Help desk
< August 19	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 21 >

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.

August 20

Still not added

Hi Guys, I see my page Kristina Hughes still has not been added.

Can you assist me? I'd love to update it.

Thanks, ~Kristina — Preceding unsigned comment added by KristinaHughes (talk • contribs) 00:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:AUTO and read Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Kristina_Hughes for why the article hasn't been created. Writing an article about yourself is never a good idea. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 00:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

James Lafferty

Hello I was wondering if you could post a picture of James Lafferty. Please and Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.144.181 (talk) 00:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:First_steps That should help. Commons is the repository for most of our pictures.--Canoe1967 (talk) 09:57, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How do I remove my wikipedia account?

How do I remove my wikipedia account? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueScreen (talk • contribs) 02:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can't remove it, but you can flag the account as retired, or take the right to vanish. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"USER:SA Brit/sandbox"

Hi, I was helping my friend make an entry on Wiki, and neither of us can figure out how to name it properly. The title of the article comes up as "USER:SA Brit/sandbox" and this is clearly not the intended title. We designed it to be called "International Clinics in Beijing." Thanks for any help you can provide on this matter, Z — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiser2001 (talk • contribs) 03:29, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When you think that the draft is fit to be submitted for review, you can put {{subst:submit}} at the top of the article, and then someone will probably move it first to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/International clinics in Beijing, & then (if acceptable) to International clinics in Beijing. Note that we use sentence case, not title case, so it would be International clinics in Beijing, not International Clinics in Beijing. The same applies to section headings, so (for example) you should change "Prominent International Clinics and Hospitals in Beijing" to "Prominent international clinics and hospitals in Beijing"; this is covered in the WP:Manual of Style. Another point which you ought to address is that your references are currently bare urls, or even incomplete urls such as www.imcclinics.com; you ought to expand them with additional information, the easiest way being the use of {{cite web}}, perhaps through the referencing toolbar, see Help:Introduction to referencing/3. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:30, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@SA Brit and Wiser2001: I suggest taking a look at WP:NOT - specifically, that Wikipedia isn't a directory, a guide, or a dictionary. In this case, unless there are newspaper and magazine articles about international clinics in China in general (so that the term is defensible), and similarly articles about these particular clinics, you're quite unlikely to have this article approved; and if you create it yourself, to have it survive very long. (About a thousand articles are deleted from Wikipedia every day, and that doesn't count articles that don't make it out of sandboxes and WP:Articles for creation.) -- John Broughton (♫♫) 15:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATING AN ARTICLE ON ME

Hello. May I call your attention to an article about me on Wikipedia:

Thomas Sheehan

The CV at the end of the article is long out of date. Can you advise me on how the current version of my CV could be substituted for the old one?

Thank you. 2605:A601:111:401:E151:990C:C3B8:3EA3 (talk) 05:32, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for not updating the article yourself – Wikipedia disapproves of people making changes to articles about themselves. The correct thing for you to do is to describe the changes you want made on the talk page associated with the article about you, Talk:Thomas_Sheehan. If possible, please provide references. Then a helpful and impartial editor may update the article itself.

(There used to be a problem here, the "talk" tab at Thomas Sheehan was wrongly redirected to Talk:Tom Sheehan (politician). I have deleted the redirect. I hope that was the best way to fix it.) Maproom (talk) 07:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

Help me how to make a signature — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.179.160.213 (talk) 07:10, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Type 4 tildes at the end of your message ~~~~, or use the signature icon in the edit toolbar at the top of the edit window. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:11, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)You need an account to have what most people consider a signature. Though you can always sign your posts using four tildes, like so ~~~~ Which in my case yields: Dismas|^(talk) 09:14, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image correction on the article

Hello,

I like to point out something about the logo on Ashghal's info box- Ashghal There has been an error on the image which is currently used. The actual logo has a line between the English and Arabic text which is missing from the one currently used... the new logo can be downloaded through this link. http://www.picatom.com/2a/Logo2-17.html I will appreciate if this logo can be replaced. Will appreciate your assistance- Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.152.10.111 (talk) 08:36, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced it. The pictacom one was .jpg format that won't do the transparent background. If it needs to be transparent then use .png.--Canoe1967 (talk) 10:12, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Canoe1967 Hi. I wasn't aware of this technical aspect, I saw that the updated one is in .png, I believe you converted it in this format. Thank you for the assistance and prompt action. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.152.10.111 (talk) 11:30, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How Do I Re-submit an article after making requested changes?

Frustrating. I provide all changes requested and there are no instructions on what to do next. No "resubmit" button. Please advise. Thanks. Montpine (talk) 10:56, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There was a resubmit button until the relevant tag was deleted in this change. I've added it back again for you. You will want to read WP:referencing for beginners, a link for which is provided in the feedback box which you can now see again. As a less important point you should remove the leading spaces at the beginning of lines, as these are causing the formatting errors which you can see in your draft. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete previous review boxes, they provide you with many links to useful information and guidance, they provide reviewers with information about the review history of the draft so that we can better help you, and finally they contain the resubmit button. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 11:24, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The style of the article needs a lot of improvement. Why, for instance, does it start with a random remark about Denver? If that is where she was born, the article needs to say so. Maproom (talk) 12:00, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

City State link question

Which is correct to use [[Pierre, South Dakota|Pierre]], [[South Dakota]] or [[Pierre, South Dakota]] or is the answer that either is appropriate, just don't change it. The closest I can find is WP:SPECIFICLINK, but even that doesn't seem to quite align.Naraht (talk) 14:35, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If the reader is likely to be interested in the state, as well as the city, then the former would be appropriate. If not, then the latter would be better. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I personally don't like to see the city and state split as two links. One reason is that Pierre, South Dakota, looks like a single link that can be clicked anywhere to go to the city, but that's not true. A second reason is that this wikitext is less than clear to a new editor. I just assume that a reader interested in the state can easily get there with two clicks (to the city, then the state), if presented with a single link.-- John Broughton (♫♫) 15:07, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Missing article history?

Dear editors: I received on my talk page a thank you for creating this article: Palmetto Education Association. However, it is not an article that I wrote. I looked at the history, and the first edit is me moving the article from another user's sandbox into the Afc so that it could be reviewed. I am sure that I used the standard move method, since the default text is in the edit summary. What could have happened to the older history of the page, showing the original creation by the original user? Is there any way to change the attribution so that the correct editor gets credit for creating the article? —Anne Delong (talk) 14:57, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You moved the author's sandbox to AFC where it was later moved to become American Teachers Association. The author then reused the sandbox (the opening item of the history being your page move) to create Palmetto Education Association. I've deleted the first few items of the history of the PEA artile to make it less confusing when looking to see who started the article. Bencherlite ^Talk 15:09, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have moved hundred of articles out of sandboxes, and this is the first time this has happened.

Donating photos

Dear editors: I am creating an article about a geological feature, and my husband has taken two photos which he has agreed to donate to Wikimedia Commons to be included in the article. He doesn't have a Wikipedia account. Can I upload them myself and include the fact that the photographer has agreed to donate the photos? Or does he have to get involved himself (he'd rather not)? —Anne Delong (talk) 15:21, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If your husband doesn't want to register a Wikipedia account, he could upload the images to another website, with a copyleft notice with the appropriate licence. Details of the options are at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. - David Biddulph (talk) 15:52, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, he has agreed to make an account. One more question: To donate photos, does he have to use his real name for a user name? —Anne Delong (talk) 17:01, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another option would be for you to upload the images and for your husband to communicate appropriate permission to OTRS via the process described at WP:IOWN.--ukexpat (talk) 17:14, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As long as the photos don't appear anywhere else in copyrighted form, he can use a user name rather than his real name. Looie496 (talk) 17:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I think I have managed it. At least, the images are showing up in my article, The Gut (geological feature). —Anne Delong (talk) 05:47, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Anne, looks good. The permissions queue at OTRS is a little backlogged so it may take a while for it to be reviewed.--ukexpat (talk) 14:25, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rock Paper Photo Edit

Hello, I work for Rock Paper Photo: Fine Art Photography. All I am doing is going to the wiki pages of our photographers and adding our site to their page. Apparently, because I am doing this to numerous pages in "rapid succession" it is considered spamming. I'm not trying to spam, I'm just trying to make clean edits. Is there a way for me to do this without getting "blacklisted?"

-Elana 50.74.5.67 (talk) 16:11, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but, in general, external links should lead the reader to further (encyclopedic) information about the subject of the article. Please see Wikipedia:External links for what is acceptable.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:25, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No. You are spamming (whether you do it in rapid succession or not). Please revert your edits now. Wikipedia's guidelines are at external links. - David Biddulph (talk) 16:26, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist/archives/February 2012#rockpaperphoto.com; though it was left in three articles prior to your insertions. Dru of Id (talk) 16:31, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

Sir/Madam:

I am the author of an article submitted to Wikipedia about the Public Service Advertising Research Center which I founded nearly 20 years ago. The article was rejected due to not having references and as I review the article, I am not sure what needs a reference and would request that someone tell me what needs a reference so I can provide it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.188.185.195 (talk) 19:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that what is missing is not just "references", but "references that demonstrate that the subject of the article is notable". And if your Research Center is not notable, you will not be able to provide these, however hard you try. Maproom (talk) 21:24, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CURRENT CONGRESS:

How can I find out the congressman/women that have taken a JUNKET in the recent congress that could be considered out of line with the last resolution passed by congress to limit these trips paid by "other" and of course we their bosses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.187.137 (talk) 20:00, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a help desk for questions about editing Wikipedia. You might find somebody able to answer the question on the Reference desk - but it will help if you say what country you are in. And I suggest you ask it in a way that makes it clear that your question is a real question, and not just an excuse for a rant, or it will likely get removed as soapboxing. --ColinFine (talk) 10:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I could be wrong, but I think Congress would refer to the United States, as in United States Congress.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 19:02, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes

Editors:

I can't seem to get the footnotes to come out right despite trying my best to follow the directions. Instead of each footnote appearing correctly, they all referenced the source in the first footnote and completely left out the content that was supposed to appear in the footnotes. I have tried to fix but cannot. The footnotes in the text looks correct but when I press preview it all comes out wrong. Help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsgwun (talk • contribs) 20:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your problem was that you had {{reflist}} tags scattered like confetti throughout your draft. {{reflist}} should occur once, and that in the ==References== section near the end of the article. I've hopefully sorted that out for you, but you need to read WP:Referencing for beginners. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:30, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help to avoid deletion: Articles for Creation space

Hi,

I received a message stating "Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/[my article], a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days."

My article has been in the articlespace for some time. Is my article (which is about a magazine that's currently in circulation) in danger of being deleted? Or does it just need to be removed from Articles for Creation space? I'm not clear on my next step. Do I need to edit or add to the magazine's Wiki page? I want to ensure that the Wiki article that I wrote stays on Wikipedia.

Thanks in advance!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.22.153 (talk) 20:34, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it's in Articles for Creation space it's not currently part of the encyclopedia, and if you're not working on it there is a likelihood that it will be deleted. If you tell us the name of the draft we can look at it and may be able to help you get it into a state when it may pass the review stage and be accepted for the encyclopedia. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:59, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, David! If you, or anyone, could take a look and tell me what I need to do, I would really appreciate it.

The article title is "We Are In America." link: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/We_Are_In_America — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.22.153 (talk) 21:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That article is in mainspace - the notification is not about it. Maybe there is a copy of it in AFC? Please copy the exact link directly from the message you received. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 22:36, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Here is the link I received in the message. https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/WEAREAMERICA

Here's the first sentence of the message: Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/WEAREAMERICA, a page you created has not been edited in at least 180 days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.22.153 (talk) 22:43, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/WEAREAMERICA was a rejected draft which has not been modified since October 2011. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/We Are In America was a new, separate, draft created in May 2012, and it was that which was accepted into main space as the article We Are In America. It is the old rejected 2011 draft which has been proposed for deletion, so unless there is any information which you want to salvage from the old draft before it is deleted, you don't need to worry. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David, I see. Thank you. I was unaware a draft had been created in 2011. I will leave it alone. Again, thanks so much!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.22.153 (talk) 07:11, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chemophobia page

Hello,

A page called "Chemophobia" has been put up there but a communications firm representing the chemicL Industry. it is a thinly veiled attack on science and scientists documenting health impacts from chemicals. The author "Grumpy Andy" works for a media firm which has been hired by the chemical industry and has just "reported" me to yo folks. What do I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stepheniehendricks (talk • contribs) 20:48, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What you can do is comply with Wikipedia policy, which requires you to discuss contested edits, rather than edit-war. And for the record, I do not work for the 'chemical industry' - though I don't expect for one minute that you will believe this, since you are evidently batshit crazy. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To AndyTheGrump: as you know, you should not make personal accusations to other editors.

To Stepheniehendricks: please sign your postings; please try to get other editors' names right; please do not make unjustified accusations against them; and please try to spell words like "chemical" correctly. If you fail in all of these, you do indeed give the impression (unjustified, I am sure) that you are batshit crazy. This does not help your cause. Maproom (talk) 21:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was a characterisation, rather than an accusation - and I'd say that the evidence is quite sufficient to suggest that it is accurate, and if Stepheniehendricks doesn't like it, she should think before casting aspersions at all and sundry. As it happens, I think the article could do with a little editing to rectify the rather overdone 'this is all irrational' line - but Stepheniehendricks accusations of everyone being paid chemical industry shills isn't the way to rectify it. Incidentally, I'd not even edited the article prior to this incident, as the article history shows.... AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:47, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How long have you been working in pubic relations, Grumpy Andy?[1] Bishonen | talk 19:32, 21 August 2013 (UTC).[reply]

OTRS pending

Dear editors: I wanted a couple of photos for my article The Gut (geological feature), so I uploaded a couple that my husband had taken and e-mailed his licensing form to the appropriate spot. However, I forgot to add the OTRS pending tag to the description of the images. I tried to find the images again, but the search engine won't find them - probably because they are new. How do I add the tag to the description retroactively? —Anne Delong (talk) 20:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can see a list of your contributions to the Commons at commons:Special:Contributions/Anne_Delong. Scarce2 (talk) 21:15, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And regarding the "how', you just edit the file page to include {{subst:OP}} in the "permission" field. Deor (talk) 23:52, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will bookmark that contributions page in case I need to make more changes later. The instructions for donating photographs just said "place on the image page", but didn't say where. —Anne Delong (talk) 05:57, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help with article

Have read tutorial. Just need a little help with set-up! - Thankyou Kurt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwkweinberg (talk • contribs) 21:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you are the topic you are trying to create an article about (judging by your past edits), I strongly discourage you from proceeding (see Wikipedia:Autobiography). Otherwise, just follow the article wizard, it will help you in creating a new article. Scarce2 (talk) 21:29, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Login Problem

My user name is "Terkurs" i registered in July 2013 and subited an edit on "Crisis Cell". I want to do more writings and edits but i can't login. Its like i forgot my password. Pls help me out asap. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.186.22.121 (talk) 21:56, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Two duplicate posts removed. The username "Terkurs" does not appear to be registered: [2]. If you set an Email address to your account, you can go to Special:PasswordReset and enter either your Email or username. ~Hue Sat Lum 22:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From the edit history of Crisis Cell, it looks as if the user name was Terkura, not Terkurs. Sounds as if you forgot not the password but the user name. - David Biddulph (talk) 02:02, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Updating IMS Health entry

Hello,

I am an employee of IMS Health and have been updating the IMS Health Wikipedia page to ensure it's up-to-date, accurate and valuable to the community and any visitors. I had been doing it without an account, but this was considered bad practice and the page was called-out by another user as a potential conflict of interest (COI).

In a discussion with this user on his talk page, I've created an account clearly indicating that I am updating the page as an employee of the company. This may appear to be a COI, but I take great care to keep the content bias-free, up-to-date, and ultimately valuable to all visitors. Without my edits, this page would be quite outdated and not accurate, which I think is worse than me trying to keep it up-to-date and relevant.

After being instructed to read the COI policy, going forward, I will post on the page's talk page any plans I have prior to updating the site. If others in the community don't take on the role of updating based on the referenced content, I will make the update to ensure the page maintains its value.

Based on this background and work I've done to comply with the COI concerns, I would like to know how I can have the COI tag removed from the IMS Health page[[3]]. Also, the logo on the page is now outdated, and I am unable to update it due to the newness of the account. Can someone grab the logo from their website (http://imshealth.com) and replace the logo so that it's accurate?

Thank you, Jon from IMS Health (talk) 14:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Encyclopedic Bias of Some Admins

Resolved

Good day! May I ask if anyone can help me regarding some encyclopedic bias of some admins.

I created an article and I did my best to follow the rules especially Wp:GNG, WP:SIGCOV and WP:NRVE and after a day, unfortunately some admins tagged the page for deletion.

While I understand that it's their responsibility to clean WP, I am just sad that they may be just relying on their encyclopedic bias rather than the rules established by WP itself to clean the pages.

If you can see the AFD of that page, you can see that I have explained in detail the defense for that article. Mainly because the subject I wrote has satisfied the requirements of Wp:GNG, WP:SIGCOV, WP:NRVE and to add to it, satisfies WP:BLP1E and #2 of WP:ENT. Therefore passes the WP:NOTABILITY criteria.

Although I am open for corrections, I know (in the spirit of WP) that all basis for decisions should be grounded in the WP rules. However, the dissenting opinions are just "I am unconvinced" and "WP is not a tabloid" without citing anything in the WP rules. Isn't that unfair, because if that's the norm, then the articles here in WP is subject to the subjectivity of the editors rather than objectivity that is grounded by the WP rules.

Again, I am open for corrections and appreciate the debate. But debates should be grounded on the WP rules and not just what the particular admins are feeling that day.

Let me give you an example, in the article, I cited carefully from the biggest networks of the Philippines where the subject comes from. One of the admins dismissed the sources as "Fringe Media." But all the sources cited are news outlets, and big company websites, it even has a TV show snippet, and not just mere blogs. Then why "Fringe Media?" Is it because it came from a 3rd World Country and comparably small, say, in comparison to CNN and MSNBC?

Another example, since my subject is a blogger, one of the admins said that the claim to fame of that blogger is writing about a "very minor celebrity." That "very minor celebrity" is the 1st Runner Up of an international pageant and is considered as a heroine for her country.

Dismissing the sources from that country as "fringe media" and dismissing a certain person as a "very minor celebrity" is an encyclopedic bias (and bordering on racist tendencies, IMHO) of certain people.

People of lesser stature has passed WP:NOTABILITY standards here in WP but I won't stick to that argument because it seldom carries weight as indicated in WP:OTHERSTUFF.

Although I admit the admins are not perfect since we are all just humans, I urge them to be more sensitive to the topics that does not come from their native land. It's not only Americans or Europeans who uses WP, but other countries as well. And valuable info for a citizen of that country may not be as valuable for others, but it doesn't mean we should deny them access to that info, especially if it is notable enough WP:NOTABILITY by WP standards.

I may be new here, but for what I know, WP is not a frathouse, where new pledges get subject to higher classmen "because they said so." It all should be grounded on the rules.

That's why there's the rules. And the article is cited properly using the Wp:GNG, WP:SIGCOV, WP:NRVE standards. This is not an AFD debate, but more of a "talking out loud" and a way to plea to some of the admins of WP to be more sensitive. Drumsaway (talk) 22:59, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is an ongoing AfD. An uninvolved Administrator will review the opinions expressed and close the discussion after seven days, pursuant to WP:CONSENSUS. If you believe the closing administrator made a decision that did not properly reflect the consensus, you can ask for a review at WP:Deletion Review. Calling other editors or administrators "biased" because you have a disagreement can be seen as a personal attack and is not allowed. You do not need to canvass or repeatedly expressing your opinion. Give your opinion, respond to other opinions if you think a mistake was made, and then let the closing admin make their final decision. Singularity42 (talk) 23:40, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, actually that's why I didn't put actual usernames here so that it won't be seen as an WP:NPA. It's more of a universal thing, by the Law of total probability, I am sure I am not the only one who experienced this. I'm shutting up now, but I hope a WP rule should be established regarding "sensitivity to an issue not native to an editor's country" or something. That's what I am aiming for and not to canvass actually. And that's why I put it here in the helpdesk, because, where else, right? Thanks.Drumsaway (talk) 00:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you will find that the Help Desk is not a great place to get help dealing with concepts, etc. (such as how to deal with general biases, etc.). The Help Desk can help explain the process, and generally speaking, the process works. Work with the process, follow the guidance above, and see what happens. Remember, you may not be happy with the end-result, but that's part of contributing to a community- and consensus-based project. Singularity42 (talk) 02:18, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]