I have tried to make minor grammatical and spelling edits as I find them, persons who are obviously ignorant of English usage keep removing them. I shall no longer waste my time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zarcillo (talk • contribs) 15:45, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry you feel that way. Having checked, I can't actually see any recent instance where your edits have been reverted, though - yours are the last edits to Tajikistan, and are still in situ. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:48, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit you removed a space after the word "the", reverting your own previous edit, but I have put the space back in again for you. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@

bypass your cache to see the current version. If that doesn't work then please give an example. Your edits can be seen at Special:Contributions/Zarcillo. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:08, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

I would like to add some information about technology adoption to Wikipedia...how do I do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lori McCrae (talk • contribs) 16:12, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

first you find

be prepared for other editors to adopt, move, rewrite, remove your content as they assess it against existing content and their reliable sources. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:28, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

I am trying to add reference supporting the information I have edited. But red letters are appearing instead of the references being accepted. Why — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gorri (talk • contribs) 17:03, 26 February 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

I have moved your question to the foot of the page (which is where new topics go), added a section heading, & signed it for you. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:12, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Each of the red error messages has a blue link at the end of the message to the relevant specific help page. If you read those, they will tell you what you did wrong. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:15, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

How do I change the thumbnail photo on the Pete Pirsch wikipedia page?

Lcmueller (talk) 17:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• If you want to upload an image from your computer for use in an article, you must determine the proper license of the image (or whether it is in the public domain). If you know the image is public domain or copyrighted but under a suitable
  file upload wizard for more information. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy
  .
• If you want to add an image that has already been uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, add [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our
  picture tutorial for more information. I hope this helps.--ukexpat (talk) 17:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Returning to a previous point made here, I contacted Toyota about the photograph of Ohno, but they didn’t seem to be interested in donating it. On the other hand I found a photo of him here: http://www.nwlean.net/leandefs.htmLbertolotti (talk) 17:52, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the image is still likely copyright, but since the subject is dead, Wikipedia (but not Commons) can make a

WP:FAIR use claim. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:39, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

It's Talk:Memorial Medical Center and Hurricane Katrina, I added a reflist, previewed, and clicked the button to go up to the reference. Samwalton9 (talk) 18:19, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

^smart one! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 18:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I made an edit at Talk:Memorial Medical Center and Hurricane Katrina that hopefully will get rid of the red error message the next time the RMCD bot runs. EdJohnston (talk) 18:31, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I at first thought it didn't work, and attempted to add noinclude tags, but yeah, I would have to wait for the bot to manually refresh (I forgot, these are not direct tranclusions [and now I know or suspect how Sam found this, by just opening up Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions and searched for the ref tags]). Thanks all!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:40, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My fix doesn't work. Will leave a note for User:Wbm1058 the author of the bot, to see if he understands it. EdJohnston (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@EdJohnston: Ah, well the attempt is appreciated. Since /Current discussions is transcluded at the WP:RM main page, I'll just go add noinclude tags around the ref's there.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:08, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, I think it did work. When I search the current discussion page for ref tags I find them in that discussion in noinclude tags, so then I backtracked and saw you did not edit that page but the discussion page, which means the bot successfully incorproated your edits on its run. So, why is the error tag still showing? Lo and behold, when I search current discussions I find that there is a second discussion with a ref tag (conspiring to confound us). Let's see if noincluding that gets rid of the error.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:14, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, fixed. Thanks again.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(←) The bot doesn't use transclusion to create the current discussions list, so hiding with noinclude tags won't work. You can either pull the {{Reflist-talk}} inside the proposer's signature, and thus include the refs on the RM/CD page, or pull the citations outside the proposer's signature, so that they are an additional comment by the proposer in support. I think the second option is preferable, so I'll try that. Wbm1058 (talk) 20:37, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Wbm1058: Because /current discussions is transcluded into WP:RM, the noinclude tags will not affect what one sees if viewing /current discussions directly, but it will if viewing WP:RM, which is all we really care about, yes? And it actually did fix that display.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:13, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, I think you're right. Of course we may need to null edit/purge the page to make sure that the latest version is transcluded. Sigh, it's complicated. Wbm1058 (talk) 21:22, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is. Thanks for taking over and maintaining the bot. The extra work needed to run RM before it and when it was down was really complicated.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:36, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We want to create a company page showing history, facts and manufacturing locations. Can this be done by us without falling into Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.150.148.49 (talk) 19:05, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you created it directly you will likely be in violation of our recommended procedures, see

WP:RA processes. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom

Separately from the COI issue, please be aware that all the information in the article should come from reliable published sources independent of the subject. Information which is not sourced, or only from sources connected with the company, should not be put in the article, and may be removed. --ColinFine (talk) 00:14, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am making edits to the

Thanks.

--Tkohlhepp (talk) 20:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To rename a page, you need to move it. See

WP:MOVE for details. RudolfRed (talk) 20:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Please note that you will not be able to move any pages until your account is

common names section of article titling policy. It appears to me based upon a quick search of Google Books that the common name is "...Company", rather than "...Group". See also Wikipedia:Official names.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:27, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Something broke? I repeatedly get "There was an error while searching: Timeout at the HTTP-request." Timelezz (talk) 21:15, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Search sometimes breaks, for example due to overloaded servers. It currently works for me. If it's still broken for you then post an example search which gives the error. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:11, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some IP's (in a range that is blocked) warned me on my Talk page about a user that allegedly was previously "lying" and "discrediting" other users. The user that was under question, removed the info from my talk page. But I presume that it is my talk page and no one else is removing text. While I do not support what the IP's wrote (meaning, that I did not even considered it interesting enough to start an inquiry) I consider it as just a point of view. But the user that is bespoken of, argues it is a personal attack and requests me coercively to remove the text. I would like to know whether someone is free to remove personal attack from other's Talk page. And whether I need to give in to the request. Or what other road would be best to follow. I do not like to hear bad talk about other users, but I can imagine cases where it is desirable that users inform about other users. And I like to retain a level of freedom of speech as well. I would like to hear some advises on this one. Kind regards, Timelezz (talk) 21:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

WP:USERTALKBLOG help at all? --ColinFine (talk) 00:17, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

request for comment on a user. Then everything is open and transparent. DES ^(talk) 00:46, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you! What is a personal attack is of course a gray area. I've replied to take it on with a moderator who now removed/moderated several sections in the thread. I'll respect the moderator's decision. I think that is in line with

WP:USERTALKBLOG. I thank you for the support to not allow other users to remove information from my talk page, and not accept every request for removal, even though I was accussed of being a colloborator. I'm grateful to have this heard from you guys. Kind regards , Timelezz (talk) 11:42, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

@DES: Would you please review the ANI report and reconsider your advice above. This case involves an IP hopper who has spent a couple of months posting outrageous attacks on an editor (outrageous in that they repeatedly attack the integrity of the editor, while offering nothing but bluster as substantiation). Timelezz is still not understanding what is appropriate for a user talk page, and they are interpreting your generic remarks as at least a partial vindication of their position. Johnuniq (talk) 01:27, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Then I guess you have not understood well how Wikipedia works. Judgement of inappropriate language is to be based on what is written, not arbitrarily on who is the sender. And on that note, I'll leave this discussion to a rest. Once again, thanks to all great remarks! Kind regards, Timelezz (talk) 21:32, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote an article that was resubmitted to me for editing. I edited it an resubmitted it and now have no idea where it is or what the status of the article is. Please help me.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kslavick (talk • contribs) 21:34, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect you are referring to the page Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/iMedRIS Data Corporation. According to the info at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Submissions, the whole articles for creation process is highly backlogged right now. -- Toshio Yamaguchi 21:45, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) Hi Kslavick. You will see a link for "contributions" at the top of every page. If you clicked on that it would have shown you a log of your edits and to what pages, and you would thereby have found (<e/c snip>) the page Toshio Yamaguchi refers you to. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:49, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Though Toshio pointed out that the AFC process is backlogged, he didn't mention to you that your draft is not in the review queue. Your article had been reviewed & declined, but you deleted the feedback template. I have added it back in for you, and that template gives a button for you to resubmit when you are ready. Your draft was, however, nowhere near ready to be resubmitted. I have put a few useful links for you on your user talk page. You need to read them, & probably a number of further links from those pages. Looking at your draft again, I see that Fuhghettaboutit has done a lot of work on it and resolved a number of the problems. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Click "Contributions" at the top right to see your edits. In [1] you removed {{AFC submission|...}}. This removed the box with the link you need to resubmit the article. An editor has restored the box so you can resubmit when you are ready. Another has added {{reflist}} so your references are displayed. I suspect that originally you clicked "Submit your draft when you are ready for it to be reviewed!" before having saved the draft. This meant your original draft was lost. Don't click any submission link when you are previewing, only when you are viewing a saved page. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:06, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I did a bit of cleaning up of the entry on Eleonora Abbagnato which had some problems with English usage. I also moved the information about her marriage into a separate paragraph from the rest of the entry which focused on her professional career. Somehow, this created a large blank space between these final two paragraphs and I can't seem to make it go away. Can you fix it please?

Thanks so much in advance

Mariacate (talk) 21:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was caused by the template {{

-}} being in between the paragraphs. I have fixed it. - Purplewowies (talk) 21:43, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

[1] ^[2]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.58.161.2 (talk • contribs) 22:07, 26 February 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

We base article content on the

been published in reliable sources with a reputation for fact checking and accuracy. If you have some of those, please bring your suggestions and sources to the Talk:Luca Valerio page. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 00:19, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

(ec) The article's talk page is the best place to bring up suggestions like this - unless you would like to try improving the article yourself. (Please be aware that Wikipedia itself, in any language, is not regarded as a reliable source, and may not be used as a reference). --ColinFine (talk) 00:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]