Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2016 April 24

= April 24 =

A draft left in limbo...
Dear editors: This draft has been around for several years now. It has a lot of references but a lot of them are on sports organization websites. I guess it should be either put into mainspace or redirected to The International Centre for Sport Security. I know nothing about sports, and I have no idea which of these websites are appropriate for referencing, Itried asking at WT:WikiProject Sports but there was no reply. Can someone suggest another place I can ask? (Or maybe take a look?) &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 00:45, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * User:Anne Delong - You didn't mention what draft it is that is in limbo, and I don't see any recent posts by you at WP:Wikiproject Sports. What draft are you asking about?  (You're an experienced editor.  You know that the usual response here to a question like yours is to ask to please identify the article.  Robert McClenon (talk) 00:57, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The only thing I could find was Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Nenad Perunicic which has been deleted for over a month. -- The Voidwalker  Discuss 01:04, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, that was silly of me...Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/The International Sport Security Conference (ISSC) Sorry Robert McClenon and The Voidwalker  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 01:15, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The only thing wrong with it seems like it could be fixed quite easily, which is that the article only states that The International Sport Security Conference is an annual conference focusing on sport security. It doesn't state what the ISSC has accomplished, or really goes into detail for what it does. However, this material is covered in detail at The International Centre for Sport Security. I would probably create The International Sport Security Conference (as well as International Sport Security Conference) as a redirect and merge the contents of the draft into the ICSS article. -- The Voidwalker  Discuss 01:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I was bold and moved The International Centre for Sport Security to International Centre for Sport Security. I think that I will also provide redirects for the American spellings.  As for the original, which was the conference article, which is an activity of the center/centre, there are two possibilities.  I would suggest that the better one is to merge it into the centre/center.  The other is to make it a stand-alone article, but I don't think that is warranted.  Robert McClenon (talk) 01:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, Robert McClenon and The Voidwalker; I will do the content merge when I have a block of uninterrupted time in the next few days.&mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 14:46, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

The Laverne_Cox needs fixing
I tried adding her birth year. Could someone wikify it? Thanks! 50.68.120.49 (talk) 01:19, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

It was fixed when the edit was reviewed. (It needed a pipe after the date, before the 'df=yes'). Eagleash (talk) 01:29, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Linda Brava
Earlier today, an editor added this image, along with quite a bit of text, to the Linda Brava article. Given that it's a high res image, I figured that I'd see if it's copyrighted somewhere. Google says that there's a copy at this page but that page has been telling me all day that the site is down for maintenance. I'm not sure where to go with that... Ideas? Dismas |(talk) 02:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hmm, there's no archive for the page on archive.org, I'll check the google cache. This appears to be the cache, but the images are not loading for me. -- The Voidwalker  Discuss 15:57, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Got it! http://media2.lindalampenius.com/2012/11/LindaL051.jpg -- The Voidwalker  Discuss 16:01, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks! I've submitted a copyright violation for the image at Commons.  Dismas |(talk) 16:20, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I've tagged one of the other images added by the uploader, but I can't find the other one. -- The Voidwalker  Discuss 16:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I think the editor that added the image to the article has a WP:COI but I'm not sure. Dismas |(talk) 17:01, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

James Kitson, 1st Baron Airedale
I have added a date into one of the refs. for James Kitson page. Please check Thanks101.189.0.102 (talk) 02:22, 24 April
 * It looks ok to me. When you put a date in the "date" field of a template, you have to format it right or you get a red error message. But in this case, I think you put a date in a footnote, where any format would work, and in fact you chose a preferred format. Maproom (talk) 09:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Lupton family
Please see if you can add the death date (d.1930) at the end of Arnold Lupton's name - which appears in the intoduction on the Lupton family page Thanks so much - I am not sure if this would be what you do 101.189.0.102 (talk) 02:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I don't understand the request. The first mention of Arnold Lupton in the Lupton family article is a link to the article on him, which gives his date of death. Maproom (talk) 09:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I think this is what they are saying: In that article (Lupton family), many people who are named have their relevant dates (birth/death) listed immediately after their name.  For whatever reason, Arnold Lupton does not.  They are asking to add his relevant dates after the mention of his name in the Lupton family article (not in the Arnold Lupton article).  That, I believe, is the request. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:49, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I think you're right – and I believe there is no reason to give his date of death in the article, as it is easily found using the wikilink, which also disambiguates him from any other Arnold Lupton who may be mentioned in the article. Maproom (talk) 06:48, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Indeed, that may be. But I was just clarifying the original request.  He/she wanted the death date added into the Lupton family article (not the Arnold Lupton article).  As you point out, there may be valid reasons why the date is indeed not included.  However, at the end of the day, some people have dates listed with their names; some do not.  (For perhaps valid reasons.)  So, this is inconsistent.  And the original poster makes a good point.  Why list the dates for some people, but not for other people?  It is my opinion that a blue Wiki-link is not relevant.  When one reads an article, it should be read as a free standing (stand-alone) article.  The fact that the article can and does link somewhere else (where we can subsequently find the death date) is not really a good reason to leave the death date out of the stand-alone article.  I think.  I think of it like this.  Imagine that, in order to read the article, you get it printed out on paper.  In such a case, there is no blue Wiki-link to click.  Why should I be able to see the dates for some people, when I read this article, but not for other people?  It's a valid question.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:24, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Website name vs. article title in citations
This question may be a little confusing, but I will try to explain as best as I can. I ask this question because I have encountered conflicts when trying to enter citation information, and I have not found an answer on Wikipedia.

Basically, when I enter in the citation information I am not sure what to enter in for the "website=" or "title=" in cases when neither are clear. For example, at this website (http://www7b.biglobe.ne.jp/~hatsune95/English/E_pen_org.htm), the article title appears to be simply "Pen Spinning". However, what would the website name be? I could enter in the website name as "Biglobe", but that isn't the website's name, it is the website host's name. Now, if the website is Google searched by entering in "pen spinning biglobe" into Google's search engine, the second result (It might not be the second result for you. I'm not certain how Google searches work.) displays as "Welcome....Please look at some Animated GIFs... - Biglobe", which does make sense. Going back to the website, one could consider the possibility that the article title is "Welcome....Please look at some Animated GIFs...", but perhaps one shouldn't use Google as a citation helper in this case because Google also displays "Biglobe" as the website title, when that is actually the host being used. One could combine both their own reasoning and the Google search result by saying that the article title is "Welcome....Please look at some Animated GIFs..." and that the website name is "Pen Spinning".

The Template:Cite web page does state that the website name is only suggested and that the article title is required, so I am inclined to believe that any title on the webpage should first be defaulted to being recognized as the article title. I was considering the possibility that the Wikipedia citation protocol for websites in which there is only one page might be different than the standard protocol, but this thought does not actually apply here because that website does link to other pages within the website (I'm talking about those gif links the webpage has). This makes me believe that the article title should in fact be "Welcome....Please look at some Animated GIFs..." and that the website should be "Pen Spinning".

Does Wikipedia have protocol for ambiguous website and title names? What should I do? (Am I greatly overthinking this situation?) Green Caffeine (talk) 03:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * You are perhaps slightly overthinking it, . The purpose of a citation is twofold. A quick glance of it should give the reader an understanding of attribution so that they can assess how relevant, reliable, or POV that information is (eg. Joe Journalist: "Pen spinning as a modern trend", The New York Times vs. MrConspiracyTheorist "Pen spinners form a secret world government!", Conspiracyblog at Blogspot.com).


 * The other purpose is that the reader will locate the source if they want to access it. For webpages, supplying additional info besides the URL is important because of link rot. If the webpage is moved, what information is it necessary to provide for the reader so that they can find the new location? Googling "Pen Spinner" is obviously inadequate (40,000 results). "Pen Spinner" and the author helps. Granted, sometimes what the name of the website is is ambiguous (usually the more professional and reliable the website, the clearer publishing practices they have, whereas the opposite often characterizes self-published sources that may not be reliable). When in doubt, just apply common sense. Perhaps  and  . (I've seen automated tools insert the domain name if no actual website name can be found). In any case, the   parameter is an alias for   which in turn refers to a major work (eg. a book, the name of a newspaper, musical album) that includes smaller works (eg. a chapter, an article name, an individual song). That's why whatever you put in   is automatically italicized). Considering this particular case, if you've read the links in my message, you might agree with me in that the particular website is unusable as a source for being a self-published website and therefor not known for a reputation of accuracy and fact checking. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 08:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Using my common sense seems reasonable. I suppose I should just use my best judgement regarding each case. (By the way I am using this website as a source for part of the history of pen spinning, which is very much ingrained in independent websites before the community started to come together.)


 * Thanks  Green Caffeine (talk) 19:27, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

can i publish an article with security?
i wants to know that if i am going to publish an article then who can able to modify my article if its Wikipedia team then its Good, and if anyone can able to make changes in it then i wants to publish article with restriction that nobody can able to make changes in it except Wikipedia team.

if there anything which needs to modify and people wants me to change it so definitely i will do it but after searching or discussing on it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gagan deep singh1995 (talk • contribs) 07:39, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Bad news all around for you. Anybody would be able to edit your article, there is no "Wikipedia team", and you wouldn't own the article. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Earlier queries
Please check above 2 questions ago to see my own queeries re 2 separate articles. We would appreciate your help so much thankd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.189.0.102 (talk) 09:05, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Both have been replied to. If you need more advice, just continue in those two threads. Sam Sailor Talk! 11:24, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Why was my page deleted??
Hello, While doing a recent search, I noticed my page has been deleted (Al-Zain Al-Sabah) and I can't find it in the log either. Please advise.188.236.32.2 (talk) 09:09, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Articles_for_deletion/Al-Zain_Sabah_Al-Naser_Al-Sabah explains why it was deleted. Maproom (talk) 09:21, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

House of Bartoli and Bartoli family
Hello, this might not be the correct place to raise this. Yesterday I stumbled upon a brand new article (Bartoli family) which was lacking in many respects. I did what I could (in a rather distanced way) to fettle it up a bit an add tags etc. but it's still very poor. However, I notice today that the editor has apparently 'copy and pasted' the entire content into a second article House of Bartoli, so there are now 2 identical articles under different names. I know C&P is entirely the wrong way to go about things but regret I do not know what should be done about it. Can anyone advise please. Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 10:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Judging from the contents it's the classic beginner's mistake: "Ups, I made the wrong title, I'll copy paste it to another". I'll tag House of Bartoli and we can move the family article. Sam Sailor Talk! 11:18, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks Sam. I've already posted at the Ed's t-page asking them to cease editing until resolved. I'll follow that up now. Funny thing...I considered going to your page to ask before I posted here. :) Thanks. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 11:23, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * :-) Thanks. Sam Sailor Talk! 11:25, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Some more ferreting about by Sam reveals what appears to be a quite elaborate hoax. Eagleash (talk) 13:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Lupton family
Please fix up ref number 130. I have failed, no doubt because I am tired. Sorry101.189.0.102 (talk) 12:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

. (Missing curly bracket at the beginning). Eagleash (talk) 12:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Albert Kitson, 2nd Baron Airedale
There should be 2 separate refs. after the word "Yorkshire" in the section "later life". Please help. I have mucked this up. I am sorry101.189.0.102 (talk) 12:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

You merely left off the final '>' in the closing tag. Eagleash (talk) 12:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

External tools: Revision history statistics
It does not work. For example, I want to see statistics of Hillary Clinton, I click on Revision history statistics, but nothing happens. I tried it for several other articles and it does not work for them too. Is that external tool disabled? Or any solution? --Zyma (talk) 14:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Works fine for me. Perhaps the server was having problems at the time you tried? --David Biddulph (talk) 16:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)



ID:	5043192

Wikidata ID:	Q6294 · 140 Items

Page size:	236,508 Bytes

Total revisions:	13,556

Number of editors:	3,876

Number of minor edits:	3,271 · (24.1%)

Number of IP edits:	1,962 · (14.5%)

Number of bot edits:	181 · (1.3%)

Ø time between edits:	0.4 days

Ø number of edits per user:	3.5

Ø number of edits per month:	76.7

Ø number of edits per year:	920

Edits in the past 24 hours:	0

Edits in the past 7 days:	22

Edits in the past 30 days:	96

Edits in the past 365 days:	1,238

Edits made by the top 10% of editors:	8,358 · (61.7%)

First edit:	Aug 1, 2001, 8:21 PM •  Koyaanis Qatsi

Latest edit:	Apr 23, 2016, 1:22 AM •  Wasted Time R

Max. text added:	Apr 23, 2016, 1:22 AM •  Wasted Time R  •  +236,508

Max. text deleted:	Jun 4, 2008, 4:01 AM •  Wasted Time R  •  -134,728

Links to this page:	0

Redirects:	0

Links from this page:	1,642

External links:	375

Page watchers:	1154

Pageviews (60 days):	–

Bugs / Todo:	3


 * Sam Sailor Talk! 16:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

How do I insert a html id into a page?
I want to directly link to a particular section of a wikipedia page from elsewhere. In particular I want my link to reference of numbered list. In html this is normally done by adding a unique (to the page) attribute to a html entity. Thereby allowing my link to reference it, So if the wikipedia link is http://wikipedia.org/blah I can reference that particular part of the page with a link http://wikipedia.org/blah#mid by adding an attribute id="mid" just before the desired section. All I need do is add #mid to the url Ideally one wants to insert the id to an existing html entity or add an entity which has no effect upon browser rendering. So   would be one way to do it in html.

How can I do it with wikipedia page markup language? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.156.110.83 (talk) 15:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Quite simply, you use the regular wikimarkup link eg., and append the #section name, just like the url eg.  . --  The Voidwalker  Discuss 15:39, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * See WP:ANCHOR. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

General question about using Google Books
In Google Books, there are many cases where a book is under copyright but several pages from the book are shown. If the information needed for a Wikipedia article is in those several pages, what is the policy on using that book as a reference? Leschnei (talk) 15:45, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Whether the book is available online or not, you just cite the book as a reference, which is most easily done using the cite book template. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * If you can read enough to get the correct context, then you can use the source. If is more iffy to use snippets, but judicious use of searching for sentence fragments can let you see a bit more around the snippet. If you rely on a snippet, it is good to include a quote in the reference. Fences  &amp;  Windows  20:24, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Is there a way to calculate a value and to also have it sort correctly in a table?
Is there a way to calculate a value and to also have it sort correctly in a table? I originally used the code as follows:  years . This gave the value as "3" and the "nts" template makes the "3" sort correctly, when sorted with other numbers. However, I wanted the value "3" to be calculated, since it will change every year. Next year, it will be 4; the following year, it will be 5, and so forth. So, I then used the code   (from one of my above Help Desk questions). This allowed the value (3) to be calculated automatically. But, it would not sort correctly as the value "3". (It sorts like this: 1, 11, 111, 2, 22, 222, 3, 33, 333, 4, 44, 444, etc.  It uses the character and not the numerical value.)  OK. Then I tried to combine both the "nts" template with the "years ago" template. What I typed was:  . This is the odd thing. When I first typed that in, it worked perfectly. The Table sorted correctly. And the value was correctly calculated as "3". Then, the next day, I went to see that article again. And there was a weird error message. The error message basically said something like "that is an invalid value". So, my two questions: (A) Is there a way to make this work, to have the value automatically calculated and to have it sort correctly? And (B) Why did the calculation work one day and not the next? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * The chart is here: User talk:Joseph A. Spadaro/Sandbox/Page80.  Thanks.  Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * You broke Years ago in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Years_ago&diff=716826116&oldid=567206180], causing extra code with Category:Date mathematics templates to be added to all pages using the template. I have fixed it in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Years_ago&diff=next&oldid=716826116]. Code inside  is only added to the template itself and not to pages transcluding the template. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Huh? I did not understand one word that you said?  Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:18, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Check [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Years_ago&diff=next&oldid=716826116 this diff]. -- The Voidwalker  Discuss 20:23, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * When you added  to Years ago, the same code was also added to all pages using the template. That's how templates work, also for category code. I prevented it by moving   inside . Code inside  is not added to pages using the template. See more at WP:NOINCLUDE. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:23, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * OK. Thanks.  As long as it's fixed, that's good.  Thank you.  Now, back to my original question.  Any takers?  Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If there is still a problem after Years ago was fixed then please clarify it. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorry, I am totally confused. Are you saying that the "Years ago" template does not work because of that error I made with the "Date mathematics templates"?  And now that someone has gone in and fixed that "Date mathematics templates" matter, the "Years ago" template should work just fine?  And it should do what I want to do?  If so, is my syntax correct:    (to do what I am trying to do)?  I thought that they were two separate issues.  And that you were just mentioningt to me the error that I made when I tried to edit that template page.  You are saying that that's exactly why my code did not work?  Right?  Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:40, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Let me explain. When you added  to years ago, you added it outside the   zone. Therefore, anything that transcluded years ago also included the data for the category with the data for the number. Thus  was rendered non-functional. fixed the location of the category, and now  works fine. In other words, your question is answered. -- The Voidwalker  Discuss 00:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Ah, perfect. Thanks!  In the above discussion, I thought we were talking about two completely different things: (A) how to get my Table to work properly; and (B) the fact that I made a good faith error when I edited that page by adding a category.  I had no idea that one had to do with the other.  In your (collective) replies to me, I thought that you were not addressing issue "A" at all, but you were simply making me aware of issue "B".  In other words, you were politely letting me know that I made a good faith error edit, and that you guys went ahead and fixed it.  But I did not know/think that my causing a problem (in issue "B") was the very cause of my problem with issue "A".  Now I get it.  Thanks.  But as a side note, what exactly does "transclude" mean in these contexts?  I see it all the time (on Wikipedia), and I never have any idea what's being said.  Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:02, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * So, basically, a template can use as its argument field another template? Right?  The (numerical) argument field does not have to be an actual number; it can be a value that is "calculated" through another template.  Yes?   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:11, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * See WP:TRANS for information on transclusion. In answer to right above, I believe so, yes. -- The Voidwalker  Discuss 01:14, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, a parameter value in a template call can be the return value from another template. Some templates like nts do calculations on their parameter and this fails if the parameter does not evaluate to a pure number. Template:Number table sorting says: "If a non-numeric value is given as the first unnamed parameter the results are undefined." Your edit to caused  to return   instead of just  . Therefore   became  . This failed. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:48, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, got it. Thanks! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:32, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:33, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Is there a way to add a colored background to the "Sequence" Template?
Is there a way to add a colored background to the "Sequence" Template? This one:. Located here: Template:Sequence. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The template has no support for that. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks. That's too bad.  Is there a way to create my own "sequence" box?  Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:36, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't recommend it with your limited knowledge of tables and templates. What do you want colors for? PrimeHunter (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Long story short: I wanted to use a "succession box". But it was plain and gray and ugly.  So I wondered if color could be added in?   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:06, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If the color doesn't convey information then I suggest sticking with the standard. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:34, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * It does/would convey info. Is this very hard to do? Usually, on a Table, you just add in one command code like "background color = red" or whatever.  Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 13:03, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * You would have to either code a new template from scratch or add a parameter to sequence which must then be passed on to the template where the actual row code is placed and color code has to be added. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:29, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Yeah, that's beyond me. So, as it presently stands, the "sequence" template does not allow this "feature".  Correct? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:33, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Correct. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:33, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Editing on mobile
For me, editing pages on mobile, especially when the pages in question are long, is nightmarishly hard. This is because if I want to add something to the bottom I must scroll back down in order to see what I have typed, because all but the first few lines of text on the page I'm editing become invisible once I start typing. This means I have to keep scrolling back down after I type something to see what I typed if it is not in the first few lines of text. Does anyone else have experience w/this problem and/or a suggestion for how I can fix it? (Note: I edit mobile from an iPhone 6.) Everymorning (talk) 21:38, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

My WIKI page is deleted !
Hello,

I am an Orthopedic Surgeon(Retired) in US and trying to create a WIKI page with all my credentials and illustrious career. My first WIKI page is deleted and like to make sure I am able to create and share this info with all my family and friends all over the world.

Can some one please call/e-mail me so that I can discuss and get this moving ASAP. I needed this done quickly

Thanks, Dr. Durairaj Govindasamy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumperoo963 (talk • contribs) 22:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY (it's not permitted highly discouraged here) and WP:COI. Also please do not post phone numbers on Talk pages here on Wikipedia; we will not call you.  General Ization   Talk
 * Autobiographies are permitted, they are highly discouraged but are permitted. -- GB fan 22:51, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I didn't think it would be helpful to go into all the exceptions to a policy in this response; they are explained at the link I provided, and the editor can click on the link to read them. Given that the editor's autobiographical article has been deleted twice, it would appear that under policy it is not permitted.  General Ization   Talk   22:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Just because it was deleted twice doesn't mean that another attempt might not be successful. It wasn't deleted because it was an autobiography. It was deleted because there was no claim to significance in the article. -- GB fan 23:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I actually do understand the distinction you're making; I'm just not sure that the editor who made the inquiry will.  General Ization  Talk   23:10, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Well I am fairly sure a retired orthopedic surgeon can read. You said flat out that autobiographies are not permitted but linked to a guideline that says they are permitted but highly discouraged. We lose credibility when we tell new editors things that are untrue. We need to tell people the truth. -- GB fan 23:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Or tell them lies which pass the test of publicity. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:44, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Sharing personal info with friends and family is for one of the list of social networking websites. For a profile here, you must meet the general notability guideline. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * If you'd like to write the editors who decided your article showed no indication of meeting the guideline, see User talk:RHaworth or User talk:SpacemanSpiff. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:16, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

(x2) :Hello, unfortunately Wikipedia does not exist as a form of social media or for persons to write an autobiography. Subjects of biographies have to pass Wikipedia's fairly stringent rules on notability and biographical pages are created by editors without connection to the subject, using information obtained from reliable independent sources. See WP:RS for more information. Sorry, we cannot offer more encouragement in this instance. If your career is notable enough a Wiki page may be created in due course. Eagleash (talk) 22:17, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Jumperoo963, what you submitted wasn't even an article. It was a bunch of points, not a single sentence and no sources. Like I said above, while autobiographies are permitted but highly discouraged. They are discouraged because as the subject, you have a hard time writing a neutral article. You should let others write the article if you are truly notable. -- GB fan 23:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I have a few concerns about the Hillary Clinton nomination page.
I have a few concerns about the Hillary Clinton nomination page.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hillary_Clinton_presidential_campaign_endorsements,_2016

First of all the clicking the numbered citation notes does not work. Furthermore, when I look at the citations in edit mode, I find that some of the claimed endorsements do not pass the giggle test. For example, Paula Cole is said to be a Clinton endorser based on this tweet: https://twitter.com/paulacolemusic/status/666328133696684032

How can we bring attention and objectivity to this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Underdog456 (talk • contribs) 22:32, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * It would appear that the article is too long, and so the template isn't working properly- when I try to preview a change to the article, I get the message "Warning: Template include size is too large. Some templates will not be included." I've noted it at the talkpage.
 * As for objectivity, I'd recommend discussing on the talkpage. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Do you think the issue would be addressed quickly? The editors who are putting in the nonsense examples of endorsements, put them back when they are taken out, and I suspect they are not acting in good faith.


 * There was an extra set of brackets ( }} ) that caused the references to not appear. As for checking the endorsements, there are over 1300 footnotes. I don't think any editor is going to take responsibility to check every one. If you find one that is incorrect, feel free to bring it up on the talk page. Liz  Read! Talk! 23:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Or at Talk:Paula Cole. There are already sections about revisionist history and "false duets" there, but a new one couldn't hurt. Been pretty quiet since 2011. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:38, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

My User Page
Hello there,

I am profoundly confused. I created a User Page earlier using the edit feature. Questions:

A) Will my User Page named Pressvue come up in a search using the keyword "Pressvue"? B) Are User Pages visible to the general public? C) I wanted to write an article regarding my site www.pressvue.com. It is a new social media site and i don't have any references. Given my status, would my article be accepted by Wikipedia?

Your response would be most appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pressvue (talk • contribs) 22:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * A) No.
 * B) For the most part.
 * C) No, that is not what Wikipedia is for, at all. Do not even try that.  Ian.thomson (talk) 23:09, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * And they're blocked. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:43, 25 April 2016 (UTC)