Wikipedia:New contributors' help page/Archive/2013/April

April 1

Newbie confused about markup

Hi, I'm a new contributor to Wiki, still trying to write my first article. I need help in using the Wiki markup language - it's so simple it's confusing!

For instance. I want a bulleted list, for which I should place asterisks in front of each item with a space before the word: "* First item" But my list looks like this:

List of items *First item * Second item

• Third item.

The last is surrounded by a box with a dashed outline!

What's happening? I admit that I started my page by writing it in MS Word and then copied that text across to my user page. Is that likely to carry over unseen editing commands that are confusing the Wiki markup?

Help, please! John TapkaJohnD (talk) PS Here is my draft page [[1]]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by TapkaJohnD (talk • contribs) 10:14, 1 April 2013 (UTC) 

Those boxes are caused by leading spaces.

• First item

 *Second item

To indent you use leading colons  :*First item

• First item
• Second item

GB fan 10:25, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, GB fan. That removes the box, but I still can't get a bulleted list

For instance :*first *second

gets you just that.

This mark-up is pretty obscure, or is a version of HTLM? Where is there a teach-youself page on Wiki? The quick guide is prety inadaquate.

John TapkaJohnD (talk) 21:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

See WP:WIKIMARKUP.--ukexpat (talk) 01:44, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Markup like * and # (for lists) and : (for indent) only have effect at the beginning of a line. You have put your *first *second on the same line as what preceded, so they are not interpreted as wikimarkup. --ColinFine (talk) 10:06, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Thnaks, Colin! No why didn't I think of that? Because I'm a newbie and I can't find an instruction manual. Surely there is one? John — Preceding unsigned comment added by TapkaJohnD (talk • contribs) 19:13, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at Help:The Missing Manual.--ukexpat (talk) 00:50, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

My contribution in association with a local community.

Quite adapt at html and writing on social media site pages, thought I would extend our community on to Wikipedia.

Its not outside of my user base as yet so hopefully it doesn't get deleted or changed without understanding why. Tried to start it under its own title or give it a reference but that was deleted within minutes. A link or mention back would be appreciated where users could be looking for just 'Richardson Road' at a future point.

I am at a loss on how to eventually move it from a user page to a full Wiki page article and maybe change the actual naming to not have it look out of place. Maybe like html, its just a copy paste after 'create an article'.

Richardson_Road.

Richardson_Road_Hove.

RichardsonRoad.

Looking to check it wasn't already there I found http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richardson_Road .

being a page all about Newcastle University and 'our' intended 'name' was used as a redirect.

I would prefer it not to have the Hove added, but its here for the time being.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dinnages/RichardsonRoadHove

I look forward to advice. Dinnages (talk) 11:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello Dinnages. Your title User:Dinnages/Richardson Road (Hove) is fine, and would get moved ultimately to Richardson Road (Hove) (currently a redlink, because the article doesn't currently exist there. I would prefer Richardson Road, Hove, but either is acceptable.) If the article survives (see below), then there will be two Richardson Road articles, and unless it could be shown that one was overwhelmingly referred to by references in independent sources, then probably each should have a disambiguated name, and a hatnote to point to the other one.

However, at present, your article would not survive being moved to mainspace, because it does not have any references to reliable sources independent of the subject. Without these, it does not establish that the street is notable by Wikipedia's standards. Such sources could be local papers, but they would need to be more than just a directory or a mention of the street: it would need to be articles specifically about the street. Some editors argue that because there are so many streets in the world, individual streets need to meet some further criteria: see User:Grutness/One street per 50,000 people, which is not a Wikipedia policy, but has been quite influential. : One more point: the tone of the article is not as it stands appropriate to an encyclopaedia. The content of the article should be taken entirely from indpendent sources sources (rewritten, so as not to constitute a copyright infringement): personal observation and argument is not acceptable in Wikipedia articles. And addressing the reader directly (either with you or with instructions what to do or not to do) are almost always inappropriate. See WP:TONE and WP:NOT.

When you think the article might be ready, I strongly advise that you submit it to articles for creation, where it will get a comprehensive review before being moved to mainspace. --ColinFine (talk) 10:28, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

April 2

Anushka Shetty

Anuskha Shetty Nominated for International Tamil film awards for Vaanam .how to edit the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicholas brain (talk • contribs) 11:45, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at Help:Editing.--ukexpat (talk) 13:37, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

April 3

Creating a new page (Travi$ Scott)

Me and a few others would like to create a page for Artist Travi$ Scott. However, according to Wikipedia, he already has an article. I click on his name, and it redirects the link straight to G.O.O.D. Music, meaning that he hasn't got a separate page. How do I resolve this issue?

Thank you.

Millyman77 (talk) 15:54, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

If you're convinced that the subject satisfied the notability requirements, and that you can provide sufficient references to reliable sources to demonstrate that notability, then this link will let you edit the page, and replace the current redirect. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:13, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

RE: article Common Sense (pamphlet)

Uh, it is said in this article Common Sense (pamphlet) that "...the average colonist was more educated than their European counterpart...". I want to ask - is there anthing that justifies this? And/or qualifies what is meant by "counterpart"? Does it mean people who have colonised Europe? (surely not, but then who in particular? People of a common social class? Economic class? The entire population? And what measurement was used to quantify 'education' when taking this average?) Should I check libraries for reference [11]? Or will [11] only justify that "Paine made political ideas tangible for a common audience. This brought average colonists into political debate, creating a whole new political language."? I have to say here that while I thought perhaps that this sort of question maybe belongs on the talk page, I found that the whole process was rather intimidating, I felt that I might somehow wreck the wikipedia I have come to adore, and that not understanding the <> bracket syntaxes and whatnot I might -sort of- wreck the talk page. Would you recommend that I read a lot of the beginner's guides and so forth? I have spent a long time reading wikipedia, and only now have I considered getting a login. Honestly, I would rather not. I'm not really an expert in anything I have studied, and I wouldn't want to, well, get in a textual (?) shouting match with a PHD. I just want to know if I need to get a membership at my former university library to verify this.

-Matt, In need of clarification. 143.238.230.81 (talk) 16:01, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Matt. First of all, you can't wreck Wikipedia by editing: even if you break an article, you or anybody can look at the article's history, and revert it to a state before you broke it.

Secondly, you might find Book:The Missing Manual helpful.

Thirdly, yes the article's talk page would be the normal place to pose such questions.

Fourthly, probably nobody here can answer your question, because it is a terrible article, full of unsourced statements and original research. Such a statement should be referenced to a source, which you can in principle look at to find out what they meant - but in any case, if the Wikipedia article is ambiguous, then it should be changed to be clear. In principle it is possible to go back through the history and find out who inserted that sentence, and ask them on their talk page (and there are tools such as WikiBlame which makes this easier); but there is no guarantee that the editor who inserted that is still active on Wikipedia, so you may or may not get an answer. I agree that it looks likely that reference 11 only supports the statement it is attached to, rather than the whole of what precedes; but without consulting the reference, we can't tell. If you want to read it, you may find somebody at WP:RX can help.

If you have the knowledge and interest to improve the article, that would be very welcome. Otherwise, I suggest you post your concerns about it on the talk page. (Note that the talk page is for discussion about improving the article, not about the topic in general; but since you are pointing out ambiguities in the article, I think that would be appropriate. --ColinFine (talk) 17:47, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

April 5

New article

I want to make an article on this really good youtuber/actor that i met through a channel called officially Linsay, How do i get it accepted through Wikipedia?

Linsaylover101 (talk) 00:19, 5 April 2013 (UTC)LinsayLover101

The starting point is to read the links that have been provided on your user talk page. If you have any specific questions after that, please ask. - David Biddulph (talk) 01:40, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

References

Hello,

I have a question regarding the Reference List of my article.

I have typed the following in the editor programme:

== References ==

{{reflist}}

However on the page it only lists the references like this: 1.^ Reference 1

2.^ Reference 2
3.^ Reference 3
4.^ Reference 4
5.^ Reference 5
6.^ Reference 2
7.^ Reference 6
8.^ Reference 2
9.^ Reference 7
10.^ Reference 8

How do I get the descriptions of the references to show?

Thank you!

Minipigs (talk) 09:02, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

The content of each reference goes between the <ref> and </ref> tags. So where you have typed "Reference 1" you actually need the book title, web address or whatever it is that backs up your statement. See Help:Footnotes for more. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

New article

I want to make an article on this really good youtuber/actor that i met through a channel called officially Linsay, How do i get it accepted through Wikipedia?

Linsaylover101 (talk) 00:19, 5 April 2013 (UTC)LinsayLover101

The starting point is to read the links that have been provided on your user talk page. If you have any specific questions after that, please ask. - David Biddulph (talk) 01:40, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

References

</nowiki>

However on the page it only lists the references like this: 1.^ Reference 1

2.^ Reference 2
3.^ Reference 3
4.^ Reference 4
5.^ Reference 5
6.^ Reference 2
7.^ Reference 6
8.^ Reference 2
9.^ Reference 7
10.^ Reference 8

How do I get the descriptions of the references to show?

Thank you!

Minipigs (talk) 09:02, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

The content of each reference goes between the <ref> and </ref> tags. So where you have typed "Reference 1" you actually need the book title, web address or whatever it is that backs up your statement. See Help:Footnotes for more. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:11, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Re-submitting a page

Hello, I am trying to re-submit a Wiki page having taken on the feedback. However, somehow I have managed to save the new edit over the old edit, so wiki thinks that the new edit is the original one I submitted but actually it is the one that I wouThejetsetters (talk) 16:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC)ld like to re-submit. Is there anyway to amend this? Thejetsetters (talk) 15:27, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I have undone the last two edits at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Steve Varsano, restoring a version with some of the promotional wording removed. Is that the version you want to resubmit? If it is, click the "When you are ready to resubmit" link halfway down the pink box at the top. If I've got it wrong, go to the history of the page and click on the date/time links to find the version that you prefer; if you can't see how to re-instate that version, post back here with its date/time, and someone will re-instate it for you. -- John of Reading (talk) 15:52, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I am not sure if I am completely misunderstanding. But is it possible to delete everything from today (5th April). As it will not let me re-submit anything? It also doesn't let me delete these myself. Sorry this is the first time I have done this! Thanks so much Thejetsetters (talk) 16:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I suggest you click the "Edit" link at the top of the page, where it says "Read / Edit / View history", then select and delete the entire text except for the very top line, then paste in your preferred version and "Save". -- John of Reading (talk) 16:30, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

I have tried this. And now it is telling me that this page might qualify for deletion? Would it be best to do that and start again? It is still telling me that the version I want to re-submit is the one that was rejected and this is not the case. Thanks for you help! Thejetsetters (talk) 17:09, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Please wait for sometime until the editor who requested deletion tells us why he requested deletion. I have removed the request until he responds. --Ushau97 ^talk 17:17, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks! Thejetsetters (talk) 17:28, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

(Later) Does the current version of the page have the text you want to resubmit? If so, use the "When you are ready to resubmit" link and then "Save". This won't delete the pink box at the top, but will add a new yellow box at the bottom, and it will queue your text for review. -- John of Reading (talk) 19:21, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

The editor who requested speedy deletion did that because you blanked the page as you did with this edit. Actually it was a misunderstanding because G7 criteria does not apply to userspace pages. So you can still work on improving the draft. Cheers! --Ushau97 ^talk 09:10, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Does an AFC page strictly count as being in userspace? Glad that the problem has been solved, anyway. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:49, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

April 7

Feedback Request Service

Hey, It'd be great to be part of the feedback request service. I'm pretty new to the area, and the labyrinthine word based structure tends to make my dyslexia go a little crazy, can someone enlighten me as to how to join in this aspect of the wiki? It is possible that there is some leveling involved?

Thanks Ed42311 (talk) 13:52, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi. You have to add {{frs user|{{subst:currentuser}}|limit}} to WP:FRS#Requests for comment to sign up for Feedback Request Service. Replace limit with the the largest number of requests you would like to receive in a calendar month. You can choose any section that is of interest to you. See WP:FRS for more on this. --Ushau97 (talk) 11:52, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

April 8

Translating Spanish article

Hi!

I'm a complete noob at this, but discovered that the article in English on SAREB, Spain's bad bank is a stub and felt it deserved a translation from the Spanish. I have a few queries:

- How can I request someone proofread the article once I'm done? - Is it ok to post the translation in bits, rather than all in one go, the Spanish is quite long? - Is it ok to use the same references as the Spanish article, to pages which are in Spanish? - I've marked the page as under construction because I'm translating, but how long will it stay like that to give me a chance to translate?

cheers!

Saul (talk) 11:18, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you can translate the Spanish article to English. You could request someone listed at Category:User es-5 to proofread the article. But please make sure that the user is active before requesting on their talk page. However, if you are fluent in Spanish, then there is no need for someone to proofread the article. It is okay to write the article in bits as this is how most of Wikipedia's featured articles are improved. Many articles are stubs when they are created and as time goes, the article gets improved and they reach FA status. And it is alright to use the same references in the Spanish article, but please provide an English translation of the title when citing. See Template:Cite web#Examples's Foreign language and translated title on how to do this. And that tag will stay at the top of the article until you are done expanding. When you have finished the expansion, then you could remove {{underconstruction}}. Or if the article has not been edited for several days a patrolling editor would remove the tag, since it haven't been edited for a long time. See WP:1ST on how to write articles. Happy editing! --Ushau97 (talk) 11:40, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Article re-evauluation

Hello Wikipedia community,

Last week I wrote my first Wikipedia article on Mitchell S. Steir. Within minutes the article received comments regarding it's neutrality and a perceived lack of verifiable information. Within the next hour I made changes to the information that I thought was possibly the reason for those comments. I wrote why I edited the article and proceeded to update the page, assuming somebody would verify the changes shortly. Two days later, I started a talk page about the article which has received no engagement. A week later and no responses or updates yet.

Now that I've completed these steps, I would like to know what I have to do to have my page re-evaluated with the goal being having the flags pertaining to it's validity removed. The page is for my job, so it's very important to me this get updated. Thank you everybody in advance!

RyLaughlin (talk) 17:59, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

To tackle the easy one first, this information shows that the article is still an orphan. The reason for the remainder of the problem is rather revealed by your penultimate sentence. If you are editing this page for your job it is difficult for you to maintain a neutral point of view, and that is the reason for Wikipedia's guidance on conflict of interest. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:28, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but if it is important to you to get it updated, then your purposes are inconsistent with those of Wikipedia. WP:There is no deadline. --ColinFine (talk) 17:06, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I have given Laughly a warning template about conflict of interest. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:17, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

How to get someone to review a new unreviewed article?

Hello!

I recently wrote an article for Academics Stand Against Poverty Academics Stand Against Poverty

There is a banner at the top of the page that has a puzzle with a quill image on it that says it the "page is a new unreviewed article." It says it must be edited by a non-author of the article. How could I get non-authors to edit this page? Within the organization there are members who have submitted wikipedia articles for organizations related to ASAP. Would these members be able to edit the article and remove the "new unreviewed banner"? Is there anywhere on the site I should submit the link to the article so it can be considered for review by others?

Thank you for your help

Vknanavati (talk) 23:43, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

April 18

Message to Reddogsix

How do i leave a message for 'Reddogsix' about the article 'Keith Johnson author'Dvdwllm (talk) 18:34, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

On their talk page at User talk:Reddogsix.--ukexpat (talk) 18:38, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

See more at Help:Using talk pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:26, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Declined article Centre for South Asian Studies

RE: new submission : Centre for South Asian Studies at the University of Toronto

I just received notice that my new submission was rejected by "Arthur goes shopping," for the "submission's references do not adequately evidence the subject's notability." I added a few more external citations, however, I believe that there were adequate citations to show the subject's notability as the Centre for South Asian Studies at the University of Toronto has hosted many famous academics/ artists/journalists (most of whom have their own Wikipedia pages). I am a bit confused as to why this is not enough? I added a few links to the Economic Times as well as from the University of Toronto and I resubmitted the article.

Thank you.

TheActorNetwork (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Notability is not inherited. Douglas Adams kindly turned up to an event I organised once, but his presence didn't make the event, or me, or the organisation behind the event, notable by Wikipedia's standards.

What is required is significant coverage; independent reliable sources that actually discuss the organisation in detail. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:40, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

April 19

Missing city names in some pages devoted to listing names of cities/towns in a certain state?

I'm on a project requiring validation of city names in certain states. E.G. Looking for the city/town name of 'Noblesville' , Indiana. On the wiki page for Indiana, this town is not listed. Searching Google directly, there is a Google page for this town.

Why is it missing from the wikipedia page for Cities/Towns in Indiana? I've run across a number of such City/Town name omissions, such as this. Wonder why this is ? 71.195.232.175 (talk) 02:56, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles cannot list everything about every subject or there would be no focus and the article would be overwhelmed with lists and become a directory. But even if something should be listed, Wikipedia articles are works in progress, and they are written by volunteers who are interested in the subject. If no one has come along who has the drive and ability to take an article under their wing and try to make it comprehensive, it may very well have lots of different gaps as to things it should cover but does not. If you see a gap on Wikipedia, You can boldly roll up your sleeves and fill it. That's how all of our content was written. I'm just someone else out in the world who decided Wikipedia was a noble cause and started editing it. You can do so too (I suggest you first create an account which has many advantages and takes just moments, and then take a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial). But as to the specific example you used, in fact, Wikipedia's articles on Indiana does list Noblesville. One minor thing about terminology. In your question you said "On the wiki page for Indiana..." Just so you know, a wiki is any website using wiki software; there are thousands of them. You will confuse people if you refer to a specific Wikipedia article as "a wiki". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 03:21, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

New question

I need to get rid of the first box of not trusty words. I have changed the references several times but it is still there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChristianGregersen (talk • contribs) 08:42, 19 April 2013‎ (UTC)

It isn't clear to me what you mean by "the first box of not trusty words"; to which article are you referring? - David Biddulph (talk) 11:02, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I think Christian is probably referring to the maintenance templates on Gallery Int Fashion Fair. GB fan 12:19, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

If GBFan is correct, then those templates are not automatic: anybody may remove them if they think that the problem has been addressed. But I think you should look at WP:CORP and WP:COI. --ColinFine (talk) 12:56, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Non-native English

I often see a problem with articles in English written/edited by non-native speakers. I don't want to be ethno-supremacist, but... Is there anything in the advice to editors to say "If you're editing in a language that is not your native language, get help to insure that what you write is grammatical and idiomatic"? Kotabatubara (talk) 18:26, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

How would they do so? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:56, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

April 24

Hello!

I've been working on my first article. I tried once before in September last year, and the article was declined becasue it lacked sufficient references.

I rewrote the article with much better referencing, and made it more concise, but a combination of a faltering internet connection (meaning it was submitted twice and created two entries) and Wikipedia linking the new rewrite up with the original entry of the same name (that I hadn't been able to find) meant there were three entries and it was declined this time because of the duplications... I've deleted everything apart form one final revised, fully referenced article, but can't see how to 'resubmit'. I don't want to create the same situation whereby in trying to resubmit I am generating more copies... I've asked the reviewer but they haven't responded...

Does saving the article count as a re-submission / is it back in the queue? Many thanks for your help. In case you need to see the article in question, it's here: Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Woodpecker Wooliams

Dv8create (talk) 22:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

There's a line in the middle of one of the boxes: "When you are ready to resubmit, click here." --ColinFine (talk) 09:00, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes. Right before my eyes...! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dv8create (talk • contribs) 20:30, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Don Albinson

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

I just sent (I think) the text about Don Albinson, how do I add photos, and how is the proper formatting done? Do you people at Wikipedia do it? Please advise that we are on the path toward making this happen. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balbinson (talk • contribs) 19:27, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

HELP! I tried to send the Don Albinson article, and have no idea if I succeeded. Did you get it, how do I add photos, who does the formatting? And I didn't do the four tildes, here they are. Thank you. Balbinson (talk) 19:35, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You posted the article on the help desk. I recommend you read the comments there. Thanks, FrigidNinja 00:52, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

April 25

biographical outline

I've been in the broadcasting industry for almost 40 years and wondered if it's possible for me to write a brief biographical description of my experiences to be included here? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rusty1vermont (talk • contribs) 13:37, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

An article could be justified if you meet the notability requirements at Wikipedia:Notability (people). You also ought to read WP:BLP, and WP:Autobiography. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:57, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

April 29

Changing a picture

Hi, my name is Jonty Rhodes, and there is an article about me in Wikipedia, which I have been able to edit, but I have not been able to change the picture that comes up with the article. How can I get administration rights for my own page so that I may change the head and shoulder picture that is currently displayed? Regards Jonty Rhodes---- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.212.177.67 (talk) 06:53, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

You neither need nor get "administration rights" for your page: you have no special rights in respect of a page about you, and indeed you are actively discouraged it from editing it directly (see WP:conflict of interest for advice about this, and WP:biography of living persons for the protection you do get). But if you have a better picture, that you are willing to license appropriately, you are very welcome to provide it: you would need to upload the picture, preferably to Wikimedia commons, and explicitly release it under a CC-BY-SA license: see WP:Donating copyright materials. Then you or anybody can edit the article to use the new picture. --ColinFine (talk) 16:55, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

delete sandbox history?

Just wrote my first article. Is it possible to delete the sandbox edit history? Thanks. Ljv21 (talk) 22:32, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

You can delete what's in there by clicking edit, deleting the content, and then saving. This will then blank the page. You cannot delete the history I'm afraid. Why would you want to delete the history? -- Cassianto^Talk 23:59, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I guess you refer to User:Ljv21/sandbox which is waiting for review. If you don't want the edit history to be attached to an article (in case it's accepted) then you could copy the current content to another page, for example Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Art Vincent, and then blank User:Ljv21/sandbox. You could also tag it with {{db-u1}} to request deletion. Note: You are only allowed to copy-paste the content because you are the only contributor. If there are other contributors then they must be credited in the page history. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:47, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

List of references on Punjab Prisons (Pakistan)

A large majority of the sources used on Punjab Prisons (Pakistan) seem to be primary sources. As such, could somebody help me understand whether these are ok or whether they violate WP policies. Thanks in advance! Ralfan (talk) 17:54, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia; but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them. Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the source but without further, specialized knowledge. For example, an article about a novel may cite passages to describe the plot, but any interpretation needs a secondary source. Do not analyze, synthesize, interpret, or evaluate material found in a primary source yourself; instead, refer to reliable secondary sources that do so. Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable sources, i.e. third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. --Ushau97 (talk) 11:10, 1 May 2013 (UTC)