I want to cite that someone appears in an episode. If their name is in the credits for that episode, does the episode itself count as a reliable source? - Purplewowies (talk) 01:35, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What "episode" are you talking about exactly ? A Wiki page or something else ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tanner Lin (talk • contribs) 09:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An episode of a television show that contains an actor's name in the credits, which I can provide a timecode for. I'm wondering if the episode itself counts as reliable for the purposes of citing that someone was in it on a Wikipedia article. - Purplewowies (talk) 15:32, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i have used cite episode on occassions but only where there is no other source available even a unrealible one, i think using cite episode is frowned upon cant be sure, best asking at wikiproject television as that the parent project for all television related things. personal i would use it but only if i could not find a source anywhere else--Andrewcrawford (talk - contrib) 20:10, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:101.169.48.3&diff=cur

I'm the editor of AusBT and not sure why this site is not considered a reliable source, as we are an established online publication with a solid track record of reporting and indeed breaking many stories. AusBT is as credible as other recognised media outlets and I believe that citations from information provided by AusBT can only help make Wikipedia articles more current and more useful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.169.48.3 (talk) 02:24, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We answer reliability questions at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Reliability on wikipedia is governed by the author, publication venue, the publicatished item itself, the statement supported on wikipedia, and the article on which it appears—no source is universally reliable. You certainly should not be posting your own publications to wikipedia pages as this is a WP:Conflict of interest. As a Reliable Sources/Noticeboard editor on wikipedia, I can tell you that your publication triggers a number of instant signals that are worrisome; but, I couldn't form a judgement outside of the specific context of an WP:RS/N request. Fifelfoo (talk) 02:46, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. We'd like to sort this out so that information sourced by AusBT can indeed be shared via Wikipedia – for instance, with regards to the new Scoot airline we already have exclusive information from an interview with Scoot CEO (which makes him a pretty reliable source) on the fact that all Scoot Boeing 777s will be extended-range ER versions but not rated and operated as such at launch (http://www.ausbt.com.au/scoot-debuts-sydney-singapore-in-mid-2012-china-india-to-follow); that Scoot will not use traditional in-seat video screens and is instead looking to tablets (http://www.ausbt.com.au/scoot-mulls-wireless-ipads-android-tablets-for-in-flight-entertainment); and also more info on Scoot seating, including that Scoot's business-class seat will in fact be a premium economy seat (http://www.ausbt.com.au/scoot-s-new-business-class-not-business-as-usual). That's on top of many other stories which we have broken or which we're first to report (often ahead of larger publications and newspapers due to the more nimble nature of focussed online media), and as this info feeds back into Wikipedia it should be cited appropriately. I'd welcome a chat about how AusBT triggers 'worriesome signals' and how we can work on fixing that so that if a third party updates Wikipedia articles with information from an AusBT article, and cites appropriately, that revision will remain live for the benefit of all users. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.169.48.3 (talk) 03:06, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to Wikipedia:COI see WP:EL#ADV. See also this archived discussion. —teb728 t c 03:17, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On wikipedia I'm not in the business of supplying consulting services relating to online media; nor, generally, does wikipedia supply advice to editors of magazines regarding the current state of consensus because

• consensus is determined on a day to day basis by expert editors working together in discussion on RS/N
• we would rather not have our methods and structures "gamed" such that some outlets achieve an appearance of reliability without the substance.

My suggestion would be to take a specific article to RS/N when it has been used to support a specific statement on a specific article, and watch how RS/N editors work. If in general your articles get accepted by RS/N, then your publication will generally be accepted in future. Do keep in mind that I've opposed the reliability of Time The Times and The New York Times in certain articles when they're used to support certain statements. If you note problems with reliability for your publication on RS/N, then I'd suggest you consider correcting those issues at your end if you wish your publication to be used as a resource. Additionally, I'd suggest contacting an appropriate Wikiproject, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation where editors interested in Aviation congregate, and mentioning your publication to them. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:29, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I noted Bidgee's observation that "ABT seems to be more than a blog and an apparently independent news source, but not notable enough for its own article yet" – so as we're a year on I should have that rectified and set up an article. We were adding a _lot_ of information into WIkipedia articles and thus AusBT citations with them, which I thought was more appropriate than inserting information without any reference (and only fair that if AusBT had the first/best story, AusBT should get the cite) – and I know of many other journalists who do the same with their own work. But to avoid potential WP:Conflict of interest issues I'll ensure that doesn't happen, so if you can help by removing the 'red flag' on AusBT that'd be appreciated. I'll also look into touching base with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation folk. Thanks for your help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.169.48.3 (talk) 03:38, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The behaviour of writing articles and then inserting text into wikipedia sourced to your own article sounds like the perfect start to a Conflict of Interest issue resulting in banning. Please follow Wikipedia's conflict of interest policies carefully: post to the article talk page noting your new publication and its potential use in the article. There doesn't seem to be a hardcoded restriction against your website's link; but, reliability issues are judged on a case by case basis. Fifelfoo (talk) 07:06, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I typed my user name, then my password. After following the prompt to come up with a new password, I got the message that user 'cpopa' does not exist, which is untrue. What's going on? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.28.74.112 (talk) 03:15, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cpopa does exist. But be sure you understand that both usernames and passwords are case sensitive. —teb728 t c 03:28, 5 December 2011 (UTC) But I have never heard of Wikipedia asking for a new password. Are you sure you were trying to login to Wikipedia? —teb728 t c 03:39, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:cpopa only exists at the English Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org. Was it here you tried to log in? Try again at Special:UserLogin. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello;

A side table in the article Municipalities of Mexico is apparently not editable, as it does not appear anywhere in the Edit tab and seemingly does not belong to any section. It also doesn't have an edit option at the bottom, as other table or box template have. On this table, at least one datum is wrong (the number of municipalities of the state of Jalisco is 125, not 126).

Could you please point me to a way to edit this table? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rene8 (talk • contribs) 05:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Go to Template:States of Mexico by municipality. That is the location of that table. GB fan 05:06, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) It is being transcluded from a template rather than being part of the article (see Wikipedia:Transclusion for technical details). The table you wish to edit is located at Template:States of Mexico by municipality. If you ever see text included in double curly braces {{ }} at Wikipedia, that means it is from a template, so if you see {{Foo}}, you can edit the contents of that template at Template:Foo. Does that help? --Jayron32 05:08, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. I know little about the technicalities of editing, so dind't know about transclusion. I know it now. I've edited the mentioned table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rene8 (talk • contribs) 05:34, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

where can i go to buy mercury — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.27.112.174 (talk) 05:48, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which one? The planet, the god, the element, the car, the basketball team, the newspaper, or the football player? --Jayron32 05:58, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Probably the rock star. —teb728 t c 06:23, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is the Wikipedia Help Desk, for asking questions about using Wikipedia. If you can't find what you want in any of the articles linked from Mercury, you might consider asking at one of the departments of the Help Desk Reference Desk - probably either Science or Miscellaneous (if you do so, remember to tell people where in the world you are!) But you might do better just googling. --ColinFine (talk) 21:19, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced "Help Desk" by Reference Desk in the above post. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:27, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I want to create own .dic and .aff files without unicode ie is in ASCII codes. Can you please suggest me how to create it if I have wordlist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.100.175.66 (talk) 05:59, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. I suggest you ask your question again at the Computing reference desk. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:25, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i read the article written about Mohammed the prophet (peace be upon him) and i was insulted and offended by the fact that a photo for the prophet was posted in the article, actually, the photo did not add any thing to the article and it can be removed or replaced by any other photo for his tomb or for any other islamic symbol without affecting the context of the article... it is banned in the islamic religion to imagine the shape of the prophet mohammed or even drawing any symbols for his shape.. Therefore, please remove the photo or replace it as this is an offence for the muslims and as you wrote an article about islamic religion, write it in the right way and you can add a note that it is banned and prohibited for muslims to draw the prophet. this will be a valuablr and realistic add...this issue is important for all muslims and no action is taken, i will sue wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.197.169.177 (talk) 06:13, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are no photographs of the Prophet Mohammed. He passed away long before the invention of photography. I suggest you read Depictions of Muhammad, and then read WP:NLT. In any case, for what it is worth, I can see little merit in including depictions of the Prophet on Wikipedia - but that doesn't justify threats, even unenforceable ones. This isn't an Islamic encyclopaedia, and while we need to consider the sensitivities of certain faiths, we are not ruled by them. AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:26, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes better to discuss about the photo graph of His Highness Hazrat Mohammed Mustafa better please try to know and fallow what he has taught to the human beings . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.0.9.62 (talk) 10:36, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See also Talk:Muhammad/FAQ. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:56, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a logo of the United Russia logo in SVG format in Russian wikipedia I wanted to upload to English Wiki, but it gives me the error -

"Warning: A file by that name has been deleted or moved.

The deletion and move log for this page are provided here for convenience: 14:54, March 13, 2008 ^demon (talk | contribs) deleted "File:United Russia logo.svg" ‎ (Speedy deleted per (CSD I8), was an image available as a bit-for-bit identical copy on the Wikimedia Commons.) "

• Please note, that almost 4 years past and the logo should be uploaded.

SVG link - Файл:Логотип партии "Единая Россия".svg

En.Wiki OLD png format to delete after the above upload - File:United Russia logo.png

Thank you,
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 06:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently what happened was that en:File:United Russia logo.svg was moved to Commons:File:United Russia logo.svg but then deleted from Commons as non-free. An admin should undelete the local copy. —teb728 t c 06:47, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, but it a) probably needs a fair use rationale, b) needs fixing (the SVG looks broken, at least from my computer). CharlieEchoTango (contact) 07:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but I think it should be deleted and than created again as it doesn't allow a real upload, it shows the dimensions as 0 × 0 (131 KB), with no preview pic, but after clicking the date it shows it. wierd. tried to upload few times with no avail.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 09:08, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged it {{db-f2}} which will get it deleted as a corrupt file, but that will probably just take it back to where it was before it was undeleted. Probably the thing to do is upload it under another name. —teb728 t c 12:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where do I go to ask for help in modifying a chart at Los_Angeles_City_Council#Past_members? Thank you. GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:59, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What sort of help do you need? The tables themselves are encoded in the page source as usual for content and the page isn't protected. On the other hand, table syntax can be confusing. The talk-page of the article would be a place to discuss ideas for improving layout before you delve in and get your hands dirty (and brain fried) trying to overhaul a whole table's organization. Or HELP:TABLE is a starting point for table syntax details (and probably links to specific discussion pages?). Or I guess here is a good enough place since it's active and lots of editors have a range of experiences with table tricks, just let us know details of what you're trying to accomplish. DMacks (talk) 07:09, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I saved a draft entry using the wizard, now I want to work on it some more, but I can't see it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tatianagoldflower (talk • contribs) 07:26, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't saved anything other than this message under your current username. Can you be more specific as to which entry (title) you saved in the wizard? Perhaps you weren't logged in and saved it under your IP address. CharlieEchoTango (contact) 07:44, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per the article wizard instructions I did not put in a title as it was a draft. Definitely hit "save page." Now its gone? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tatianagoldflower (talk • contribs) 08:11, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We might be able to help you find it with a text search. What unusual names, words or phrases were in your draft? -- John of Reading (talk) 08:22, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was a start of an article on a person named Eran Thomson - unique words would include friendlet, prepare to live and koobar. thank you for your help :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tatianagoldflower (talk • contribs) 08:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Try this search again in 24 hours. It takes a few hours for the Wikipedia search indexes to be updated. If that doesn't find it, then I'm afraid that your edit wasn't saved. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:41, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

کس طرح بڑھایا جا سکتا ہے — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.0.9.62 (talk) 10:28, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is the English Wikipedia, please speak in English. We also do not answer medical questions. -- Obsidi♠n Soul 11:28, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you are interested in editing Wikipedia in Urdu, you can see the Urdu Wikipedia (ur:صفحہ اول). But they don't answer medical questions, either. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 21:56, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does this particular event satisfy notability criteria? I would like to hear opinions on that. I plan on creating an article about this event. The following are the list of sources i plan on using:

Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 11:56, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Notability (events). Considering that this happened last October and still seems to be controversial enough to be nationally significant, it may be notable. If there have been significant in-depth treatment of the event (like feature stories, etc.) as well, then it's very likely to be notable.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 12:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. So my conclusion is that it satisfies the following:

• WP:EFFECT – The incident caused a great deal of public outrage all over India, and led to people protesting in Mumbai, and police being dispatched to patrol the streets to curb eve teasing. Also, calls are being made for tougher laws against sexual harrasment.
• WP:GEOSCOPE – The incident was covered nationally.
• WP:INDEPTH – Some of these articles do put the events into context.
• WP:DIVERSE – Sources are obviously diverse.

Joyson Noel ^{Holla at me!} 12:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You need to consider WP:NOTNEWS. The absolutely most important criteria for deciding if an event is something which merits its own encyclopedia article is if sources exist outside of the standard "news cycle", that is if writing is being done beyond the immediate time period after the event. --Jayron32 14:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I got rollback rights yesterday and downloaded Huggle but it doesn't seem to work. I've enabled it on my config. page but it still says I need to check it when I try to login. -Abigail was here :D (Need Some Help? Click Me!) 11:59, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After looking at other user's huggle.css pages (search), I suggest you try "enable:true" rather than "enable-all:true". -- John of Reading (talk) 12:07, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's documented here. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:08, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have recently successfully placed an entry on to wikipedia; 'The Peterloo Group', I chose as a category 'Arts, Manchester' which is showing highlighted in red as if it is invalid, could you please suggest a better category for this entry. Are there a chosen number of acceptable ones? Thank you.DonLorenzo11 (talk) 13:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly you spelled the word "category" incorrectly. Secondly you had the format of the link wrong; as you used {{...}} it was looking for a template; it should have been [[...]]. The list of categories is at Special:Categories, & that includes a link to an index by topic. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:58, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have added two categories [1] but the article still has many problems. See Wikipedia:Your first article. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:11, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've wikified it a bit, by adding links to other article. Needs better referencing. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 20:43, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why wikipedia rankings seems to be based, only in Alexa rankings? --My Sistemx (talk) 14:47, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some of Wikipedia's articles about web sites show the Alexa rank in the box at the top right - for example the Wikipedia article itself. Is that what you are referring to? The place to discuss that would be Template talk:Infobox website. -- John of Reading (talk) 18:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Recently, I started to use User:Buster7/Sandbox-Belgian American Club of Chicago as a receptical for work on a seperate but similar article. In hindsight that was probably a mistake. I should have created a new sandbox right from the start. What is the best way to move the new article to its own sandbox? Move the whole "shabang" and then edit-out one from the other? Thanks! TRA! Buster Seven Talk 15:06, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copy and paste would be OK in this situation. – ukexpat (talk) 15:58, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copy paste would indeed be fine, but if you want to retain the article edit history you will need to request that an admin perform a history split (see WP:HISTSPLIT). I unsure of a correct venue for requesting this, last time I needed it done I asked at WP:AN. LxRv (a.ka. Rehevkor) 16:31, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks! No history necessary. Buster Seven Talk 17:50, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Today an anon has made several unhelpful edits to Behavioral optometry. they have to do with eating Indian food. Can somebody roll the article back to it's state before these many edits were made? Lou Sander (talk) 17:09, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done, & IPs warned. For future reference, if you go to the article history and show the difference between the last good version and the current version, you can then use the "Undo" link, and merely add an appropriate edit summary. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:18, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Step-by-step instructions for undoing multiple edits can be found here. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:48, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

collapse trolling

In a survey done on over 400 university students, many of them my students, over 80% of Wikipedia users claim the images supplied at the top of the page on all wiki articles is misleading. To look up George Washington and to get a matching photo of Karthik Nadar is described in the survey as 'obnoxious'. I think Wikipedia needs some sort of editing staff to check for content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.204.21.91 (talk) 17:13, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply] We have thousands of editors, all volunteers, who (mostly) do their utmost to improve Wikipedia. You are one of them. Please feel free to fix things. Wikipedia is amazing because it is entirely edited by volunteers. It would not be what it is, if we had editorial staff.  Chzz  ►  17:21, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply] P.S. I don't understand what you mean about George Washington? I just looked it up, and the top image of him is a portrait of him (as shown here).  Chzz  ►  17:24, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply] The complaint appears to be about the fundraising banner, rather than about content. Acroterion (talk) 17:26, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply] It's trolling. Яehevkor ✉ 17:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply] Indeed. There's no such survey.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 17:37, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How does a user upload a spoken word version of an already existing wikipedia article? ThanksHigginson21 (talk) 18:16, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:SPOKEN, in specific Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia/Recording guidelines and Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia/Uploading guidelines. Hope that helps. - Purplewowies (talk) 18:50, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Could you ask one of your expert chemists, especially rifleman82 if he would help modify my new entry from today 'ditetrahydrofurylpropane' to make it more consistent with Wikipedia standards. The reference section is duplicative and I do not know how to add a structure to ChemBox.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by George.kvakovszky (talk • contribs) 19:06, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

I have posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry, so with any luck some expert chemists will take a look at this article. Meanwhile Purplewowies (talk · contribs) has combined the references for you; see WP:NAMEDREFS for guidance on this. -- John of Reading (talk) 20:44, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This author has written a few extremely specialized reports based on hyper-specialized references (including to himself). I begged him to read WP:SECONDARY with no response. I recommend that he drop his approach and try to contribute to notable themes sought by our readers. Wikipedia is not a personal stamp album.--Smokefoot (talk) 20:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In an effort to clean up an article, I was attempting to report a user for reported vandalism. However, the page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AIV, intended to provide instructions for doing so, appears to have been vandalized itself. The page is completely empty and does not provide any instructions for reportinga notehr user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TowheadJeff (talk • contribs) 21:47, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it was, it was for <1 minute. Refresh.  Chzz  ►  21:49, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This was my misunderstanding. I failed to follow directions. My apologies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TowheadJeff (talk • contribs) 21:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot play any sound from your site. In other sites, I can play sounds fine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.122.6.86 (talk) 22:35, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You need a program on your computer that can play Ogg files. I don't know which programs work with Wikipedia, though. - Purplewowies (talk) 22:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:OGG. - Purplewowies (talk) 22:45, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At some point the article Algemeen Beschaafd Nederlands was redirected into the article Dutch language. There is no mention of ABN or AN in the Dutch article. Is it possible to see the article, as it was, before it was redirected? Thanks. Buster Seven Talk 23:31, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the fact that I would like to see the original article, I think the redirect should have been to Dutch Language Union. That would have been and IS a better fit.Buster Seven Talk 23:40, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clicking on this link – Algemeen Beschaafd Nederlands – will get you to the redirect page. Or click on Algemeen Beschaafd Nederlands and at the top of the article where it says "redirected from Algemeen Beschaafd Nederlands", click on there. Then click on the "history" tab, and select a version of the article that predates the redirect, such as this one. If you want to change the redirect target, you can either raise it at Talk:Dutch language to see whether anyone has any views, or be bold and do it yourself (as long as you're prepared to discuss it if anyone objects). Bencherlite^Talk 23:50, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks! Buster Seven Talk 00:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]