Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2012 December 13

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

December 13

Top Ten pages within a category

Hi Guys,

i have created a media wiki and used categorization to organize it. the front page is broken into four rows looking like this

First Heading First heading category containing pages relevant to that heading using the categorization syntax catagory

when you click on each of these four rows it takes you to the catagory you placed your wiki into, so every page in my wiki is catogised. now on the front page i have the top ten most poplular pages, however i want implement this within the catagories, but when i use the same syntax, it doesnt work or pulls the top then from the whole wiki rather than the catagory

also at the bottom is the link to the popular pages, however these are all the pages on the wiki using <TopTenPages offset=1/> the offset is the main page

what i would like to do is have each of these four rows containing the popular pages within that category. I have looked everywhere but cant find any syntax that will allow me to use popular pages within another if that makes sense?

This is the help page for Wikipedia, not for the Mediawiki software. I suggest you look at m:Project:Help. --ColinFine (talk) 00:03, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Every time I try to start a wikipedia page for my organization - it gets deleted.

With the main complaint being that the organization doesn't exist. We're not the goddamn illuminati. We're Inter Species Wrestling. A pro wrestling organization out of Canada and the US, that not only entertains many - but has raised thousands of dollars for various charities.

www.interspecieswrestling.com www.youtube.com/interspecies

Is that not proof enough? What's going on here?

Mike Woods — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.115.182.204 (talk) 00:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

(For posterity, I'm assuming this is it.) Are you sure your organization meets Wikipedia's notability standards? Also – assuming Inter Species Wrestling is the page in question – it was deleted the first time as an administrator found it's content to be nonsense and it was deleted the second time as an administrator did not find it's content to be constructive and removed it as vandalism. Scarce2 (talk) 00:52, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

FWIW, Google News search for "interspecies wrestling" or "inter species wrestling" returns no relevant hits. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 20:03, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Uploading/Embedding educational videos on a Wikipedia Article

Hello, I was hoping somebody could help me work out how to upload and embed a video on an existing Wikipedia page? Thank you very much in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arsalan daudi (talk • contribs) 00:26, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

See WP:CMF#Video for information on acceptable videos, licenses, and how to embed them. Scarce2 (talk) 00:37, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Adding categories to image files

I'm not sure if I should, (or know how to) add a category to an image file. I was looking for a possible image for an article, and found possibilities in the category: howdah. Then I tried a google image search which turned up a very interesting one —from WP— which is not included in the media howdah category. Perhaps adding this image to the category is something to be left to somebody with more experience in this area. (?)

Image = File:Kublai at four elephants.png

Category = :Category:Howdah

~Thanks, E:74.60.29.141 (talk) 00:48, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no Category:Howdah. If you mean commons:Category:Howdah then that's a category at Wikimedia Commons and File:Kublai at four elephants.png is hosted at the English Wikipedia so the category cannot be added (unless the image is moved to Commons as it probably should). See Help:Category for how to add categories. And see the source of my post for how to link files and categories by putting a colon in front. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:56, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. The WP vs. Commons issue still gets me stymied at times. So I gather that WP categories are separate from Commons categories, etc. What I'm trying to accomplish is to have that file be included when a user links to: "...Commons has media related to this subject" - which means the file would need to be copied from WP to Commons, then have category:howdah assigned. ~E:modified:74.60.29.141 (talk) 22:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it would need to be moved to Commons. I don't work with that. Category:Copy to Wikimedia Commons (bot-assessed) and Category:Move to Commons Priority Candidates have respectively 313,047 and 174,659 files. It may take a long time before a mover reviews it. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:23, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Nuclear Proliferation Treaty

there is a nonsensical statement in the first sentence of the "Dual Use Technology" Heading of this article? Nuclear proliferation#Dual use technology— Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.127.96.161 (talk) 01:31, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Puerile vandalism reverted by this edit.--ukexpat (talk) 02:07, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Team Unicorn is real do NOT delete them

Please leave the Team Unicorn page up and leave them alone. The group is a real thing, they are currently developing a television series and have created several videos online in addition to making numerous television and public appearances. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.209.148 (talk) 02:32, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Being real is not sufficient. Subjects must be notable, as demonstrated through sources. See the general notability guideline criteria.--xanchester (t) 02:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

You are also welcome to contribute over at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Team_Unicorn_(2nd_nomination). However, Xanchester is correct about the basis of what articles should not be deleted. You can also learn more about the process over at WP:AFD Tiggerjay (talk) 07:32, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Ordering of disambiguation pages

When creating or editing a disambiguation page, what guideline should be followed for the ordering of the target pages? Weihang7 (talk) 04:17, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

This is covered in the Manual of Style. See MOS:DABORDER RudolfRed (talk) 04:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

How to really filter transclusions out of "what links here"

Scenario:

• Articles A and B transclude navbox N, which has links in it to articles A and B.
• Articles E and F have links to article A.
• I want to find articles that link to A, but ignore those articles that only link to A via their transclusion of navbox N. i.e. I want the search to find only articles E and F.
• If I go to page A and click on What links here in the toolbox (which links to Special:WhatLinksHere/A, it shows me A, B, E, and F, even if I click on the Hide transclusions option.

How can I accomplish this? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 05:35, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

There is no such feature but others (including me) have suggested it. See for example Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2009 September 2#What Links here - filter problem? and Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 81#"What links here" problem. There are also several bugzilla requests about it. PrimeHunter (talk) 06:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

PLEASE HELP!

Hello friends. I am having MMMMMUUUUUCCCCCHHHHH trouble using Wikipedia! I would like to be (a):

• Autopatrolled
• Autocomfirmed (I am autocomfirmed though)
• Reviewer
• Rollbacker

PLEASE help me with these above. Regards. (Help desk talkback please.) CURTAINTOAD! ^TALK! 08:41, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

WP:PERM is the place to request these additional permissions (I'd recommend a slightly more sober statement there, though...). Yunshui 雲‍水 08:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Addendum: I've just checked, and you're waaay short of the requirements for autopatrolled and rollback (not sure about the reviewer right; it's not one I hand out, but I suspect you won't get that at the moment either). To qualify for these rights, do the following:

• For Rollback: Make around 50-100 good vandalism reverts using Twinkle (which I see you have installed). Make some good faith reverts as well, to show that you can tell the difference. Warn those you revert appropriately. (This essay may help.)
• For Autopatrolled: Create another 48 articles, minimum, with sufficient sourcing to meet WP:N, and no copyright issues. (This essay may help.)

I really wouldn't bother applying until you meet these goals. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:48, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for that; but how do I "revert a good faith edit"? CURTAINTOAD! ^TALK! 08:54, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Twinkle/doc#Revert and rollback. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:57, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Does another user know about the reviewer right? Thanks, CURTAINTOAD! ^TALK! 09:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reviewer#Becoming a reviewer - Purplewowies (talk) 09:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

You aren't required to use Twinkle. I did all my RVs manually. - Purplewowies (talk) 09:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your enthusiasm to help out around here! Something else to keep in mind, all of these specific systems have been put into place to help protect the integrity of Wikipedia from both well meaning editors (such as yourself) from making common newbie mistakes. There are many policies and guides here, and it is somewhat impractical to learn all of them in advance, so most of us invariably learn the hard way. So there are some safeguards in place, such as partolled pages and the rollback settings. In truth, you can still do everything you want to do without those specific permission - you can create pages, and undo vandalism edits (which is the summation of the access you are looking for).

The only difference is that reverting vandalism take a bit more effort; but with Twinkle it is almost single click so there is little difference between having and not having the permissions (although I believe there is a bit of a database/performance benefit to the rollback user method, but we are not supposed to worry about performance. Autopatrolled just means that you have written enough that we intrinsically trust your articles. This doesn't mean you cannot create article - you can do that at any time, and they will show up on Wikipedia immediately as long as you are autoconfirmed (which you are). The difference is simply that since you are not auto patrolled, your articles while more likely be reviewed faster and with a ounce of more caution to ensure it meets guidenlines, which are outlined at WP:YFA...

Both of those points of access are trust based - and those basically only come with time and experience where other editors can see that you can be trusted with these tools because you have been shown to know the policies as it relates to article creation (which can be tricker than you might assume) and reverting vandalism. All the best to you! Tiggerjay (talk) 12:16, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Help for grammar

Hi, how can I arrange to get help for grammar, style, and spelling from a native speaking English Wiki? Because the existing and actual published article Types of capacitor contains a lot of discrepancies, I have revised and new written the complete theme which can be find under my user page: User:Elcap/Types of capacitor. May be may translation sounds a little bit German.

Thanks so much for helping. --Elcap (talk) 09:09, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for wanting to help! You can feel free to directly edit any article for grammar, style and spelling as you feel is appropriate. Please remember to include appropriate edit summaries. Also understand that while there are grammatical and spelling differences between American English and British English (and other variations), there is no specific preference for any style, and you shouldn't arbitrary change an article from one style to another. I would also suggest you read and review Basic Copyediting and Manual of Style. Also understand WP:BOLD which is a common method of editing, where you can feel free to edit any page, and if someone disagrees with your changes they can revert/remove them - instead of readding them again, please discuss it on the article talk page. If you have more questions, please ask! Tiggerjay (talk) 13:03, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I would reiterate Tiggerjay's encouragement to be bold. Infelicities of grammar or style can easily be corrected by later editors. If you are concerned, you can add a notice {{Copy edit}} at the top, to draw people's attention to the issue. Tiggerjay, Elcap didn't say anything about US vs UK style, but just about English style in general. --ColinFine (talk) 13:29, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Mohamed El Naschie

The content of this article is highly misleading and almost defamatory. This is CV of a person and not the opinion who wish the person ill and who are in unfair competition with him in the Court of Justice. For instance, the person concerned was not represented by any lawyer in Court while Nature-Macmillan the multi-national employed an army of solicitors and paid 5 million pounds to defend the non-defensible. In addition the case is still in the Court namely the Court of Appeal after a controversial initial judgement reminiscent of Galileo's trial. How come that your article gives the impression as if it was a case brought against the person and not the other way round. All of us scientists and engineers are taken aback that uneducated so-called science and engineering bloggers who are nothing but out of job journalists can tell the specialist what and what not they should write and think. Everyone knows that there is a plagiarism behind the trial and it was a vendetta against El Naschie conducted by financially strong media. Does Wikipedia as a highly used and mostly trusted Internet Encyclopedia want to take sides in such filthy fights. El Naschie has declined an offer by Nature to settle out of Court and he has papers to support their offer and his declination. Writing things about people and damaging their professional reputation without any information that is substantiated lacks in professionalism and undermines Wikipedia's reputation. You say encyclopedia content must be verifiable. Have you verified the information you got about Prof. Mohamed El Naschie? Saying he does not have a Doctorate is pathetic. I trust it is best not to follow what bloggers say because they are not a reliable source of any information. Many of them are hired to defame for money for instance the criminal who runs El naschiewatch and his name is Jason and he is a criminal. It is best to stick to facts and the facts are definitely not contained in what bloggers write. You must have reliable sources. Mohamed El Naschie has been subjected to an incredible vicious campaign to undermine his scientific findings. You even mention his thesis cannot be found? How little do you know. His thesis is there and he has a Doctorate and he had a full professorship. Please please before writing check your sources and verify the information. For instance he just made an historic announcement in Shanghai and Alexandria about an extension and correction of Einstein's famous theory on Relativity. Adhamwaleed (talk) 12:02, 13 December 2012 (UTC) M. Abdel-Hamid

Thank you for your feedback on Mohamed El Naschie - we need people who are well informed to contribute to our articles, and you can help out! We need information which is encyclopedic, verifiable through reliable sources (not original research, as you have provided above) and written from a neutral point of view (unbiased) -- those are the starting points. We also ask people to contribute who don't have a conflict of interest in the subject, such as personal connection (good or bad) with the subject. A great place to start would be to read WP:BLP which relates directly to biographies of living person's which Mohamed El Naschie would be considered. Please let me know if you have any other questions. Tiggerjay (talk) 12:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

You write, of the libel case, "your article gives the impression as if it was a case brought against the person and not the other way round". In fact the article is perfectly clear about this. It says "El Naschie disputed these allegations and sued Nature for libel."

The statements in the article are supported by the references given. For example, you write "You even mention his thesis cannot be found? How little do you know." Well, we do know – the second reference in the article is to the British Library site, which states "The reason given by the institution is: Institution have been unable to locate thesis in their stock." Maproom (talk) 12:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

It appears that User:Adhamwaleed is (or purports to be) Mohamed El Naschie. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:50, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

wikitable sortable

I want a column so small as possible. How can I get the <>-sort icon under the "year" word?. <br/> or width="10" don't do it and "Y." isn't optimal.

Year
1984

--Best regards, Keysanger (what?) 12:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

This:

 {| class="wikitable sortable"
 |-
 !style="background-position:center 80%;padding-right:0px;padding-bottom:30%;" width="10"|Year<br/>
 |-
 | 1984
 |}

seems to do it, but I don't know how robust it will be if the user changes font size or the window size. Generally speaking, you should not be trying to interfere with the layout like that, for just that reason.

Year
1984

--ColinFine (talk) 13:55, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Colin and --Best regards, Keysanger (what?) 10:10, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

How to fix my article.

I recently created an article on Kanti Children's Hospital but there were some problems and can't seem to be able to understand the problem or the mail from the editor. Ho can i fix the issues in my article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiragRajk (talk • contribs) 14:30, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm confused myself about why MadmanBot tagged that article as an internal copy; MadmanBot is an automated program meant to catch when people copy the text from one Wikipedia article to a new article under a different title, but it doesn't appear that you did that. Someone should leave a note for the bot op to see what happened here. I might just do so, inviting them to comment. --Jayron32 14:42, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Another editor boldly removed the warning on the page, you should be good to go! Tiggerjay (talk) 03:06, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Gator Bowl Hall of Fame Inductees/ omission

Charles R Hilty Sr. was inducted into the Gator Bowl Hall of Fame in 1989. He was the founder of the Gator Bowl Game. He was inducted posthumously. The honor was received by his son, Charles R Hilty, Jr. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.177.54.36 (talk) 16:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Gator Bowl#History says he first conceived of the event but do you have a published reliable source that he should be listed at Gator Bowl#Gator Bowl Hall of Fame? He is not listed at the official site: http://www.gatorbowl.com/?page_id=615#1989. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:43, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

in the news image

Hello, recently why Wikipedia doesn't display image on In The News section of its main page? is wikipedia policy changed never to display image on in the news section at all? Puramyun31 (talk) 16:31, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I think it varies, depending on the news items and the available space. Sometimes the news section has an image; sometimes it doesn't. The Anonymouse (talk • contribs) 16:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

But as I know in the news images was always displayed on main page until October 2012. Puramyun31 (talk) 16:49, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Whether there is an image depends on many things - if there is one appropriate to the subject and appropriately licensed, for example. I can recall many occasions since I have started when there has been no image on ITN. Mdann52 (talk) 16:53, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

A policy change has resulted in more time without an image. Wikipedia:In the news#Procedural says: "A freely licensed image to accompany the item may be suggested. Ideally this image should be covering the top news item. If there is no suitable image available for the top item a relevant image for an item further down the list should be used instead. If the image is of a living person it must only be used for the top item." The restriction for living people was decided at Wikipedia talk:In the news/Archive 42#Dislocated ITN images. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:57, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

However see this link. A user (WaltCip) said, "we shouldn't have images on the front page to begin with, except for the featured picture." does that mean any in the news images will never be allowed at all? Puramyun31 (talk) 07:28, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

That was just the opinion of one editor. It's unlikely to gain consensus. People like images to break up texts. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:37, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I created a page

I created and saved my page, but when I search for it it doesn't show up. Attila Kovacs — Preceding unsigned comment added by Attilako (talk • contribs) 17:05, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Do you mean your user page at User:Attilako, also duplicated on your talk page at User talk:Attilako?--ukexpat (talk) 17:25, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

You created a user page for yourself: User:Attilako. It does not show up in search because it is not a Wikipedia article. Please do not try to create an article about yourself; any such article is likely to be deleted. Instead, read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Notability. Maproom (talk) 17:30, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

There is a lot of concerns with your posting, and the reasons given my Maproom are correct as to why it will not show up and as to the issues with creating the article in the first place. Please checkout WP:YFA for information on creating your first article on wikipedia. Also WP:BLP which is about creating Biographies of Living Persons. Your posting on your userpage will likely be deleted by an administrator because it isn't the correct place to have that information. You are free to create a page over at User:Attilako/Sandbox where you can test and play with creating an article, and then as you learn about the process you can develop it there. It will not be found by google nor the search box on wikipedia, but it is a good place to experiment and learn... Once you feel your article is ready in your sandbox and it meets the directions/guidelines provided in FYA and BLP, then feel free to checkout Move Request as a way to open a discussion about moving your page into the main space where it will be found by both google and wikipedia search. Just be careful about moving it too quickly, otherwise it will likely be deleted again. If you need help, let me know Tiggerjay (talk) 17:47, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Henry M. Morris has weird citation at top

Henry Madison Morris (October 6, 1918 – February 25, 2006) was an American young earth creationist and Christian apologist. He was one of the founders of the Creation Research Society and the Institute for Creation Research. He is considered by many to be "the father of modern creation science."[1] He wrote numerous creationist and devotional books, and made regular television and radio appearances.try from you[so]

what is this try from you citation and can you remove it please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.34.33 (talk) 17:57, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't see this text in the article. I thought it would be vandalism, since removed, but I cannot see any evidence of it in the article's history either. I think it must be in your browser. Do you still see it? If so, do you see it after a reload (CTRL+F5 on most browsers)? --ColinFine (talk) 18:19, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

It appears to have been vandalism at {{Citation needed (lead)}} that resulted in the problem. The vandalism has been corrected. Monty₈₄₅ 20:14, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Adding a Subcategory Page

I'd like to add a subcategory for the Barons Latimer to the category page for Barons in the Peerage of England [1], but don't know how to create the subcategory page or add the names of the Latimer barons to it. Help with this would be much appreciated. NinaGreen (talk) 18:20, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Change the Category entry in any of the articles from eg [[Category:Barons in the Peerage of England]] to [[Category:Barons Latimer]] (or whatever name you think is appropriate. Then go to that new category, by picking it from the article, and Edit the category to add its own [[Category:Barons in the Peerage of England]]. By putting it in a category, you make it a subcategory. --ColinFine (talk) 18:24, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll give it a try! NinaGreen (talk) 19:19, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I created the subcategory page at [2]. It didn't show up on the main category page Category:Barons in the Peerage of England, but I read that sometimes such changes don't show up for a while, sometimes weeks. It was suggested that adding a null edit might speed up the process, but rather than that, I'm wondering whether I should add the other Barons Latimer to the subcategory page. I assume I'd do this by going to the articles for those other barons and changing the category Category:Barons in the Peerage of England to the subcategory page I created Barons Latimer.

Alternatively, perhaps I created the subcategory page incorrectly, and that's why it's not showing up on the main category page? NinaGreen (talk) 19:38, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

You did it correctly from what I can see. Adding the category to other applicable pages would be fine. Thanks for the contribution! Dismas|^(talk) 19:42, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for checking that. I've added the other barons to the subcategory page, which still hasn't shown up on the main category page, but I'll put it on my watchlist and give it some time. NinaGreen (talk) 20:06, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it has. But you had it under the Bs when it should have been under the Ls. I've fixed it. Though, are all the Barons Latimer supposed to fall under the Ls when their last name doesn't start with L? I know next to nothing about British peerage, so I'll leave that for someone else to figure out. Dismas|^(talk) 20:14, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again. It should be right for the Barons Latimer to be under the Ls; the titles and family surnames don't always match. NinaGreen (talk) 20:37, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Links are not Spam

I am working on linking the episodes of the fourth and fifth seasons of Mad Men to posts made on Kritik, the official weblog of the Unit for Criticism & Interpretive Theory, a recognized institute for cultural studies at the University of Illinois. I am placing a note regarding the validity of these links on the Talk pages of the episodes. However, I received a warning from Wikipedia about posting links too rapidly. It warned me that if I will proceed, there is a risk that the links would be considered spam and the website will be blacklisted from Wikipedia. I will continue posting the links because I have consulted the policies and am not spamming. Please feel free to review the content and to contact me if there is any perceived problem. 192.17.134.9 (talk) 19:16, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

As far as I understand it, that message is automatic whenever someone adds the same or similar links in quick succession to several articles. There may not be a problem with the links, I don't know I haven't looked at them, but I hope that helps explain the warning. Dismas|^(talk) 19:35, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

If the site is reliable (in the way that most blogs are not), you may indeed use it as a reference. That does not mean that it is necessarily appropriate for an external link: the criteria for using these are more restrictive than many people realise: see WP:EL. --ColinFine (talk) 23:13, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

delete a wrong page

I have today, as user Rastaman1892, created the page "Jan Blommaert" on Wikipedia. However, and in error, I had also created "Jan blommaert" with minor b. The latter one should be deleted, please, since the name is incorrect, should be with capital B. Both pages contain exactly the same information.

Cheers, and thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rastaman1892 (talk • contribs) 20:38, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I have requested speedy deletion of the page per your request. Another editor placed a redirect in the mean time, but it really in an uncessary redirect. Tiggerjay (talk) 20:59, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Jan blommaert has been tagged for deletion per your request.--ukexpat (talk) 20:59, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

The page has now been deleted per your request Tiggerjay (talk) 03:04, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

How do I create a page?

How to create a new page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ssreddy37 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

See Your first article and I suggest that you use the articles for creation process.--ukexpat (talk) 21:00, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

(e/c) Welcome to wikipedia, please see WP:YFA for assistance with creating a page... Tiggerjay (talk) 21:01, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Okay to use this image

I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask this question, but is it okay for me to use the file I am using on my user talk page editnotice? Also, how does one link to an image without displaying it? I couldn't figure out how. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 21:32, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't see an image in your edit notice. To prevent display of an image but link instead, use the colon trick, [[:File:Example.jpg]] renders as File:Example.jpg. --ukexpat (talk) 22:05, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

OK I see it now - yes you can use it as it is not protected by copyright and I very much doubt that there is any trademark infringement issue. (IAAL, but not giving legal advice).--ukexpat (talk) 22:10, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for both answers. AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 22:39, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Biased editors keep deleting our page.

I am the President of the National Atheist Party. We are a validly existing 527 political organization under the IRS classification. We have chapters in every state. Every time we have tried to post a simple page referring to our existence, the entire page gets deleted by your editors. Is Wikipedia allowing religious bias to choose which articles to accept or reject? I don't see anyone deleting the Tea Party or Green Party pages. - Troy Boyle 74.136.3.143 (talk) 22:37, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

The article National Atheist Party has been deleted on three occasions, once at AFD and twice speedy deleted. It was first deleted at Articles for Deletion with the discussion here Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/National_Atheist_Party. Then deleted for "G4: Recreation of a page that was deleted per a deletion discussion" and then deleted for "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion: Multiple reasons: Speedy deletion criteria A7, G4, G12". Dates of deletion were: 30 August 2011, 28 October 2011, 21 February 2012. Reading the discussion at AFD you would need to show multiple independent sources that satisfy WP:RS in order to get this deletion overturned. Do you have such sources? RJFJR (talk) 22:54, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Further information: the original deletion by discussion in August 2011 objected the article was unsourced because the party was so new it was in the process of forming. If sources now exists that can meet WP:RS it would be possible to write an appropriate article but it should probably be started in a 'sandbox'. RJFJR (talk) 23:00, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

But it should not be created by you: see WP:COI, and WP:ORGFAQ. --ColinFine (talk) 23:15, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Don't blithely assume editors are deleting the page based on a religious bias. I have looked at the deletions and agree wholeheartedly with each one, on the grounds given for each one. I am also a strong atheist. More to the point, nothing that has gone on with respect to the deletion provides any basis for your assertion of bias. You know what Bertrand Russell would say about that, right?--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:18, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Looking at the most recent version of the deleted article, I can see why there was a problem. The bulk of the article was text copied and pasted from the NAP web site; the largest section was a copied FAQ. Most of the external links were to the NAP website and Facebook pages of various state chapters. News coverage appears limited to a handful blog posts. Looking around a bit more, it seems that there were fewer than a hundred attendees at their first 'convention' (a picnic in Chicago [3]), while their second convention had to be cancelled due to lack of funds and lack of interest: [4]. While I understand your frustration, please bear in mind that Wikipedia isn't intended to be an advertising or promotional venue to 'get the word out' for any cause, no matter how worthwhile. I'm afraid I don't see any evidence of particular bias against atheism-related topics on Wikipedia; please feel free to peruse our articles on American Atheists, Center for Inquiry, Reason Rally, Freedom From Religion Foundation, American Humanist Association, Secular Coalition for America, and many more. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 04:07, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I refer you to your own articles on "minor political parties" and "currently active political parties" in the United States. This is an Encyclopedia, is it not? Without including our party in those articles, and a main article of the party itself, your encyclopedia is inaccurate. I understand your criticism, however. I will assign a writer to more closely follow your guidelines, instead of "cutting and pasting." However, a "handful" of blog posts is woefully inaccurate since the formation and activities of this party have been reported on by NPR, Religion News, Washington Post, Swedish Television, the Huffington Post and others that would seem to meet the "noteworthiness" requirement. Also, to point out another fact, the Convention was delayed until March 9, 2013, due to a logistical problem in Boston. It was not cancelled due to a lack of funds. Some research you've done there. 74.136.3.143 (talk) 13:53, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

No, you should't be "assign[ing]" someone to write about you. Again, please read WP:COI and WP:ORGFAQ. If Wikipedia ought to have an article on your party according to Wikipedia's standards for inclusion (and simply existing isn't enough), then someone unconnected with the party will in due course write it. Bencherlite^Talk 14:01, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Regardless of where the NAP may have received coverage, the only sources actually presented in any version of the Wikipedia article were blog posts. Despite searching, I'm having trouble locating significant independent coverage from mainstream news outlets of any stripe. The Washington Post, Huffington Post, and Religion News (and some others) all ran the same Religion News Service column ([5]) by Kimberly Winston earlier this year, and I get the impression that that column may have led to one or two other interviews elsewhere, but beyond that I'm stymied. Other that confirming the fact of the NAP's existence and a basic statement of its goals, there just isn't a lot of commentary out there about NAP. Being forced to rely nearly exclusively on what the NAP has to say about itself makes it impossible to write a reliably sourced encyclopedia article from a proper neutral point of view: two absolute and non-negotiable requirements for Wikipedia articles.

On the topic of the convention's cancellation, I can only report on what NAP's president announced when he cancelled the 2012 convention, five or six weeks before it was scheduled to take place (my emphasis added):

...I won’t bore you with the long litany of reasons that this convention hasn’t come together. Suffice it to say that too many critical players have backed out of the event, and too few donations and sponsors have committed to supporting it. Whether that is our failure to market the event properly or we simply didn’t have enough seed money to insure its success is moot. The plain fact of the matter is that we have to cancel the event and spend more time and careful planning to make our 2013 convention a solid and better organized success...

The message appeared under the banner headline "President’s Address – NAPCON 2012 Cancellation". While it looks like NAP is planning to try to hold a convention next year (NAPCON 2013) – and I wish them the best of luck – I can't think of any way to describe NAPCON 2012 as anything but cancelled. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:30, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

ICM Partners

ICM Partners (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

i would like to add our new logo into our ICM Partners wiki page, but cannot figure out how. Can you help? I can't even figure out how to post the image here. Longboardsurfer (talk) 23:48, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I see you have uploaded File:ICM Partners Logo.jpg since posting here. I have fixed the display in ICM Partners. See the documentation at Template:Infobox company#Parameters explained. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:57, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

But bearing in mind that it is not "our ICM Partners wiki page" may save you some hassle in the long term. --ColinFine (talk) 16:39, 14 December 2012 (UTC)