June 26

Someone known locally but not having newspaper articles or internet sites to use as source information? How would i see to it that the article is not deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.235.241.102 (talk) 01:11, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You won't. You must

original research, which is also disallowed. Xenon54 (talk) 01:33, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

You can write about anybody on WikiBios. You may also have a

composting, you could write about him or her on Appropedia. If you want to get your hero on Wikipedia, a first step would be to persuade some journalists to write about him or her in the mainstream media. If you can't persuade the journalists, you won't persuade Wikipedia's deletionists. --Teratornis (talk) 01:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I neglected to mention that WikiIndex is one place to look for other wikis. Also see

WP:ALTOUT. --Teratornis (talk) 02:45, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm curious: if they are considered a "local hero", I would expect there to be some decent coverage in the local media, if nowhere else! If the local press doesn't want to cover the individual, then I would contend that he can't be much of a "local" hero! If the person lived a while ago, I would still expect there to be coverage. For example, I noticed that a local well-known personality had no article on Wikipedia, so I created William Stanley (inventor) - and although he died over a century ago, I could still find plenty of material to use as sources (OK, I was lucky that he was listed in Dictionary of National Biography - and the local library had a couple of publications!). Check your local newspaper archive (at the library), where coverage should be present -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:07, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to add an link to Playa Hermosa Artificial Reef Project to the "Artificial Reef" wiki page. http://condofish.com is the site and it's hosted at http://condofish.wordpress.com. It keeps getting rejected by the bot. I'm assuming because it think that this is some blog. This is the official site for the project. How do I add it it's directly relevant to the wiki article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.241.228.79 (talk) 01:22, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See

notable enough for its own article here. You could request one on Wikipedia:Requested articles. --Teratornis (talk) 01:59, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

The article Justin Bieber is understandably semi-protected. It also bears the semi-protected notice banner for unestablished editors to see when they hit "view source" (This page is currently semi-protected and can be edited only by..."), with a link to post an edit request on the article's talk page. But... the talk page for Justin Bieber is also semi-protected, and its link to post a request links right back to it. Is there a way to modify the notice to link to Talk:Justin Bieber/nonautoconfirmedtalk, or otherwise remove the semi-protected banner and create a custom one for the page? I understand I'll probably need admin help for this, but tell me the theory (unless some nice admin happens to read this and do it themselves...) Let me know if I made no sense. liquidluck✽talk 02:09, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. that's not helpful at all. I'm not sure it can be done, I'll just check. {{Sonia|ping|enlist}} 02:15, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know where I can find the default semi-protected edit notice, to create a custom one for that article? {{Sonia|ping|enlist}} 02:23, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've looked for it too, and haven't yet found it (still looking). But you can see it if you log out and attempt to edit any semi-protected page. liquidluck✽talk 02:34, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. I can't remove that one, only add a customised editnotice. What would you like it to say? {{Sonia|ping|enlist}} 02:36, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's an editnotice at all; it should be a editmessage, since we can't find an editnotice. Kayau Voting IS evil 05:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That would probably be it. Liquidluck: do you still want the editnotice? I can create it if you like. {{Sonia|ping|enlist}} 05:40, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll propose that a new editmessage be created for protected talk pages at the village pump. Kayau Voting IS evil 05:47, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotected the talk page instead. Prodego ^talk 05:48, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't respond earlier! I was thinking of something that simply replaced the link or at least gave anons further directions, but unprotection works just as well. Thanks, everyone! liquidluck✽talk 07:35, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Prodego, but have you seen this discussion first? Kayau Voting IS evil 10:54, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about it am I supposed to see? Prodego ^talk 03:34, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I currently use the Wikipedia template filling tool to fill out cite templates. It's a decent tool, but I wish that it had more functionality. For example, it's not intelligent enough to figure out an article's author or date published.[1] Is there a better tool I can use? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 03:24, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Check out Wikipedia:Cite4Wiki. I don't use it, but it seems to have some of the functionality you're looking for.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:03, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it doesn't quite have the functionality that I was looking for but it looks like they're planning to add some of these features in the next release. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 01:03, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just found

WP:REFLINKS, this seems to work better for bare links. The tool itself is here: [2] --LK (talk) 00:28, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

On the Texas State Highway 114 page there is a word that says ayshire. Should it be Ayrshire?,Gobbleswoggler (talk) 07:30, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Google maps search box says "yes" -- John of Reading (talk) 07:35, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the artical I am currently writing has the following problems...

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve the article or discuss these issues on the talk page. The notability of this article's subject is in question. If notability cannot be established, it may be listed for deletion or removed. Tagged since June 2010. WHAT DOES THIS MEAN????

It may have been edited by a person who has a conflict of interest with the subject matter. Tagged since June 2010. NO IT IS NOT.

It is an autobiography, or has been extensively edited by the subject, and may not conform to NPOV policy. Tagged since June 2010. IT's NOT AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY. AUSTYN BROWN IS A SOLO ARTIST —Preceding unsigned comment added by Austynbrown (talk • contribs) 08:19, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of messages on your talk page that give more detail about these article tags. But in brief...

• All topics at Wikipedia have to be
  reliable sources
  such a newspapers. If Austyn Brown has not been written about, the article will be deleted.
• All topics at Wikipedia have to be
  verifiable. The article must mention the sources of the information so that anyone reading the article can check for themselves that it is correct. The Austyn Brown
  article does not explain where the information is coming from.
• For legal reasons, all articles at Wikipedia that are about
  reliable source
  .
• Your chosen user name, "Austynbrown", would seem to indicate that you are writing about yourself. This is
  strongly discouraged
  .

-- John of Reading (talk) 09:02, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a thought experiment; suppose there is a Wikipedia article about a fabled magical potion. One old source includes a recipe. So the article mentions the ingredients, like this:

...a recipe, which calls for carrots, onions, pieces of tree octopus, parsley and hemlock.

It comes to the attention of the editor that one of those ingredients is an unknown and possibly non-existent substance. No source can be found, however, which investigates the recipe and questions the meaning of "tree octopus". The recipe is known to have been translated from another language, although the original in that language is lost. It further comes to the attention of the editor that in this other language the words "treeoc topus" translate as "marinated beef".

1. Is it OK to say pieces of "tree octopus", with scare quotes, or do the quote marks count as OR?
2. Is it OK to mention the original language and the words for "marinated beef", or is that OR?
3. If these things should be left out because of OR, is that a good thing in itself, or an unfortunate side-effect in which the very necessary OR policy leads to a loss of useful information?

213.122.29.174 (talk) 10:21, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the other language is in any way tied to the potential source of the magical potion, I would say to leave a footnote saying something like "in xxx language, which is related to the origin of this potion, tree octopus means marinated beef." That appears not to be original research, because you found a source for that statement. It is just a note clarifying a possible meaning of the phrase. If the language is quite strongly tied to the source of the potion, then I would add a small paragraph to the article explaining about this definition and why it may or may not be what the potion recipe means. This is a rather interesting case. Also in response to 1. : scare quotes are POV, not OR, by nature. They lend undue weight or undue questioning to a phrase that may not be implied. {{Sonia|ping|enlist}} 10:31, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who do I speak to if I want a second pair of eyes to look over things? There's an IP user who has been making sloppy and non-encyclopaedic contributions ([3], [4]) and has resorted to insults and spam links ([5]). I've used Twinkle to revert and to warn the user; but I would like to know if my response has be the right one. •• Fly by Night (talk) 10:41, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fly By Night,

WP:RS requirements. Educate the editor... ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 13:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I did assume good faith ([6]) until s/he just got silly and wrote "P.S whoever keeps editing this page, please stop as you obviously dont know your head from your elbow" ([7]). •• Fly by Night (talk) 14:14, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still, agf... Uncivil yes, vandalism no... ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 15:09, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Broadly agree with Wifione.
  manual of style. TFOWR 15:20, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Okay, I'll give that a try... Thanks TFOWR! •• Fly by Night (talk) 15:35, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  No worries! And that was perfect, by the way. TFOWR 15:52, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wan't to delete the page created by me....

Srijit Banerjee/

Please tell me steps to delete it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srijit92 (talk • contribs) 10:45, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tag it with {{

db-author}}, and an administrator will help you delete it. Kayau Voting IS evil 10:52, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I have deleted it, and I have also deleted

Bencherlite^Talk 10:54, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

The article for Béla Bartók has a link near the top of the page to a disambiguation page for other uses of Bartok, but clicking on this takes you straight back to Béla Bartók. My knowledge of Wiki-code is nowhere near up to fixing it; anyone able to take a look? SixBellsChime (talk) 12:22, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 fixed, thank you. That redirect has been a redirect since 2006, the page that was meant to be linked to was Bartok (disambiguation). Good spotting. Regards, {{Sonia|ping|enlist}} 12:29, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is the most recent edit on the page EDL vandalism so I know if i'm correctly or incorrectly warning the user for vandalism?,Gobbleswoggler (talk) 12:52, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No. Not vandalism. Edit issue. Disambig pages are not expected to become edit issues like that any which way, so undo the change if you like, but better, discuss on the talk page. By the way, next time, leave a diff when posting here. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ _―Œ ^{♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣} 13:34, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My draft in the userspace is ready BUT when I clicked the move tab the page still says "work in progress".The material has been edited by another and it is accurate.Tonyremo (talk) 14:37, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You need to remove {{Userspace draft}} yourself; moving the page does not automatically remove the template. You did use the correct procedure for moving the article to the mainspace, and I will remove the template for you. --Dylan620 (contribs, logs) 14:42, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does peaking at #1 on a

Please see

verifiable in already published material.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:20, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

No, it shouldn't repeat like that. I can be called more than once but the full cite doesn't need to be repeated. See my recent edit. Dismas|^(talk) 17:34, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why do people in Wikipedia fight over the Gaza flotilla and other issues. I am shocked to find that Mr. Lindholm is listed as the ambassador from Finland. Maija Lähteenmäki has been the ambassador for six months. How do we fix things like this instead of fighting over goofy things? Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 18:22, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the first question, Wikipedia does not exist independent of the world. It exists in the world, and people that come here carry their conflicts here as well. You and I are not going to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict, so we ALSO are not going to be able to solve it on Wikipedia, vis-a-vis edit wars. The best we can do is to limit the damage the conflict causes to normal editing, but the conflict itself still exists. For the second question,

WP:SOFIXIT is the answer. There are lots of articles which are outdated because no one fixed it. If you find something that needs fixing, the solution is to fix it yourself. It takes more time to complain about other people not fixing it than to just make it right. --Jayron32 18:43, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I did fix it! And I have several more fixes that I am saving for the Dramaout! Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 19:38, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the ambassdor at

List of Ambassadors from Finland, but I wouldn't be surprised if other ambassadors there are out of date. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:43, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

About the content dispute issues, see the links under

blocked. --Teratornis (talk) 00:46, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

It's me again,I keep seeing these signs over the article that I wrote /and was improved by others...etc./thanks! What do I have to do to improve it further?Or is anybody better suited for it? Kind regards.Aristiderazu (talk) 20:23, 26 June 2010 (UTC) Aristiderazu[reply]

I've replied on the article talk page - I saw your question there before I saw it here. -- John of Reading (talk) 21:52, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Despite all the improvements,

original research tag. Would anyone like to add a prod/afd tag? -- John of Reading (talk) 07:41, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Well ,now the article about Aristide Razu looks good.Thanks!Aristiderazu (talk) 20:09, 28 June 2010 (UTC) Aristiderazu.[reply]

I even found a couple of references to

reliable sources - notice that you can click on them to see small extracts from books that back up some of the facts in the article. You could have a go at finding sources for the rest of the article - you will do it better than I can because they probably won't be in English. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:19, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

or http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=123060&st=25 Aristiderazu (talk) 23:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC) Aristiderazu.[reply]

Hi,

I wrote another article about my gg grandmother "Zoe Mandrea born Balcescu" So shoot what are the problems with this one. Any suggestion is wellcomed. Kind regards, Aristiderazu (talk) 20:26, 26 June 2010 (UTC) Aristiderazu[reply]

Did you read the templates left at the article? They tell you what is wrong. The major problems that I can see are:

1. The article lacks proper
   verify
   the information in the article.
2. The article does not conform to
   sections
   .
3. The article does not make proper use of English grammar and is not particularly well written.

Of these three, only the first is a major problem.

sources you used to write the article, other people cannot easily make corrections unless the also have access to those same sources. So, if you have to fix something, I would highly recommend you provide the source material you used to write the article. --Jayron32 20:56, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

I've added a "notability" tag to

references. Are there books about her? -- John of Reading (talk) 22:09, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

at1.I did say about the book wriiten by my gg grandmother Zoe Mandrea ,"Icoane Din Trecut" 3.Well if someoneelse wishes to better write it ,fine by me. 2.Ok. I'll send birth certificates ,to Wikipedia, etc.To which address?3'.I did put the grave stone in the article ,thought the photo is a document for both "Aristide Razu" article and "Zoe Mandrea".Aristiderazu (talk) 22:03, 27 June 2010 (UTC) Aristiderazu[reply]

I read through the article, and I can't see why she would be notable as Wikipedia defines it

here. Writing the book in itself would not make her notable - unless the book was widely regarded as being notable in itself (see Wikipedia:Notability (books)) - which I can see no evidence for. As for the birth certificate, etc, this would prove that she was born - but no one is disputing that! The main problem is that she does not appear to be notable from Wikipedia's criteria -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:16, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Only that she was the nice of Nicolae Balcescu by his father Barbu Balcescu and she has founded the "Societatea Femeia Romana" when there was trouble with the Apponyi Law in Transilvania.Not much.And her husband Nicolae Mandre was the founder of "Junimea".Ok I understand that on the larger scale these may not be of relevant to the World.89.114.127.23 (talk) 12:29, 28 June 2010 (UTC) Aristiderazu.In the end they are just "wuoords!".Aristiderazu (talk) 19:48, 28 June 2010 (UTC)Aristiderazu,[reply]

Yet, Iuliu Maniu is of importance ,Ion Antonescu is of importance(!?)Good thing you don't have an article about "Bizu" Cantacuzino.No offense.Aristiderazu (talk) 19:48, 28 June 2010 (UTC)Aristiderazu.[reply]

..............

May I ask why the article was completely removed?I gave it a search and it has vanished?Is it for my own safety?Or simply because it was of no importance.I would appreciate an honest answer.Aristiderazu (talk) 22:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC) Aristiderazu[reply]