please, PLEASE indicate, esp. in RUSSIAN NAMES, where the stress lies. It is such a help! For instance LAVROV: is it LA-vrov or la-VROV? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.88.239 (talk) 13:37, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree it would be helpful, but the person inserting the name may not even know the pronunciation, and Wikipedia has no mechanism for forcing people to do say anyway. The only relevant policy I can find is MOS:FOREIGN: "The use of diacritics (such as accent marks) for foreign words is neither encouraged nor discouraged; their usage depends on whether they appear in verifiable reliable sources in English and on the constraints imposed by specialized Wikipedia guidelines", but that really refers to when names are used as article titles. Perhaps you could post your suggestion at Wikipedia Talk:Manual of Style and see if you can gain a consensus as to what should be done]]. --ColinFine (talk) 14:51, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I think, in this case, they're talking about a WP:Pronunciation respelling key, not diacritics. These are used when editors care to do so, as at Isaac Asimov: "Isaac Asimov (... ...)" —&#91;   Alan M 1  (talk) &#93;— 21:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

HELP NEEDED TO PRESENT A CONTRIBUTION IN WIIKIPEDIA TO BE SEEN ON GOOGLE
I need help with the contribution entitled "The Born-Oppenheimer Equation for Time-Dependent Molecular Systems."

We submitted a contribution under the title: "The Born-Oppenheimer Equation for Time-Dependent Molecular Systems" to be published in the Wikipedia as an article. As far as we can see it cannot be exposed through Google.

We would like to emphasize that there is an article by the name "Born-Oppenheimer Approximation" in Wikipedia which has nothing to do with what we write in the above item. Our treatment is not an APPROXIMATION, and has nothing to do with approximations. Moreover our treatment is TIME-DEPENDENT whereas all other articles related to the Born-Oppenheimer Approximation are TIME-INDEPENDENT. While saying that, I would like to clarify that this treatment allows considering the interaction of external electromagnetic fields such as lasers with molecular systems.

To summarize our plea, please install our article in the Wikipedia so that it can be shown on Google.

Baemic (talk) 13:44, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia does not publish original research. When your model has been published in a scholarly journal and written about or commentated on by multiple scholarly sources, then it will merit an article in Wikipedia. Until then, the article will not be permitted to remain. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  13:53, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * First of all, we do not have articles on Wikipedia "to be seen on Google". This is an encyclopedia, not a Google page-ranking or popularity contest. Second, who are the "we" to whom you refer? Third, why the urgency? There is no deadline. Fourth, your draft is in the review queue like 1941 other drafts so you will have to be patient.--ukexpat (talk) 13:56, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Unpublished research papers usually belongs in arxiv.org. --Enric Naval (talk) 13:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * We have an article - Born-Oppenheimer equation - and and AFC - Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The Born-Oppenheimer Equation for Time-Dependent Molecular Systems - that appear to be identical (I haven't trawled through the math(s)). Appears to be OR as m'learned friend Yunshui has pointed out.--ukexpat (talk) 14:00, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * And the article is now at AFD.--ukexpat (talk) 14:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Thin Yellow Line
The Thin Yellow Line is a copyright trademark and belongs to www.thinyellowline.com this is the universal symbol for Victims Assistance not security officers or tow trucks they do not have the legal right to use this trademark. Please correct your listing on this symbol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.137.156.40 (talk) 15:07, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There is no article on The Thin Yellow Line. Livewireo (talk) 15:15, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * See The Thin Blue Line (emblem). -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  15:29, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Though the section in question is completely unreferenced. --ColinFine (talk) 01:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Although a blog, the best source i could find is clearly about security officers sporting that symbol. Thinyellowline.com seems too promotional for me to take seriously since Cleaner911 (whatever that is) is promoted everywhere . Thanks ツ Je no va  20  (email) 16:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Nikki Giovanni
Vulgar comments on her Wiki page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.83.140 (talk) 15:26, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It looks like cluebot reverted vandalism. RJFJR (talk) 15:31, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Strange edits
Special:Contributions/187.12.26.206 has been doing some rather strange edits. I haven't reverted any yet. I hope there aren't too many bad ones and some are out of my fields to examine.--Canoe1967 (talk) 15:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Today's edits are all nonsensical so I reverted them, earlier edits seem to be valid. Roger (talk) 16:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, resolved.--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:18, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Link
Hello,

I was thinking adding my link to the subject of CFS. But then read a notice following; "BEFORE inserting new links here you should first post it to the talk page, otherwise your edit is likely to be reverted"

This is a link to a personal blog about the disease CFS. My opinion is beside, doctors and medical articles it's important than we can support each other in order to receive proper diagnose as son as possible. i.e. my experience with medical health system hopefully can be to others in the same situation.

But now I'm very confused how to do.

Kind regards, Leif Karlsson

Blog URL http://www.edsten.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Desnobo (talk • contribs) 16:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Giving medical advice is specifically forbidden here on Wikipedia. Links to personal blogs are also not normally permitted, except in some circumstances, blogs belonging to the subjects of biographical articles. Roger (talk) 16:18, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, Leif, but we never permit that kind of external link. Wikipedia gathers and collates published information from impartial, vetted third-party sources. Your personal experiences and observations, however profound they might be, do not meet the standards we set for our content. Mutual support, vital as it is, is simply not the role of an encyclopedia: which is what we are. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  16:20, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Number of accounts?
Does anyone know the number of accounts that have been created? I don't need an exact count, approximate, to the nearest million, will do. Either en Wiki or all projects, whichever is easier to find.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  17:47, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * = on this wiki. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:49, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's exactly what I need.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  19:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Special:Statistics has more numbers. meta:List of Wikipedias has counts for all languages. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I needed special stats, for other stats.-- SPhilbrick (Talk)  00:59, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

removing a wrong birth date, as well as libelous citation?
On this person's biography, the only citation to this person's birthdate, which is shown as verifiable, apparently, because it cannot be edited, refers to the article " Mr. Skin (2004). Mr. Skin's Skincyclopedia. St. Martin's Griffin. p. 168. ISBN 0-312-33144-4."

Secondly, the citation of birth date is from a source who has already been warned of violation of privacy, and is libelous. Why is this citation allowed? Especially when there are other, verifiable sources that exist which at the very least, dignify its subject? 17:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)17:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)17:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)17:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)17:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)Petangel88 (talk)
 * What article are you talking about? how can a birth date be libel? -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  18:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Krista Errickson we think at BLPN. Sources are rare and flakey. Remove it for now?--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:23, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Why is Mr. Skin considered a problematic or libelous source?&mdash;Kww(talk) 18:35, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't know about libelous, but the quality of writing is pure tabloid. There's no reason to take it seriously as a reliable source. As stated at the BLP noticeboard, the article has bigger issues re: unsourced content than the date of birth. 99.149.87.54 (talk) 18:40, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

NLP article
This article seems to be poorly edited with a POV in the last year or so.

Neuro-linguistic programming

It seems the new editors are well intentioned, that they would like to inform people of the pseudoscientific aspects of this or other things in the world. I applaud that effort. However, the article no longer seems to be encyclopedic or well structured. It's is very generalized from a premise that: it has not been double-blind verified (very expensive) to work in changing a psychological diagnosis therefore the entire concept is invalid. This has lead to editorialized phrases like "largely discredited" or subtler imp;ications all throughout the article, rather than in a criticism section or more specifically in a criticism of an application, like psychological DSM V diagnoses. It would be like generalizing that Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs has never been double-bind proven to reduce depression or anxiety there for the entire theory, and all of Maslow's work, is pseudoscience. Testing one idea or technique in one DSM diagnosis then generalizing to all possible domains (like sports, business, coaching, communication, etc.) is an editorial leap most readers will not catch.

What can be done to make a fair place for debate to improve the standards of this article? Can it be reviewed by a higher third party just on the basis of format, logic, editorialization... good encyclopedia standards? What would it take to put a fair dispute at the top of the page so reader know the status? Is there a general format that can be encouraged? My concern is, without unbiased editorial mediation, the article will stay a "king of the hill" challenge rather than a place to discuss and execute good editorial judgement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eturk001 (talk • contribs)

This would be better placed at the talk page of the article concerned. Britmax (talk) 19:11, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Note however that the talk page with archives already has 7.2 MB of discussions according to Database reports/Talk pages by size where it's number 26. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:59, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Limoges figurine
Hi there i am trying to some source information about a figurean made by limoges france?

thats the story i need a emial add to send some photoes to can you help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.111.127 (talk) 18:16, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 4 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck.--ukexpat (talk) 19:05, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * http://www.picatom.com/ May work if you want to upload the image for others to view.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:10, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

page was deleted
my page was deleted, why? im doing and i wrote the history in our website, www.pamcsk.com, and i just put the same on here in wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michjan28 (talk • contribs) 19:23, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * It was deleted as a copyright infringement. If you want to make the text available for use on Wikipedia, please follow the process set out at WP:IOWN, but be aware that even if an acceptable copyright release is sent, the tone of the text may, indeed probably will, be too promotional in tone to use on Wikipedia. After all, the website's purpose is to promote the organisation.--ukexpat (talk) 19:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * And Wikipedia's purposes explicitly exclude promoting anything whatever. --ColinFine (talk) 01:26, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Questionable content on "Plymouth Plantation" article
Hello,

I was looking up information on the 17th century Plymouth Plantation. The article that comes up under that heading, however, is a three-sentence description of a sex house with underage prostitution. There are no citations and it seems that this is a spurious article with inappropriate content. I'm requesting that it be deleted and that a search for "Plymouth Plantation" be redirected to the Wikipedia article titled "Plimoth Plantation."

Thank you, 75.161.170.103 (talk) 19:26, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It was petty and childish vandalism, already reverted. -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  19:30, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello
I have just finished my first CD. It has already been played ont ehe radio. I am looking for a Promoter of CDs to get my song introduced to other radio stations§ש  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.175.231.9 (talk) 21:11, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 4 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck. RJFJR (talk) 21:56, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Merging two pages
Dear editors: I have been taking part in a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy about two pages that are similar and should really be merged. One user suggests that info from the newly created article be moved to the older article. Another user suggests the opposite happen. The discussion probably should have been on the new article's talk page, but I didn't know about the other article when I asked an innocent question.... I don't know what the usual procedure is for merging pages, and I am wondering if a more experienced editor could weigh in on this discussion. Thanks. &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 22:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep the one with the better/more accurate/compliant with guidelines/correct name. Roger (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I've just looked at WT:WikiProject Astronomy - my answer above is obviously useless. I'd agree with the poster there who suggested that the article with the better structure is the one to keep. The name of the merged article is a separate issue. Roger (talk) 22:27, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Free School
Hi,

The following page - Free School - was originally 'Free School, an electronic music duo, based in Birmingham, UK', someone has now moved the Jean Baptiste page to this URL and overwritten the existing page. There are other Free School pages on Wikipedia so why would this one be chosen to be overwritten rather than a new page or URL created?

Thanks Urbanfly (talk) 22:42, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

http://wearefreeschool.com https://www.facebook.com/FreeSchoolMusic/info


 * Are you sure? I don't see any history of the "electronic music duo" being described on the page Free School, either in the history of Free School, Jean-Baptiste (songwriter), Jean Baptiste (songwriter), or Jean Baptiste (record producer) (lots of page moves).  I see that at Free school, a line about this duo was added back in March 2011, and again last week, but since they don't have an article, that line was removed.  Is that what you're talking about?  Because as far as I can see, the article Free School has always been about Jean Baptiste Kouame, either as an article or a redirect. In any case, you'd want to make sure that the electronic music duo meets the requirements in WP:NMUSIC before trying to write an article about them. If they do meet that guideline, then a discussion could be had on what page should be named what. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:49, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Virus threat in a reference?
When I just clicked on an external link that was given as a reference at Sardar Bahadur Khan ( http://www.delhilive.com/page/who-built-new-delhi-200802132209 ), I received a message from my virus checker, saying "threat blocked ...". The URL in that message was different, having ".fi" as TLD. What does this mean for the article? Should we do something about that reference? Editor030813 (talk) 23:00, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't see any external links or bare urls on that page. --Floquenbeam (talk) 23:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I guess you mean the currently 6th reference in Sobha Singh (builder). PrimeHunter (talk) 00:24, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's what I meant. Sorry about the confusion. Editor030813 (talk) 02:03, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Why is there a Sardar Bahadur redlink at the beginning of Sobha Singh (builder). -- Ushau97 talk  contribs 07:58, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * 'Sardar Bahadur' link removed. --CiaPan (talk) 16:51, 11 March 2013 (UTC)