Page move-protected

Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Wikipedia Help Desk
  • This page is only for questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia. For other types of questions, use the search box or the Reference desk.
  • Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
  • We are all volunteers, so sometimes replies can take some time. Please be patient. Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.

  • New users: While this is a good place to ask questions, new users may prefer to ask for help at the Teahouse, an area specifically for new users to get help with editing, article creation, and general Wikipedia use, in a friendly environment.
Are you in the right place?

May 17[edit]

Author of source insists on prominently crediting himself in article body[edit]

I wrote an article about a recording artist named Charles A. Asbury that was largely based on biographical research recently published in a reissue album and accompanying booklet. I should have done a better job citing all statements informed by that source, but now the author of that publication (Wikipedia user Ricmarti) has edited in a statement about his research at the top of the article and reverted my attempts to bring the article back to Wikipedia standards (by removing preliminary statements and adding citations - see edit history). I'm not going to continue editing the page because I think the author is taking my edits personally but if a more experienced editor could look at this and take any appropriate actions I'd appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masonvl (talkcontribs) 02:32, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

@Masonvl: Hello, I have restored the page, tidied it up a bit and left a message at the other editor's talk page. The edits aren't really acceptable and if they continue the editor should be reported as disruptive or WP:NOTHERE. Please sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 04:53, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Switching between visual and source editing[edit]

I have only recently discovered and started using the visual editor occationally for citations, but I think that I'm coming to the conclusion that it's more trouble than it's worth, mainly because of the inability to switch easily between the two types of editors. It seems to lose edits unless you publish every time before switching, and also I found that after publishing via source and then trying to edit again via source that it gave that warning again about losing edits, even though I had not edited anything at that point. Is there a bug, am I missing something, or is it just like this because one is not expected to switch between the different editors? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:59, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

I don't think you're missing anything. The Visual Editor was not requested by editors, it was foisted on us by the Wikimedia Foundation. I also, after several attempts to use it, have concluded that it's more trouble than it's worth. Maproom (talk) 08:11, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
@Maproom: Okay, thanks for that. I think I'll just forget about it myself. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:18, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
@Laterthanyouthink: I can switch between editors on the pencil icon without losing work. I have Firefox in case it matters. But I dislike VisualEditor and don't use it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:58, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Hmmm, that's odd. I also use Firefox. I am more used to the source editor and also didn't much like VE - but perhaps I'll experiment further one day... (Right now, also experiencing mouse problems, having to drag my wireless mouse around the desk multiple times to move around, which doesn't help!) Thanks for that. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:30, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
@Laterthanyouthink:I'm very aware that many editors, including some highly respected editors in Wikipedia are not big fans of visual editor. I tried it early on. Founded had many problems and stayed away for some time. I tried again more recently and I now use it on a fairly regular basis. It can't do everything (or perhaps that means I simply haven't learned how to do certain things) but it does something so well I wouldn't want to be without it.
You mentioned use it for citations. This is an area that was problematic early on but now is quite good. Almost always, when I'm having a citation I use visual editor. The ability to drop in a URL and have a create the citation (about 99% of all cases) or just drop in an ISBN and have create the citation for you is wonderful. I know some longtime editors are very skilled with citations and may find it easy to create them with the other editor, but for new editors, creating citations can be a pain in the visual editor makes it much easier.
Do you ever have occasion to edit tables? This is an area where the visual editor stumbled badly early on but now does a decent job. While I can find some counterexamples, in many cases when I want to add a row to a table or edit an entry, it is much easier in visual editor.
I do note that sometimes I have to switch from one to the other and I have to be careful to make sure I don't lose something, but as I almost always composed material in an external editor I almost never lose anything unless it's just a couple words.--S Philbrick(Talk) 15:58, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
@Sphilbrick: Thanks for that, I'll keep it in mind. I've rarely edited tables, but may do more as I become more proficient. I did find it handy for generating the citations, but found switching between the two editors problematical as I had to keep saving and that slowed me down. I have only just begun composing my first full article in my sandbox, and keep thinking that it would be useful to have more than one sandbox, or be able to partition it into different articles (a side issue, but I haven't found a way of using a separate editor apart from my sandbox, as yet). I will have another go at using VE sometime and see if I can get used to it though. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 10:28, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
@Laterthanyouthink: You can make many sandboxes, e.g. at User:Laterthanyouthink/sandbox2, User:Laterthanyouthink/sandbox3, ... See Wikipedia:User pages#Terminology and page locations. I guess Sphilbrick uses a normal text editor and copy-pastes text between that editor and Wikipedia's source editor. I often do that. In Windows software, Ctrl+a will mark all, Ctrl+c will copy it to the clipboard, and Ctrl+v will insert it elsewhere. The source editor also has a tool to help make citations from a url, ISBN or other resource. If you have a toolbar above the edit box with "Cite" to the right then click that, select a template to the left, fill out a field with a magnifying glass, and click the magnifying glass. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:59, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Ah, I see - I thought that there must be a way of doing that! That makes sense. (I know about the Windows shortcuts - just finding my way around the finer points of Wiki editing still.) And I'd never noticed that shortcut to the citation templates at the top - I have just had a play with it and that will be very handy too. Thanks very much! Laterthanyouthink (talk) 11:18, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Do not trust that whatever is returned by a magic citation filler tool is correct. For example: ISBN 9783161484100 using reftoolbar produces this:
{{cite book|last1=Maps|first1=Peekaboo|title=Berkeley, Oakland : Albany, Emeryville, Alameda, Kensington|date=2009|publisher=Peek A Boo Maps|location=[Berkeley?]|isbn=9783161484100|edition=1st ed.}}
Maps, Peekaboo (2009). Berkeley, Oakland : Albany, Emeryville, Alameda, Kensington (1st ed. ed.). [Berkeley?]: Peek A Boo Maps. ISBN 9783161484100. 
That template is malformed: |last= and |first= have variants of the publisher name; |location= is uncertain; |edition= has extraneous text. I don't use visual editor but I suspect that it will produce a different result, perhaps equally malformed.
If you follow the isbn link above to Google books, to Amazon, to WorldCat, you will see that each lists multiple items for that same isbn. The data for the above citation came from WorldCat which is a not-so-well curated database. If the tool works and does fetch data that matches the source that you consulted, great, but you must always check. The magic tools all have limitations and are absolutely dependent on the quality of the database(s) they use. Always check your results when using these tools.
Trappist the monk (talk) 12:07, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

An Old Nuking of an Article[edit]

Hello,

I recently came across this article on Nancy Jacobson, which ought to adhere to WP:BLP. The page seemed odd to me, as it had this long protracted section on No Labels, and barely anything anywhere else. After looking at the history, I came across edit by Jason775, as seen here. In a single edit, 2/3rds of the page was deleted, in the name of "updated and summarized content".

I was wondering what would be the best way to move forwards? Should I try to restore some of the old information, as it is useful to understanding who Nancy Jacobson is? I am hesitant about making any reverts, since this nuking happened back in 2009....

Thanks in advance for your help!

ChunyangD (talk) 17:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

ChunyangD, thanks for getting in touch. I think the edit you meant to point us to was this one, from 2016 (not 2009). In this and a few subsequent edits Jason775 reduced Jacobson's career prior to No Labels to a single sentence, which is perhaps going too far: articles should show a due balance between past and more recent activities in proportion to the coverage they have received in independent sources (not what we editors think important or would like to emphasize or downplay). Jason only ever edited that one article and hasn't edited at all for over a year. Further discussion of the content could appropriately take place at the article's talk page: Noyster (talk), 19:30, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Noyster, thanks for the response! Yes, I linked the wrong edit and you found the right one - I'm not sure how I mixed up the dates as well! Given your encouragement, I have created a talk post on the article and will try to restore some of the old information. While that information was slightly out of date, I think I can restructure it in a meaningful way. I'm still fairly new regarding adding large sections to a Wikipedia article, so feel free to drop by and check out the page after the weekend and let me know if I'm doing anything wrong. Thanks! ChunyangD (talk) 14:53, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Brad Little[edit]

Hello,

In the article Brad Little (politician) section "Lieutenant Governor of Idaho", there are boards that are not working. Could someone set the data straight please? Thanks!

WhatsUpWorld (talk) 18:03, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

I don't know why there was a fistful of nowiki tags, but I have removed them in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:44, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi there[edit]

How do I get my company details listed on Wikipedia. I own and run Netkiosk

Thank you for any advice — Preceding unsigned comment added by AimeSnijders (talkcontribs) 18:53, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi AimeSnijders. I need to explain that Wikipedia is not a business listing. Like any encyclopedia, it carries articles about companies when they are considered "notable". They become "notable" by virtue of the published coverage they have obtained in sources independent of the company itself. Owners and employees of companies are in fact actively discouraged from creating or editing articles about their own companies, owing to their "conflict of interest": Noyster (talk), 19:36, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Noyster.

Sorry if I am not to familiar with communicating in Wikipedia. I know that Wikipedia is not a business listing. I also know a listing should not be done by ourselves. So who in the end will publish any company information on wikipedia (if we can't do it ;) Netkiosk has been around for 7 years. I regularly find other companies with a listing on Wikipedia. So was wondering how I as owner founder of Netkiosk can also be found on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AimeSnijders (talkcontribs) 19:46, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

For example I use Statcounter mysself and saw them on wikipedia. If it was not them who published their info and logos then who did. But more importantly who can I ask to publish an independent listing for Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AimeSnijders (talkcontribs) 19:48, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

All you can do here is post on our Requested articles page for companies. Include a couple of links to some of the most extensive published coverage of your company, so editors can see there is something to work from. I'd have to add that Wikipedia, like life in general, is not always fair: this being a volunteer project, there is no way to enforce prioritisation of work done within our policies and guidelines. The more you develop your business, thus attracting wide attention in the outside world, the better the chances that there will ultimately be a Wikipedia article about it: Noyster (talk), 22:07, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Privacy Statement[edit]

Does Wikipedia have a privacy statement? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.77.150.79 (talk) 19:27, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

The bottom of pages have a Privacy policy link. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:36, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Too many edits?[edit]

Just curious if there is any policy, guideline or help page at Wikipedia that suggests that there is such thing as too many edits, specifically, multiple edits of the same page (and even the same section) at the same time (like this)? —  AjaxSmack  21:02, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

@AjaxSmack: There are many edits in that sequence (from 2014, and over several days), but there was a lot of editing being done to different parts of the article. Don't think there is any objection to this if not done disruptively: it's sometimes recommended, indeed, as here. With smaller edits, if someone sees a problem with one particular change, it is easier to revert just that change, or to identify it with a diff for discussion: Noyster (talk), 21:48, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. I don't have a particular problem with it; it was just mild curiosity. The example I gave probably wasn't the best (this is more what I wasn't thinking of). I've just had the experience several times of wading through pages of edit history looking for an edit and wondering if there was any good reason for every little edit to be saved separately.  AjaxSmack  02:30, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Page Creation[edit]

How do you create a page on a subject? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gizzylocal (talkcontribs) 21:58, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

See this guide to writing your first article, which will help teach you some of the rules and policies on Wikipedia. Note that only autoconfirmed users (those with at least 10 edits over 3 days) can make articles on their own; newer users must do it through the articles for creation process. Also, may I ask what specifically you wish to write about - I might be able to give some more specific advice. LittlePuppers (talk) 23:24, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
I keep being puzzled why answers on this page even mention the possibility of creating a new article directly (which is the only context in which the restriction to autoconfirmed users applies). I would always advise any editor, new or old, to use the Article Wizard to create a draft, unless they were very sure that they could get the article up to an acceptable standard on the very first try. --ColinFine (talk) 15:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

May 18[edit]

wp processing error?[edit]

Just "Template:Cite web" is displayed for a properly formatted Template:Cite web reference instead of its title, see Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Is this being addressed? 204.38.4.80 (talk) 00:03, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

The article is in Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:11, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
It is only number 23 on Special:LongPages at ‎611,172 bytes. List of Gothic brick buildings is number one at 943,160 bytes. So how would it be that? 204.38.4.80 (talk) 00:25, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
1100+ templates (timeline) vs 400ish templates (gothic)
Consider splitting the timeline article.
Trappist the monk (talk) 00:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Is that a guess at what is causing it then? Do you have backing info? 204.38.4.80 (talk) 00:43, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Not a guess. Here is the data for the timeline article (visit the timeline article, right click view page source, towards the bottom):
NewPP limit reportParsed by mw1234Cached time: 20180518000655Cache expiry: 1900800Dynamic content: falseCPU time usage: 7.924 secondsReal time usage: 8.126 secondsPreprocessor visited node count: 44797/1000000Preprocessor generated node count: 0/1500000Post‐expand include size: 2097152/2097152 bytesTemplate argument size: 24693/2097152 bytesHighest expansion depth: 15/40Expensive parser function count: 7/500Unstrip recursion depth: 1/20Unstrip post‐expand size: 1459196/5000000 bytesLua time usage: 4.868/10.000 secondsLua memory usage: 5.54 MB/50 MBTransclusion expansion time report (%,ms,calls,template)100.00% 7337.226 1 -total53.82% 3948.584 838 Template:Cite_news15.31% 1123.157 244 Template:Cite_web1.07% 78.640 13 Template:Cite_tweet0.55% 40.223 3 Template:Citation_needed0.53% 38.824 1 Template:Donald_Trump_series0.49% 35.898 1 Template:Sidebar_person/US_President0.49% 35.716 3 Template:Fix0.46% 33.772 1 Template:Sidebar_person0.43% 31.838 1 Template:Use_mdy_dates
Trappist the monk (talk) 00:50, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Cool, thank you. 204.38.4.80 (talk) 00:52, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
And as mentioned, the article is in Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded. The category page explains the issue. It's a hidden category so you don't see it on the article but it's there. Registered users have an option to see hidden categories in normal page views. Other users can for example see them by clicking "Page information" [1] in the left pane. The problem was discussed but not fixed at Talk:Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections#Article size causing issues with templates. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:16, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Talk page / anonymous user reverted my edits[edit]

I removed an edit to the page of a living person (politician) that referenced an article that cannot satisfy Wikipedia Verifiability guidelines. This was reverted by what looks to me as an anonymous user. I'm trying to start a Talk page to further expound on my reasons for the removal, and open it up for discussion. I tried editing a page that has Talk:{page name}, but it's not appearing on the page. Can anyone point me to something that good description of how I should start a Talk page? Also, is multi-hex value user name a Wikipedia bot, or as I think it is, an anonymous user? Gbonline (talk) 01:08, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

The discussion is now going on where it should, at Talk:Dave Min. The multi-hex value user name is a new-style IP address. Anonymous editors are as entitled as anybody else to edit here and to take part in discussions. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:25, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Great, thanks OrangeMike! Gbonline (talk) 02:43, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

I've commented on the Talk:Dave Min page, but I still don't understand why I don't see it as a tab on that page. Do I need to edit the page to include the talk tab? Gbonline (talk) 17:32, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

2018-19 NHL team articles[edit]

Why haven't you started the 2018-19 NHL team articles there is only one NHL team because the others were too soon you need to start making 2018-19 Buffalo Sabers season 2018-19 Dallas Stars and 2018-19 NY Rangers season. 169.55.19.145 (talk) 01:28, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Presumably because no-one from the appropriate project has got around to them yet. You could raise the matter at the project page or you could start them yourself... see WP:YFA, WP:WIZ and WP:AfC, or request an article at WP:RA. It has been mentioned to you previously that this page does not exist to demand edits be made. Eagleash (talk) 07:05, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

UBS#References: citation error[edit]

So I just checked the references for UBS and they're red for some reason. It says: "Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; name ":4" defined multiple times with different content"... what does that mean? I tried to fix it but seem to be making it worse. Can someone take a look at/fix it? Whats happening to the references? LivinRealGüd (talk) 01:28, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

The "help" link in the error message goes to Help:Cite errors/Cite error references duplicate key, so you need to read that page. The problem is that you tried to name a new reference with <ref name=":4"> when an existing reference already had the name ":4". (The same applies to quite a number of your other reference names.) If you intend to use the new reference only once you don't need to give it a name, but if you want to use it more than once you need to give it a new unique name that has not already been used. For further help, see Help:Referencing for beginners#Same reference used more than once. --David Biddulph (talk) 02:49, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Sweet! Thank you!! LivinRealGüd (talk) 04:23, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

How to find a draft[edit]

Hi there!

I made a draft article on Tuesday and sent it for review ...

How do I find / access this article?

thanks!

JB — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbyoung00 (talkcontribs) 14:32, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

@Jbyoung00: Click "Contributions" at the top right to see your edits. You created Draft:Pablo Navarro but have not submitted it for review. There is a button for that but note Wikipedia:Notability (music). PrimeHunter (talk) 14:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jbyoung00 (talkcontribs) 14:44, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Linking articles[edit]



To whom it may concern. A new article has recently been created and approved: http://en.wikipedia.org.mevn.net/wiki/Adjusted_RevPAR. The name of the index is either Adjusted RevPAR or ARPAR or AdjRevPAR. I have a few questions:

1. How do I ensure that the readers can find this article using either of the 3 names in the search? 2. There is an article on Arpar that already exists (http://en.wikipedia.org.mevn.net/wiki/Arpar), which is a village in India. How do I edit it (or create another one that references both articles) to allow people to navigate to the ARPAR index article (http://en.wikipedia.org.mevn.net/wiki/Adjusted_RevPAR)?

Thank you in advance for your advice.

Volchok1 (talk) 17:27, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Volchok1 - firstly, with regard to search you don't need to do anything. If you search for ARPAR, the article you created and the one for the village in India are the top two results. Readers will have no problem finding either.
As for a note on Arpar to direct people to Adjusted_RevPAR, you could put an {{about}} template at the top of each, along the lines of {{About|the village|the performance metric|Adjusted_RevPAR}} (reverse the order for the other page). Richard0612 18:06, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

create a page[edit]

I have a new account "Backupbass" I am trying to create a page for myself a professional musician. how do I do this? see example below

Proposed article text collapsed

Tutu Jones From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Tutu Jones Birth name John Jones Jr. Born September 9, 1966 (age 51) Dallas, Texas, United States Genres Electric blues, soul blues, country blues[1] Occupation(s) Guitarist, singer, songwriter Instruments Guitar, vocals, drums Years active 1970s–present Labels JSP, Rounder, Doc Blues, CD Baby Website http://www.tutujones.com/bio.html Tutu Jones (born September 9, 1966) is an American electric blues and soul blues guitarist, singer and songwriter.[1] He has cited Freddie King and Z. Z. Hill as influences on his playing style.[2] Since 1994, Jones has released five albums.[1]

Contents 1 Life and career 2 Discography 3 See also 4 References 5 External links Life and career John Jones Jr. was born in Dallas, Texas, the son of a Dallas-based R&B guitarist, Johnny B. Jones. Through his father's work, he was introduced to house guests such as Freddie King, L. C. Clark, Ernie Johnson and Little Joe Blue. Jones began playing the guitar by the age of five, by which time he had acquired his nickname Tutu from his father.[3]

He began his career in adolescence, as a drummer, graduating from backing his uncles Barefoot Miller and L. C. Clark (the latter in 1976)[2] to working with Z. Z. Hill and R. L. Burnside.[1][4]

Meanwhile, working on his own guitar playing, by 1989 Jones had moved on to fronting his own bands.[3] This in led to the recording of his debut album, I'm For Real, on JSP Records in 1994.[1] It was nominated for a W. C. Handy Award.[2] Blues Texas Soul followed two years later, and Staying Power in 1998.[1][4]

A live album, Tutu Jones Live, was issued in 2005 by Doc Blues Records. A journalist at the Austin Chronicle then stated, "bluesmen are traditionalists, but Jones learns how to mesh soulful wails with syrupy blues that are as sweaty live as they are in quiet studios."[5]

His album Inside Out was released by CD Baby in 2009.[4]

Discography Year Title Record label 1994 I'm For Real JSP 1996 Texas Blues Soul Rounder 1998 Staying Power Rounder 2005 Tutu Jones Live Doc Blues 2009 Inside Out CD Baby [1][4]

See also List of country blues musicians List of electric blues musicians List of soul-blues musicians List of Texas blues musicians References

Jason Ankeny. "Tutu Jones". Allmusic. Retrieved October 17, 2012.Bill Harriman. "Tutu Jones". Swaves.com. Retrieved October 17, 2012.Govenar, Alan (2008). Texas Blues: The Rise of Contemporary Sound (1st ed.). College Station, Texas: Texas A&M University Press. pp. 159/65. ISBN 978-1585446056."Tutu Jones Biography". Tutujones.com. Retrieved October 17, 2012."Tutu Jones". Docbluesrecords.com. Retrieved October 17, 2012.

External links Official website Authority control MusicBrainz: 576fe335-5b05-4d24-8302-6063c96dfe5d Categories: 1966 birthsLiving peopleAmerican blues singersAmerican male singersAmerican blues guitaristsAmerican male guitaristsAmerican drummersElectric blues musiciansTexas blues musiciansSoul-blues musiciansCountry blues musiciansSongwriters from TexasMusicians from DallasGuitarists from Texas20th-century American drummers20th-century American guitarists Navigation menu Backupbass Alerts (0) Notices (0) TalkSandboxPreferencesBetaWatchlistContributionsLog outArticleTalkReadEdit sourceView historyWatchSearch

Search Wikipedia Main page Contents Featured content Current events Random article Donate to Wikipedia Wikipedia store Interaction Help About Wikipedia Community portal Recent changes Contact page Tools What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Permanent link Page information Wikidata item Cite this page Print/export Create a book Download as PDF Printable version

Languages Français Edit links This page was last edited on 7 February 2018, at 06:46. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Backupbass (talkcontribs) 21:38, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Backupbass. I'm afraid the simple answer is that you don't. Wikipedia may not be used for promotion of any kind. If several people who have no connection with you have chosen to write about you (not directly based on any material from you such as an interview of press release) and been published in a source with a reputation for editorial control, such as a major newspaper or a book from a reputable publisher, then there can be an article about you, based almost entirely on what these independent people have published about you. It will not be your article, it will not in any way be controlled by you, it should have little material in it originating from you, and you are strongly discouraged from writing or editing it directly (see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY). If there are such sources, you can request that somebody write an article about you at requested articles, but there is no guarantee that a volunteer will pick up you request. Please also see WP:NMUSICIAN. --ColinFine (talk) 22:54, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Born vs Origin[edit]

In "background Information" for a person, how is "Origin" different from "Born"? In my understanding of these words, they are the same. One's origin is where one originated. That means where one was born. How can a person originate in a different place from that of his birth? — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ Wikievil666 (talkcontribs) 22:10, May 18, 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Wikievil666. Words often have more than one meaning (see Polysemy). The relevant meaning here is (from dictionary.com) "4. ancestry; parentage; extraction: (example) to be of Scottish origin." --ColinFine (talk) 10:16, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

May 19[edit]

What are these strange brackets and codes?[edit]

In the article on Lee Israel there are numbers near the raised foot-note citation numbers. But they’re not foot-notes. I looked on the editing page of the article [2] and I found that these numbers are put there using brackets like this { { } } and between the brackets there is: rp|16 (the number varies). The result is this: :16. It might be a secret code. I’m asking only to be informed. Thanks.Rutabagasubu (talk) 12:23, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi Rutabagasubu - those are the page number or numbers in the cited reference where the information can be found - for further information please see Template:Rp - Arjayay (talk) 12:32, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Thank you very much.Rutabagasubu (talk) 13:11, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

CoderStudio[edit]

Hello.

I have wrote an article in list of compilers, in C compilers, named:CoderStudio, but I can not link a page for this article. Could you write a page with the following info ?

CoderStudio package includes Tools for Windows 32 bit programming. A plain C compiler 32 bit, (pcc32), a Linker 32 bit, (Link32) and a Resource compiler 32 bit, (rc32). There is also under costruction an IDE that I am writting in plain C using the above Tools. You can download the above Tools from: http://manoscoder.gr/coderstudio/index.php

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manosza (talkcontribs) 14:41, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately CoderStudio does not appear to be notable and as such it is not suitable for inclusiong into Wikipedia. Ruslik_Zero 20:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

Do nonregistered users have just as much right to dispute resolution-related mechanisms as registered users?[edit]

I recently asked a question on the dispute resolution noticeboard. It was dismissed because it hadn't been discussed recently enough. Fair enough. However, in dismissing my request, the editor in question "advised" me "to register an account if [I] want to engage in dispute resolution." I would like to know whether this is an accurate reflection of Wikipedia policy. In other words, is it true that nonregistered users are not just as entitled to dispute resolution as registered users? (I searched the FAQs here but couldn't find anything.) Thank you. 39.9.139.80 (talk) 15:49, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

IP User, yes, all policies and guidelines, including ones on Dispute Resolution, apply to both registered and unregistered users. Participation in fora such as the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard and Requests for Comment is facilitated, however, if all users are registered. Among other benefits, registered users can receive notifications that a reply has been made to you in such a forum. This makes it easier for everyone involved in the discussion to ensure that everyone else is updated. I hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:59, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Any editor acting in good faith can give other editors practical advice or helpful suggestions, even if the suggested behavior is not required by policy. As Eggishorn points out, there are many benefits (and no negatives in my opinion) to registering an account, and improved communication among editors is one of those benefits. But it is not required by policy. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:49, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
What they said. We long-term users tend to be evangelists for creating an account, but you are still entitled to dispute resolution if you don’t have one, that has never been a rule and I would hope never will be. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:52, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

WMF Incubator link[edit]

Is there a way to provide an internal-style link to https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Incubator:Main_Page? I mean, one can link to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page with [[:Commons:Main Page]], for example. Is there a prefix for the Incubator that's comparable to the :Commons: prefix as I've used it here? Context: lots of disambiguation pages have inappropriate external links, so I've been browsing through a list of search results for disambiguation pages with the code http. I've found more than one link to https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Incubator:Main_Page that is being used properly (e.g. at Incubator), so I'd like to reformat it so it doesn't show up in my list of search results. Nyttend (talk) 21:59, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

meta:Interwiki map shows that the prefix for https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/$1 is Incubator:. https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Incubator:Main_Page has "Incubator:" in the page name (it's a namespace there) so this works: Incubator:Incubator:Main Page. In this case you can also just write Incubator: since https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/ redirects to the main page of the wiki. It's the same for Commons:. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:09, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. I've seen that map page before, and I was thinking about it, but I hadn't the slightest clue what it was called or where to find it. Nyttend (talk) 00:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

May 20[edit]

Moscow[edit]

Why are there no population figures visible in the stats section of the infobox?--Neufund (talk) 12:43, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

@Neufund: Someone tried to update them, but didn't do it correctly. I have restored the 2010 figures. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:48, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks a lot!--Neufund (talk) 12:49, 20 May 2018 (UTC)