Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2014 January 6

= January 6 =

Search terms lead to incorrect entry
When I type in "Church of the Creator," I'm directed to this page: Church of the creator, which is the page for a white supremacist organization, NOT an actual church.

That organization was sued in court and lost and may no longer legally use that name. How do I get the search results changed?

Church of the Creator (talk) 00:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Where should it redirect? GB fan 00:36, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to set up an official Church of the Creator page and that's where queries should direct to. Is there any way to change the current direct in the meantime? Church of the Creator (talk) 01:16, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * See Articles for deletion/Church of the Creator. DES (talk) 01:17, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Nice -- my other account was blocked. Sorry I broke your rules. Now -- how about helping me change the directs so that people who looking for the religious organization CHURCH OF THE CREATOR aren't instead sent to the page for the white supremacist group that was successfully sued in court and is no longer allowed to use or be affiliated with that name. Thanks. Bohemian Gal (talk) 01:35, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * All such pages now recirect to Creativity (religion) or a similarly neutral target, so your request has already been fulfilled. Note thst in creating a new page about a church of this name, please be sure that it is notable. Please also read our conflict of interst policy if you are an employee of or affiliated with the church. If that is the case, you should not directly create or edit such an article, except possibly via articles for creation. DES (talk) 01:45, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

When I type in "Church of the Creator," THIS is where I'm sent:

Church of the creator

It's a page aaaaaaaaaaall about the White Supremacist group.

And, no, I'm not affiliated with COTC (I'm an atheist, in fact) -- just trying to help out a friend who IS. Bohemian Gal (talk) 01:47, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The redirect should definitely be changed if the white supremacists aren't allowed to use the name anymore, since it isn't the name of their church. If there is no article for the Oregon church either, then the redirect really serves no purpose other than to misdirect people and should be deleted altogether.  — Soap — 01:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note my comment below: the white supremacists may not be allowed to use this name, but if they did so and were so referenced in reliable third party sources Wikipedia will so report. Deleting the redirect would be a matter for Redirects for Discussion. I'm not sure what would happen there. If the is another topic to ehich the redir should point, it could be altered. I am going off-line now, but will check back on this later. Or other editors may help sooner. I'm sorry that I haven't been as accurate at first as I should have been, and that the issue is not yet dolved to your satisfaction. DES (talk) 02:09, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Try purging your browser's cache, that page is now merely a redirect to the Creativity (religion) page. See this history and this log page. If after refreshing yoiur browser cachse you still see an article about rhe White Supremacist group, please post here again because in that case there is something odd going on. 01:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * My error Creativity (religion) is the page about the White Supremacist group. The Afd linked to above (Articles for deletion/Church of the Creator) decided that the article should be redirected thee, as that is the notable name of the WS group. We could add a hatnote (a note near the top of the article, indicating the difference. Or possibly content about the court case in this article. Note that if a group is commonly known by a name, Wikipedia will normally say so, even if it does not have the legal right to the name. DES (talk) 02:03, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

correct mark up code for links
Dear friends, I just created a new page to submit, but i seem to have used the incorrect code for linking to other wiki pages, as well as linking to Wiki's ISBN Book Source page. Can you please clarify what mark up code i need to insert? I used the square brackets to surround my linked website pages. But i see this is only to be used for external sources. I can't find the correct directions, though I've searched. Please help? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Julesfaye (talk • contribs) 00:51, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ Use douple brackets for internal links. Inside the double brackets should go just the article's title, not the full URL. For example this:


 * renders as Wikipedia.


 * I fixed two of the links on Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Mirabai Starr so you can see how it is done. See also WP:LINK. DES (talk) 01:12, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * See ISBN to learn how ISBN linking works. You need only place a space after ISBN and have a number follow it, and it will automagically link itself like this (if you check the edit window you will see it's just plainly typed): ISBN 9780000000000 - Purplewowies (talk) 06:07, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Pagename for User:SpaceJace
Today I attempted to create my first article and feel pretty good about it. However, how do I create the "pagename" at the top of the article?

I will be adding some images as well once my account is confirmed.

Thank you.

"SpaceJace"

User:SpaceJace

SpaceJace (talk) 02:09, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * To create the "pagename" at the top of the article, you would move User:SpaceJace to Earth Tribe L.A.. However, since the Earth Tribe L.A. topic does not meet WP:GNG, moving the page would result in a series of disappointing experiences for you with Wikipedia in that the article on Earth Tribe L.A. eventually would be deleted. If you have another topic in mind to write about, I would be happy to help you with it. -- Jreferee (talk) 04:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I have moved the user page to a user sandbox at User:SpaceJace/Sandbox - user pages are not the appropriate place for draft articles.--ukexpat (talk) 20:06, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Who is the editor now watching our page?
I have questions about an edit that someone made with a wrong date on it!

How do I find out who is watching our page now? And how do I contact them? Seems we keep getting new editors, over time, and each has a different opinion. Consistency would be nice! Also, I am not a techie, I am a long-time volunteer. Kindly don't use technical (or legal) terms I won't understand. Thank you. Yvonnefitz (talk) 04:15, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * There is no specific or particular editor "in charge of" or "watching" any particualr article. Any editor may edit any artice he or she chooses at any time. Over time, most articles are edited by a more or less wide variety of editors.
 * I don't know which page you refer to as "our page". The policy WP:OWN prohibits any editor from "owning" or having exclusive control over any article. I see you have edited High School of Art and Design quite a bit, is that the page you refer to?
 * When discussing edits to an article and what would or would not improve the article, it is often better to use the article's talk page rather than a user's talk page. In the case i linked to above that would be Talk:High School of Art and Design. If you want to be sure that a particular editor sees a comment, use U with the editor's user name, like this,, and the user would be notified of the comment when the user next logs in, but other editors interested in the article can also see the comments and have a single place to discuss the article.
 * Some matters are governed by policies or guidelines, but a great many issues are matters of opinion here, and your opinion is just as valuable as that of any other editor. DES (talk) 04:27, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Yvonnefitz - A list of the edits to High School of Art and Design can be found here. A list of the people who contributed to High School of Art and Design can be found here. To contact them, each user has a talk page associate with the user name. For example, User talk:Yvonnefitz is associated with your user name. -- Jreferee (talk) 04:46, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Jreferee, but I was never aware there was a sole "talk" page for the High School of Art and Design. Usually, the subject wound up on the talk page of whichever editor had last been watching it. And I then had to go to that editor's page. The last editor had discussions with me in 2012, I believe. So, at this point, I didn't know where to go. Or whom to seek out. Did I not include the wiki page link in my question? I was sure I did that so whoever read my question would know what page I was referring to. Yvonnefitz (talk) 07:24, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Every article has a talk page. Discussion about an article should go on that talk page.  The talk page is accessible from the article page by clicking on the tab for Talk.  It is preferred for comments about article content to go to the article talk page rather than trying to guess what editor is likely to respond, since no editor is "responsible" for "watching" an article in an encyclopedia anyone can edit.  Robert McClenon (talk) 13:08, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Yvonnefitz - Post at Talk:High School of Art and Design. People may not be monitoring that talk page (given that Wikipedia has millions of talk pages and only thousands of editors), so feel free to make a second post at this Help Desk asking to have someone respond to you at Talk:High School of Art and Design. In the alternative, post at Talk:High School of Art and Design and use Template:Request edit with your post and that will being someone to address your request. I know this is frustrating and confusing, but everyone is has the article's content in their best interest and will be happy to work to bring it into Wikipedia's standards, particularly given the importance of the high school. -- Jreferee (talk) 15:44, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Errors in titles of articles.
The titles of these articles, all of which begin with the word "Immigration [sic]" are incorrect:

Immigration [sic] to [sic] Mexico "                     to [sic] the United States         "                      to [sic] Canada "                     to [sic] Argentina         "                      to [sic] the United Kingdom since Irish independence

In the context of these articles, the proper title should be "Emigration to .... [etc.]" If the authors would substitute "to" with "in", then immigration would be correct. How would I do that? Full Definition of EMIGRATE: to leave one's place of residence or country to live elsewhere  Autodidact1 (talk) 04:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * This probably has come up some place, but I was not able to find it. Some links: List_of_commonly_misused_English_words notes emigration is the process of leaving a country; immigration is the process of arriving in a country—in both cases, indefinitely. Also see, Propose renaming Category:Australian immigration to Category:Immigration to Australia. If you are looking to generate a discussion on this, you can try listing one of the articles at Requested moves or post a request at Reference desk/Language or Village pump (miscellaneous). If you look at All pages with prefix to see what pages are redirected and what pages are article titles, you can get a better idea on how consensus is dealing with this issue. For example, Immigration in France redirects to Immigration to France and Immigration in the United States redirects to Immigration to the United States, so the use of "to" seems to be favored. -- Jreferee (talk) 05:10, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * For what it's worth,, I strongly disagree with you on both counts. I believe that the current titles are exactly right. But if you want to pursue this, follow Jreferee's suggestions for where to propose it. --ColinFine (talk) 18:18, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

ruth madevitt
just saw her on ALFRED HITCHCOCK with RODY MCDOWELL on TV. BUT see no credit given her on that program on your address. JoeP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.163.107.239 (talk) 05:15, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Unlike IMDB, Wikipedia filmographies such as the one at Ruth McDevitt tend to be partial lists giving a selection of the subject's most notable roles. So far, nobody has decided to add that particular appearance to her list.  Rojomoke (talk) 06:02, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * And that nobody is me. Miss Right (and Mrs. Fister) are now listed. Sort of notable, as she was also in The Birds right around then. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:34, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Re-submitting.
I'm trying to resubmit the following, very much edited article.

Chris Inglis
Chris Inglis is a voice actor known primarily for being the voice of Charlie Brown on Peanuts television specials. [1] [2] [3]

See "Play it Again Charlie Brown"', "Charlie Brown" in Wikipedia

References[edit] [1] IMDB, Chris Inglis [http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1316592/ [2] "Play It Again Charlie Brown", Wikipedia [3] "Charlie Brown", Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cwinglis (talk • contribs) 06:52, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * IMDB and Wikipedia's other entries are not enough to prove that a person is notable enough for an article on Wikipedia. The person would need substantial independent coverage in other media.  Please see WP:BIO for our notability requirements.  And due to the fact that your username is similar to the subject you are (presumably) requesting an article for, please see our conflict of interest policy.  Dismas |(talk) 07:17, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

watch list
my watch list is not saving the pages i ask it to not saving any at all (Mr N Ivanov (talk) 07:09, 6 January 2014 (UTC))


 * When you go to your watchlist and then click on the link at the top that says "View and edit watchlist", do you have any articles there? Or is it empty?  And just to make sure you understand what a watchlist is supposed to provide: Your watchlist will only show changes to the articles on it within the last X number of days.  Not every article on your watchlist will show up every time you view it.  Dismas |(talk) 07:21, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Probably easy question about image layout.
Help Desk, the pharoah's in trouble!

How can I make the image of Amenemhat II's sphinx line up neatly into the relevant section? All I know to try is right and left alignment. Left gets it tangled up with the See Also and References, right puts it right at the bottom, under a long-ass infobox. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * You can use

]] 07:24, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * As Hans Moleman once said, "No, that's too big." But thanks for the suggestion. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:38, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Slightly unrelated, can you use the regular format for dates (5 tiles (13:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)) +username, or 4 tiles (-- Mdann 52   talk to me!  13:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)) ) to sign your messages? It messes up the flow of discussion for some, and may not conform with guidelines. At the least, dates shouldn't be linked. -- Mdann  52   talk to me!  13:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't know. Another editor also didn't like this a while back, and I see how it might be slightly confusing. But I really don't like the default date format. I get that it's common in a lot of the world, but as a Canadian, it just seems backwards, and I conscientiously object to propogating its use. I'd be more open to unlinking it, though I don't see how that part is as problematic as the formatting. I try to weigh the "damage" it causes against the "benefit" to me. I'm probably biased there, but the good seems to outweigh the bad. I've tried a few compromises, but they don't really work. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You could use the preference option under "date and time" to have all the dates in any standard signature read in the order you'd like. - Purplewowies (talk) 03:26, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Tried that, as one of the "few compromises". Doesn't work. Don't know why not. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:38, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Could move the Sphinx image to the left of the article though I'm not sure I'd like the way that would look. RJFJR (talk) 16:24, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No, I don't like it, either. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * As to the references; see Template:Reflist. --  Gadget850talk 23:27, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look. Thanks. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Got it. At least it looks good on my monitor. Good work, Gadget. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Wrong Article title
Dear Admin

The wikipedia page for the upcoming film 'Vaayai Moodi pesavum' displays a wrong spelling. Please make the necessary changes.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nayakcinema (talk • contribs) 07:33, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * The link for the article is Vaai Moodi Pesavum. And as far as changing the name of the article, it would have to be moved to the new title.  That said, only two of the several references that are provided in the article ever mention the name of the film.  They don't even match one another.  And they don't match either spelling of the article title here!  Is there anyone who speaks Tamil who might be able to tell us what the title of the film actually is?  Dismas |(talk) 07:42, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Fake profile
hi there somebody has made a fake profile on here using my daughters name and sending rude pictures of themselves actings as my daughter messaging her friends please can u remove it as I've contacted the police, the user name is chloecobane13,plz look into this thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.104.94.162 (talk) 09:52, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I added a heading to separate your request from the one above. Are you sure about the name and that the place it was registered on is Wikipedia? I cant find any user with the name chloecobane13, perhaps there is some letter, space or capital missing? Sjö (talk) 09:58, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * There is no user named Chloecobane13 - or anything similar - on Wikipedia (see this search). I believe you may have us confused with another website. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  10:01, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, you might want to contact some other website instead. We do have articles about many social networking sites and the like, but that doesn't mean that we are a part of their organization. Also, there are very few ways to send messages for a Wikipedia user, basically you can only contact other Wikipedia users. What tells you that the rude pictures were sent by someone from Wikipedia? Sjö (talk) 10:09, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Can't even see that username on Google search. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia Language
I would like to point out the the so-called "English" Wikipedia is in fact American English, and not true British English. It makes it difficult when I am forced to constantly spell-check articles for use in projects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.68.225.90 (talk) 12:47, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, it's both. There's no preference here for one version of English over another. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  12:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * See regional varieties of English. Also, please don't insult speakers of American English by distinguishing it from "true British English".  (That is just as annoying as the disparagement of British English by Americans.)  Those and multiple other varieties of English are considered by Wikipedia and by scholars to be regional varieties of English. Robert McClenon (talk) 13:13, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Some articles are even in Australian English, which may suit you better. Of course, you shouldn't be copy-pasting articles into your projects in any case; Wikipedia is not a reliable source, and the software to detect plagiarism is getting cheaper and more reliable. Arjayay (talk) 13:28, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, copy-pasting Wikipedia's text is entirely permissible, as long as it's attributed back to Wikipedia. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  13:30, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * You miss my point, copy pasting is certainly allowed by Wikipedia, however, no (reputable) educational institute wants projects to comprise of copy pasted extracts, from a potentially unreliable source, even if the student has to go through the "hardship" of using a spell-checker. Arjayay (talk) 13:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, see your point now. I hadn't assumed that the OP was a student. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  13:46, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

DrVita
Not sure where to go next with my DrVita page to get it accepted -- new to all of this. Any help would be so appreciated.Halescape (talk) 13:58, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi Halescape. As several reviewers have pointed out, you need to provide suitable references for your article. First, read this succinct explanation of the sort of sources you need. Next, read this short essay on how to incorporate them into your draft. Once you've done that, add  to the top of the draft to resubmit it. Yunshui  雲 &zwj; 水  14:10, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Login problem
I know some at the help desk are on top of login issues. OTRS received a request Is there someone comfortable with login problems who could help?-- S Philbrick  (Talk)  16:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Those questions are beyond me, so I was unable to help I am afraid.--ukexpat (talk) 21:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Staysure - blacklisted?
"\bstay[\w-]*\.co\.uk\b" false positive

The entry for "\bstay[\w-]*\.co\.uk\b" was added on 12 April 2011 in response to this request. However, this rule is overly broad (it seems to catch any domain starting "stay" and ending ".co.uk"). This is causing problems with the link to www.staysure.co.uk on Sunday Times Fast Track 100. Could this rule be removed or rewritten to be more specific to the domains mentioned in the original request? Thank you. – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 17:16, 28 September 2013 (UTC) @Amatulic: @Hu12: ping. Jackmcbarn (talk) 17:54, 28 September 2013 (UTC) Looking at that site, it doesn't look like something Wikipedia should link to, because the site's only purpose appears to be promotional. I'd say Defer to Whitelist to request white-listing of any specific page, although in browsing the site, I can't see any that could legitimately be used as a reference or even an external link. The tables shown in Sunday Times Fast Track 100 are linkfarms violating WP:NOTDIR, the external link columns really need to go. ~Amatulić (talk) 03:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC) Fair point. I've removed the external links. – PartTimeGnome (talk | contribs) 22:12, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

We came across this, we just wondered if Staysure will remain black listed?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.244.219.175 (talk) 16:23, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * You quote an archived discussion at MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/November 2013. If you want to make a new request then the place is MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist or MediaWiki talk:Spam-whitelist. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:37, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

File: Sarah Moore Grimke.jpg
There is only one image of Sarah Moore Grimke, used in various places in Wikipedia, as listed. This image is a piece of art (an engraving) that is not very high quality. Wikipedia should also provide a photograph, which is available online. And the photograph should be the main image of Sarah Moore Grimke that is used. How do I do this? 16:47, 6 January 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lwk998 (talk • contribs)
 * If you can find a photograph it should be in the public domain. Uploading is easy, although some find it tricky the first time. It is easier and better to upload to Commons, at the Upload Wizard. If you find a photo, and have trouble uploading, let us know and we can help.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  17:24, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

EPHEMERAL shortcut
Hi friends, need a little help figuring out this semi-technical edit. WP:Ephemeral (mixed-case) redirects to Manual_of_Style/Dates_and_numbers. No problem there. But I'd like to be able to use WP:EPHEMERAL (all caps) as a shortcut to the same place. Do I need to: 1) move the redirect from WP:Ephemeral --> WP:EPHEMERAL? 2) Create a new article EPHEMERAL redirected to the same place? Or 3) is there a better way to go about this? Currently the all-caps version WP:EPHEMERAL is redlinking.  Thanks, y'all. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:18, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I think the best way here is to create a new redir that points to the same target. Then either will work. DES (talk) 18:25, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Okeedokes, done! Thanks for the assist. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:49, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Overlink bot?
Is there a bot or something which helps deal with wp:overlink? There is a set of tables with (presumably) 1500+ entries, and some editors have linked every instance of towns, etc. ~E:71.20.250.51 (talk) 18:20, 6 January 2014 (UTC) I've had arguments/discussions before about what "repeated" means - does it mean repeated only once? or repeated whenever it occurs in a table? One opinion was the link should only be used the first time it occurs in a table, but with a sortable table, which is the first time? Arjayay (talk) 18:36, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The problem may be that WP:Overlink is extremely unclear: "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but if helpful for readers, links may be repeated in infoboxes, tables ..."
 * The tables start off okay, presumably done by the original creator(s); but further down [mostly in the 3rd-class section] you see the same town, or whatever, with *many*, often consecutive entries linked. (see my set of tables link, above) — My take on the quote from WP:overlink is that its okay for (one link in lead) + (one link in infobox) + (one link in table) + (one link per heading), etc. Anyway... no bot? ~E:71.20.250.51 (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2014 (UTC) :modified:20:00, 6 January 2014 (UTC) 
 * Arjayay hits the nail on the head: with a sortable table, we can't say what the first time will be. This is the kind of situation in which WP:OVERLINK isn't very relevant, and it definitely needs some sort of human decision-making; a bot would not be at all helpful here, since it would either produce tons of false positives or miss tons of things that it should have caught.  Nyttend (talk) 20:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree. And someone consulting that table is anyway more likely to be looking for an ancestor or other person of interest rather than reading it from start to finish. So it is helpful to have all the town names wikilinked. Maproom (talk) 23:04, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Merge talk page of reverted move without discussion
The talk page of Oral gospel tradition (now a redirect) needs to be merged back to the original talk page at Oral gospel traditions. This will probably require some admin help. Thanks. Ignocrates (talk) 18:24, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Please disregard this request. It looks like Talk:Oral gospel tradition was deleted rather than merged. Unfortunately, that caused a loss of some talk page content. Ignocrates (talk) 18:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Ignocrates, no page has ever existed at Talk:Oral gospel tradition (unless developers or oversighters are playing tricks on us), since there are no deleted edits or log entries for that title. Nyttend (talk) 20:47, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I made a spelling mistake. The talk page is at Talk:Oral Gospel tradition. The page has been changed to a redirect, but there is talk page history which should be merged. Ignocrates (talk) 23:51, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The talk history is mostly mine and since the mess is my fault, I am prepared to cooperate in any way! - Ret.Prof (talk) 04:59, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Did I resubmit my article incorrectly?
I made the requested changes to my entry for "Active Pen," but I have no idea whether I actually 'resubmitted' it or not. Could somebody please let me know?

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Active Pen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prusionf (talk • contribs) 18:48, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * hey I am Nechlison, do work on it and put more reliable sources to your article and then submit it for review. if you have any further question, leave me your message on my talk page. thanks Nechlison (talk) 19:15, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Hi, I don't see your article in the pending submissions. I believe an IP editor blanked the section and may not have clicked resubmit. Whatevs. I've restored the AfC decline header on the article in case you'd like to resubmit. I've made some changes to the article a la adding proper sub-sections, cleaning up your references, etc. If you can find any other reliable sources to bolster the article, I'd highly encourage that. I'm not sure if a dissertation and a blog are going to be the strongest examples of reliable sources. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:39, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Prusion, based on your request, I resubmitted it. You're welcome to un-submit it if you want (go to this link and click the "save page" button), or you can leave it as is.  Please note that a masters' thesis from a major university (and Caltech is major), like a doctoral dissertation from a major university, can be presumed to be reliable if it's approved by the student's committee — it's been peer-reviewed and sustained by experts in the field.  Nyttend (talk) 23:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Semiprotection question
So I just semiprotected 2013 after seeing a request at RFPP — vandalism led me to add two weeks of semiprotection to this page, which previously had no edit protection but was fully move-protected. I can't remember: when the two weeks expire, will the move protection be affected? Nyttend (talk) 20:44, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Nope. As you can see in the log, there's separate end times for edit protection and move protection: . The semiprotection should expire without affecting the move protection. Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 20:47, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't know if my proposed page has been submitted.
Hi, I've created a page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Toward a Science of Consciousness using the wizard. At the top of the page is a large box saying that it has not been submitted. At the bottom of the page is a large box saying the opposite! I'm confused - has it been submitted or not? If not, could you submit it for me? Thanks (Peter Ells (talk) 21:28, 6 January 2014 (UTC))
 * I just clicked the buttons to submit it, and a new bottom box (just like yours) appeared without the top box changing. I've undone my edit, since having two boxes won't help: it's clear to me that you successfully submitted it.  Looks to me as if the big box at the top always says what it does; it doesn't change depending on whether the page has been submitted or not.  Nyttend (talk) 21:33, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Many thanks - it's highly confusing though!! (Peter Ells (talk) 21:37, 6 January 2014 (UTC))
 * Although it's in the queue, it is likely to be rejected without more references from reliable sources to demonstrate the subject's notability. Wikipedia search hits are of no use in that regard.--ukexpat (talk) 22:04, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The two boxes are an ongoing issue due to a hack we use over at AFC(it makes a new section). Hopefully, if we can get extentions etc. approved, we can sort this out eventually. A bot goes through and sorts them all out eventually anyway. -- Mdann 52   talk to me!  11:06, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

editing page monkey bar
Hi I am the artist that painted the monkeys in 1985 and 1995, and the information on the site was wrong. I have corrected some of it. You can go to Murals of New York City by Glenn Palmer-smith…..and also dianevoyentziemonkeys.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dianevoy (talk • contribs) 22:34, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Is this question about a Wikipedia article? and if so, which one? It seems not to be about monkey bar, which is a redirect to jungle gym. Maproom (talk) 22:56, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * We have millions of articles including more than a hundred containing the string "monkey bar". You made it challenging but I have figured out it must be about the article Hotel Elysee. It was edited today by an unregistered user. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:24, 6 January 2014 (UTC)