Help desk
< January 11	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 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.

January 12

Problem creating an article

I want to create an article for the Greek organization "The Tabard" - but when I try to create a new page, an edit page for the already existing (but totally unrelated) article for "The Tabard" comes up, since it has the same name.

I was hoping it would lead me to a disambiguation page, or that I might be able to find "The Tabard" as a red link so that I could create the article from an existing link, but I couldn't find one.

How do I create an article entitled "The Tabard" about the organization, without overwriting the existing (unrelated) article?

Create a "The Tabard (Greece)" page or something similar, then place a "See also" disambig link at the top of the current page. If you feel your organization is what most people mean when they use the term, you may want to negotiate a move on their discussion page. Xiner (talk, email) 00:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What on Earth?

I've got the "new messages" bar despite the fact that they are, in fact, old messages which I have seen several times. I know about clearing the cache (which I have done, both with control+shift+R and manually, through the options menu [I'm running Firefox]) and yet the little orange bar keeps bugging me. What's going on?--69.144.234.146 00:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are you seeing this on only your talk page, or your watchlist as well? If the former is the case, then it may be a fake banner that has been placed there (check the diffs). Adrian M. H. 21:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My too. I've got the "new messages" bar, and I've read those messages, AND they're for an IP address that isn't mine! -- 12 January 2007 (UTC) (why isn't this anywhere to copy and paste from?!)

Answering one of my own questions... the IP address that gets logged isn't the IP address of my machine; it's a machine in the same subnet as our router, which appears to be in a completely different xxx.yyy.zzz network. At least, the IP address of my computer aaa.bbb.ccc.nnn, and the IP address two hops up in the traceroute is a machine called router1.example.com, with IP address xxx.yyy.zzz.ppp, where what is getting logged is xxx.yyy.zzz.qqq. Jibber jabber.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.132.187.240 (talk • contribs) 20:08, January 12, 2007

Removal of warning templates

I placed a warning template onto an editor's Talk page earlier today, after the editor made a rather blatant and racist edit to a page. This editor has since removed the warning from their page and, after I reverted & asked them not to do it again, they removed it a second time with no explanation.

I know there's no set policy on this, but is there anything else I should do? Or should I just let it go? -- Kesh 00:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful to know who said user is, but generally you should give them a warning for removing the other warnings (there's a template for it, but I don't remember what it is), and if they continue, report them to Administrators against vandalism. --69.144.234.146 00:56, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to watch the user. If it's a one-off, then no harm done. If the person persists, you can ask for AIV then. Xiner (talk, email) 00:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The warning-removal-warning templates referred to above ({{wr}} etc) were deleted, and there is no real consensus about what to do about warning removals. Plenty of discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Centralized discussion/Removing warnings and other places. Instead of the warning removal, you should probably focus on subsequent acts of vandalism or policy violation. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 01:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, folks. The user in question doesn't seem to be a rampant vandal, but I'll keep an eye out. The strange thing is that I'm seeing the same racist vandalism from various accounts to this one article (Evil). I'll just check the user's edits periodically. -- Kesh 01:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Up-loaded Ogg Theora video does not run

I have recently joined Widipedia and created an article containing up-loaded .png images and an ogg video clip. However, the video does not run. I can view animations in other articles but they are .gif animations, which are no longer being allowed for up-load (please correct me if I am misinformed). Do I need an ogg-friendly player on my PC to see it run or should the clip run off of an application hosted on the wiki server - that is, is the problem with my syntax, perhaps the file itself or missing software at my end? I have searched all the faq's and related help topics I can find. Thanks for any help you can offer. Tano 01:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wiki sk8 6.ogg

caption

See Wikipedia:Media help. Yes, you will need to install an OGG video player to actually see the video itself. -- Kesh 03:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. Regarding installing an ogg player (mplayer for example) - when I go to the mplayer website they say that you should be in a developer environment with compilers and other development tools loaded on your computer in order to install their player. I am not one of these (the ogg file that I am working with was converted from an avi by a helpful friend). These are not user-friendly installations and so, I submit, the vast majority of Wikipedia users will not have access to ogg animations as they browse articles. Does this concern wikipedians? Can you confirm that gif animations are no longer permitted (except grandfathered ones) or up-loadable to Wikipedia? Tano 15:49, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try VLC media player which runs on most systems.Geni 15:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the recommendation - I will certainly try it. Tano 20:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tracking an IP

There's a user who persistently removes speedy delete tags, recently another user whose only contrib is to remove the warning appeared, likely sockpuppet, but I want to track the ip to make sure. Is there a way to do so? Dooms Day349 01:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a registered user, you have to file a complaint and a steward will be able to do a lookup. If it's an anon IP, your only recourse is to get it banned through something like WP:AIV. Xiner (talk, email) 01:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Argh... well 99% chance that it's a sockpuppet, so I don't think I have much to worry about. Dooms Day349 01:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not a steward, a checkuser. Also you could request a check here if you should ever need to in the future. Prodego ^talk 02:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

debugger

how do I delete the debugger?

What debugger are you referring to? -- Kesh 02:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signitures...Again

Sorry, but I used the pages that I was given and everything went smoothly. I put it onto my prefrences and it looks like this with it as my signiture.

--''[[User: ASDFGHJKL|ASDFGHJKL=[[User talk:ASDFGHJKL|Greatest Person Ever]]+[[Special:Contributions/ASDFGHJKL|Coolest Person Ever]]'']] 02:00, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But when I just paste paste the signiture somewere, it looks like it should, like this

ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever

Thank you. ASDFGHJKL 21:00 (EST), 1\11\07

Did you check the box that says "Use raw signature"? Xiner (talk, email) 02:07, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, I didn't think of that. Thank you. --ASDFGHJKL=Greatest Person Ever+Coolest Person Ever 02:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is the most POV signature I've ever seen. ;) -- Kesh 03:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article written like advertisement, but other editors blocking tag and personally attacking rather than fixing

The Learjet 35/36 article is written as a list of personal specs on the plane. The article's editors admist that this is so, however the article is not titled "List of spec of Learjet 35/36," but rather has pretentions of being an article about the jet. I tagged it with a "this article reads like an advertisement" tag, as it does. However, this tag was removed and a group of editors contacted each other and are currently pretty much ganging up on me to keep the tag off the page. I would like the tag replaced, so that someone who understand the general purpose use of Wikipedia and knows about Learjet 35/36s, or someone willing to do the proper research, will rewrite the article to better fit the Wikipedia intentions. I have put specific comments on the talk page. I tagged it, it was reverted, I explained my reasons and asked for the tag to be replaced, instead I am being attacked. What am I supposed to do now, admit defeat and allow a list of jargon-laden specs written for potential buyers of the airplane to pass for an article? Advice would be appreciated. KP Botany 03:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which part of the article do you believe reads as an advertisement? -- Kesh 04:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The whole article was an advertisement, although it's being changed, but not particularly well. One editor admitted it was simply a list of specs, not an article, another who is more experienced in airplanes than I am (I'm not) admitted that it simply looked like it had been copied from the Learjet site. So, that it's an advertisement is not at issue, what's at issue is that instead of being corrected, discussing corrections, dicussiong the issue, the article, the talk page has turned into a special uses page for taking potshots at me for having the gall to tag the article. Now I'm accused, essentially, of acting in bad faith by tagging the article to begin with. If tags are meant to be placed on articles that need attention from editors, maybe someone could warn us new folks around here that they shouldn't be used, and delete them from all the Wikipedia articles? I believe the tag should stay up until the article reads like an article, and other plane articles are just as bad, some worse, and they need tagged and corrected. KP Botany 14:44, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Without researching the History in-depth, it really depends on when you were adding the tag. Also note that simply listing the specs of, say, an automobile as an entire article does not constitute said article reading as an advertisement. If the article contained phrases such as "the Flumph 250 Roadster's innovative automatic handling sytem offers smooth cornering," that would be 'reading as an advertisement'. If it simply says, "the Flumph 250 Roadster includes an automatic handling adjustment system, which improve cornering over normal shock absorbers alone," that would just be a statement which needs citation.

As it stands, the article doesn't need the tag now. There's a couple statements that need reworded and/or citations, but the tag would be inappropriate. It may be that you re-added the tag after someone made the effort of removing the advertising-like phrases, and they objected to that. -- Kesh 21:11, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't, I replaced it before hand. And that still isn't the point. KP Botany 22:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Skip it, it's a jargon-laden completely unusable article written as a technical specifications brochure, but that appears to be what Wikipedia wants. KP Botany 22:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Christian magazine deleted by professed atheist.

An article on a very important magazine contributing to Christian living and discussion - WHOLE Magazine - was deleted by professing atheist.

There was sufficient information and logic to support the inclusion of the article. I have done some investigation of my own. Other magazines similar in circulation, premier and notability have been submitted without controversy. The difference in the magazines is in the content.

How will this issue be handled? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lillietrotter (talk • contribs).

It appears to have been deleted three times by three different admins. If you disagree with the deletion, and can make a strong case for it indeed being a notable publication, and not a conflict of interest (i.e. you are not yourself personally involved in the magazine), I suggest taking it to Deletion Review. By the way, the deletion reasons given had nothing to do with the religious belief of the deletor -- please be cautious about making ad hominem assumptions. Hope this helps, Antandrus (talk) 04:51, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where do Templates come from?

If I want to question the content of or suggest a change to a template, where would I go to do that? Specifically the Template:Biome includes Riparian as an Aquatic biome, but I believe it is more properly a Terrestrial biome. Also, I think the template could be improved by listing the various Biomes in order (according to whatever scheme) rather than the present (what appears to me to be) random order. Thanks! -- Newbie Mpwrmnt 06:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go to Template:Biome and you will be able to discuess this on the template's discussion page - or just make the changes yourself. --Kainaw ^(talk) 06:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! That was easy! Thanks!

~ Mpwrmnt 08:16, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Subject / headlines on Talk Pages (or the lack thereof)

I have noticed that if you are the first person to make a comment on a Talk Page, the instructions say to just type in the box below, etc. But if you do that, your comment will not have a Subject / headline (unless you manually enter it with the ==x== function). However if, instead of following the instructions, you simply click on the + next to edit this page, the Subject/headline box automatically appears! So I guess my suggestion (and I don't know where else to propose it, hence I come to the lovely people on the Help Desk!) is that "we" either change the instructions to tell people to click on the + next to edit this page, rather than just typing in the box below, OR change the format of the page, so that it automatically includes a Subject/headline box. I KNOW that can be done, because when you click on Click here to ask your question about using Wikipedia, as I just did, the page that comes up DOES have a Subject/headline box! As always, thanks for your help! ~Newbie Mpwrmnt 07:33, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage

How to set up a user page?

Create an account, log in, click the top left-most link and edit like you would any other page, keeping in mind Wikipedia:User page. I recommend you don't start one until you've committed some time to the project, otherwise your setting up a userpage might be seen as an attempt to use Wikipedia as a free webhost which is forbidden by WP:NOT. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

study in finland

i want to study in finland

Good luck, have fun. Viridae ^Talk 09:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bit chilly, but the people are nice. Adrian M. H. 21:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Latest IT trends

Hi

How can I come to know about the latest trends using Wiki? How are the topics covered? for ex. if my search goes for programming, how would wiki help to me to access the latest developments goin on?

Thanks

Shekhar

(Deleted; not a request for help) Xiner (talk, email) 15:43, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

help

an HouseOfScandal are having a dispute over Party and Play he keeps on gutting my edits, not letting me change any wording, he says im "fucking up the article" and he removed content w/o using edit summaries very well.qrc2006/email 13:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Civility could help a lot here; I've posted at both user talk pages. -- Natalya 13:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Turning parts of the same string into both an external and internal link

Hello,

I'm new to editing and have run into a funny little gotcha which is probably something I'm:

(a) Not supposed to be able to do; or
(b) Too stupid to figure out.

In a new article I'm busy creating, I'd like to have the following text:

RFC 2832

That's easy enough. But now, I'd like for (only) the "RFC" part of that text to be an internal link to the existing Wikipedia article called "Request for Comments", and at the same time, for the whole string ("RFC 2832") to be an external link pointing to http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2832.html.

Hope this makes sense. If so, what do you suggest the best way would be to handle this? I'd really like to link to both the "RFC" part, so the reader can understand what an RFC is, as well as to the whole string, which is a page that exists outside of Wikipedia, but I don't think just duplicating the same thing is the best (and hopefully, only) course of action.

Thanks for your help!

P.S. I've noticed, upon previewing before I save this, that "RFC 2832" is automatically turned into an external link, pointing to http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2832, interestingly enough. How does that work?

Xhantar 14:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your request would look like this: [[Request for Comments|RFC]] [http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2832.html 2832], which looks like this: RFC 2832. (There's no way to express in HTML the linking of the word RFC to two different places, and anyway it's not clear what would happen if you clicked on it if it could be linked like that, so it's linked internally and the 2382 to be linked externally). As for the automatic external link, some strings set off the code like that; the best-known example is probably something like ISBN 01-234-5678-9 (I just made that one up, it's probably not a real book). --ais523 14:37, 12 January 2007 (U T C)

Thanks, ais523. That makes perfect sense.

You've also inadvertently answered another question (they just don't stop coming, do they!) when I looked at the markup of your reply: How to include a "code sample" on a page, using <nowiki>.

<nowiki><nowiki></nowiki>...hmm, this is fun! :P

Cheers, have a great day. --Xhantar 15:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template "link"

In an edit I saw this added at the end of the article: {{Link FA|zh}}, just above the interwiki links (here). I've tried in vain to figure out what it does. Any clues? Notinasnaid 14:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It triggers a bit of coding in MediaWiki:Monobook.css that causes the bullet on the zh interwiki link to change into a star instead. --ais523 14:51, 12 January 2007 (U T C)

Thanks. It's now blindingly obvious that my problem was looking at Template:Link rather than Template:Link FA. Notinasnaid 14:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

help finding an article

About a month ago, I saw part of an article (while doing a search not on wilkipedia) about someone who stopped by the Erinsville General Store for some pulled pork sandwiches. I tried to read the article but had to get an account first. After a few failed attempts for some reason we could not get an account. I decided to revisit that article today...I set up n acount with no problems but cannot find that article. It is driving me nuts; I have to find out what the rest of the article says. You see, I am the owner of the store in the article and would love to see comments. Is there any way to locate this article?? Thanks for your help

That sounds a bit non-encyclopedic. The only reference I find is Erinsville, Ontario [1]. Look in the article's history. Perhaps the bit's been reverted? Xiner (talk, email) 15:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

theatre origination

(Directing questioner to correct forum. Xiner (talk, email) 15:37, 12 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Sarah Dash article

Hi -

You put a box on top stating that there were no references for the article. I added sources, but I can't get rid of that box that says "This article lacks references."

Can you help? Thanks.

Hi. Please see the history for that page for my response. Thanks. Xiner (talk, email) 16:21, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changing a Title - Move function

I cannot find the 'move' button to edit the title on the United States Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology page. Please help.

Thanks!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mgherty (talk • contribs) 16:39, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Your account is too new to move pages. The "move" button should appear in two days or so. Until then, you may request moves here. Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 16:46, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To be precise, you'll become 'autoconfirmed' (and therefore able to rename pages and edit semiprotected pages) at 18:48, 14 January 2007. --ais523 16:51, 12 January 2007 (U T C)

New article

Hello, i'm new here and i would like to write a new article, but i don't were to do it. I'll hope you could help me. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamila513 (talk • contribs)

You'll probably want to read Wikipedia:Your first article for some general tips, and then Help:Starting a new page. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 17:27, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you get to the specifics of writing a good article, if you happen upon any users that have specialist knowledge in your chosen subject, you might like to ask for help on their talk page. I'm sure they'll be glad to assist you. Also have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject to see if there are any relevant WikiProjects where you could find assistance or collaboration. Adrian M. H. 21:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tanarus

I created this article for the computer game Tanarus [2] If I search for "Tanarus" it redirects me to this page [3] Should I put a link on the 2nd link to the article I wrote like is done here [4] ? Or do something else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kcpdad (talk • contribs)

Yep, that's exactly what you should do. If you want more information, you can read about disambiguation top links. Let me know if you need any help, or have any questions. -- Natalya 18:22, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I center a text?

I'm writing a userbox and would like to have the text centred. Been searching but can't find a code for that. How do I do it? Thanks Crazy Murdoc 19:07, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The good old HTML code <center>...</center> will do. Xiner (talk, email) 19:13, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks man, that worked...Crazy Murdoc 19:25, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Vanderleest

The fact that the article on John Vanderleest was erased is ridiculous. I demand that it is brought back, for the fact that it is all true.

Please go to Wikipedia:Deletion review. Thank you. Xiner (talk, email) 20:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"True" it may have been - having not seen it, I can't comment on that - but was it notable and well sourced? No-one can simply "demand" that an article be reinstated. Adrian M. H. 21:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"John was first elected to his dual position when he was only 9 years old" sounds quite hoaxy. To give it a chance of of being undeleted, you need a source to back that up. Otherwise the article isn't verifiable. If you can verify, I find that quite notable, but other opinions may vary. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For reference, the AfD is here. Looks pretty clear-cut to me. -- Kesh 01:06, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do i make propostion on wikipedia

Is there a discussion page wich is dedicated to propositions to improve wikipedia? Z E U S 20:00, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

State it here. Someone will direct you to the relevant place. Xiner (talk, email) 20:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was willing to make the proposal that , since english is the most edited language , it would be approriate to synchronise the english language with all the other languages. This can simply be done by indicating with a banner in the discusion page that this article could need some syncronisation with other languages. This is also true for article that are already present in the other language but that lack the amount of information or isn't updated as much as in the english version of the article for instance. And finally , this proposal is also true for the contrary , articles that are more developed in other languages could get this banner in order to improve the english language if it isnt specified. In that banner itself , a langue ,or more could be specified for synchronising , or even no language could be specified in the case that this article is only in the present language. Assistance with tranduction software is also another way of translation , as long as the user puts attention to the translation and makes sure that the article makes sense. Z E U S 20:21, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll admit I'm too lazy to search but I've seen templates like that. As for listing pages available in other languages, check out the left column on the page Baiji and the code at the bottom of the page (or Wikipedia:Interlanguage links). Xiner (talk, email) 21:10, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, it sounds like a template would be just the thing for that. It's not automatic but, then again, it shouldn't be. "Better" is a subjective term. So, the template may be worded so that, "(Article) on (language) Wikipedia may have more information. Please help translate this information if you can!" It would, of course, need to be worded in the correct language for that Wikipedia. -- Kesh 21:24, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I knew it's there; The last one looks good. Xiner (talk, email) 21:44, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In this case , can i create another template .Am i allowed to create templates? Z E U S 22:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure can. It's a bit complicated, but you can read up on it at Help:Template. -- Kesh 22:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page keeps getting deleted - help?

I keep reposting the same topic Re: Pump music as nobody has talked about it, but it keeps getting deleted? Help? Thanks

Please read Wikipedia:Deletion review. Thanks. Xiner (talk, email) 21:52, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There's a deletion criterion that allows the deletion of reposted material that was previously deleted. If I had to guess I suspect the problem was verifiability. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Song or single?

Is it ..example (song) or example (single). they are used interchangably, such as Mutter (song), Mutter (single). I know i should probably use the non redirect page but annoys me that theres a link page for songs and the (song) and (single) is used randomly Fethroesforia 22:41, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...(song) is the standard title on Wikipedia, and for good reason. A single can later be released on an album, or already be on one. And really, it's a song, right? Xiner (talk, email) 22:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right:) the one i currently see..is as you say (song) but some..i think Schtiel might be one..where it is (single) for some reason..anyway..thank you :) Fethroesforia 22:48, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Be bold. When you see that, move it. Xiner (talk, email) 00:29, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, Schtiel (single) redirects to Schtiel, which is even better because if there's no confusion that Schtiel refers to a song most of the time, then the simplest name should do. Xiner (talk, email) 00:31, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dreamgirls

Good Day,

I am a writer, editor and researcher. I have written many articles. I put a external link in Dreamgirls the film to my blog in which I am the writer/author.

I link has been removed. Why was my link removed? There are external links there from other blogs and even myspace. So why was my external link removed? Would you know? Please response. Thank you very much.. Yes and mines would be considered to be a fan blog and I am a writer. Here are the external links that are there right now and mines was removed.

Official DreamWorks/Paramount Dreamgirls feature film website Dreamgirls at the Internet Movie Database Official Dreamgirls profile at MySpace Dreamgirls reviews at Metacritic Dreamgirls at Rotten Tomatoes Dreamgirls at Box Office Mojo Dreamgirls fan blog Dreamgirls trailers at Apple.com Dreamgirls reviews at Spill.com Retrieved from "http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Dreamgirls_%28film%29"—Preceding unsigned comment added by Uniqueinvest (talk • contribs) 18:37, January 12, 2007

Blogs are not considered verifiable sources of information. Of the links you list, the "Dreamgirls fan blog" is the only really objectionable one I see. The rest are either official pages or notable review sites. -- Kesh 00:25, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per policy one fan site is allowed. See WP:NOT. I'm not here to discuss which one deserves to be picked, though. The article's talk page may be a better forum for that. Xiner (talk, email) 00:28, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I had overlooked that in WP:NOT. Thanks! -- Kesh 00:37, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]