Hello,

I am seeing via the final regular season blackhawks game that number 81, Marian Hossa, is wearing an "A" on his jersey and it doesn't say it on the blackhawks page. The last time the roster was updated was 3/28/15. I hope you can fix that.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Toews1994 (talk • contribs)

Who is this "you" that you speak of. You are Wikipedia. If you see a mistake and don't fix it, it is only your fault and your fault alone that it is still wrong, and you have no one to blame, and no one to ask for help, except yourself. We're all waiting. --Jayron32 02:21, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As can be simply seen from the edit history of Conversion therapy, an editor warred with me. Then an anonymous user came and changed the version; does it even count? as far as I know from the Hebrew wiki, anonymous edits don't effect edit conflicts and there are many reasons for that. What is your stance? Ben-Natan (talk) 04:32, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ben-Natan does not provide a full account of what happened at Conversion therapy. He has attempted repeatedly to remove material about President Obama's support for banning conversion therapy for minors, despite two users (an IP address and myself) agreeing that the material has to be included in some form. He has accused the IP address of being a sockpuppet of mine, falsely and without evidence. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 04:40, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I engourage other users to go and see if your acquisitions are true; btw I didn't make such accusation but presented a question - "Sign up if you want to influence - Maybe it's FKC from another PC?" you didn't read well... Ben-Natan (talk) 05:04, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See boomerang. Maproom (talk) 07:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ben-Natan, yes you reverting an IP is counted as edit warring if done enough times. So if I make an edit and you revert it, followed by someone else restoring my edit and you then reverting them. Then finally an IP restores my edit and you revert them, then yes you are edit warring and you have now reverted 3 times. It does not matter what other Wikipedia's do as each one has their own rules. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 05:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reference help requested.

The article NTV (India) seems to have a problem with references. I don't know what is wrong with it. can you fix that problem??

I referenced it as I would normally. There is no problem with me Ok. See my edit

Thanks, Supdiop (talk) 11:50, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Supdiop:, unfortunately I had to remove the added section for now. Please don't copy material from copyrighted sources into Wikipedia (see WP:Copyrights). Information needs to be phrased in your own words or put into short attributed quotations. Adding "Controversies" sections is difficult in general: it's probably best to look for additional sources about this incident to provide a balanced and neutral summary (see WP:NPOV). Regarding your reference question, Help:referencing for beginners contains a summary about this topic. You can also click on the "help" link in such error messages to show some basic information about the problem and possible solutions (in your edit 2 previous "ref" tags had no content and no closing "/ref" tag).GermanJoe (talk) 12:45, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've never figured out the point of having the tag filter at Special:Log — why would you use it there? And how do you use it? I told it to filter for HHVM, the first entry at Special:Tags, and it gave me a page I've never seen before:

A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software.

• Function: IndexPager::buildQueryInfo (LogPager)
• Error: 2013 Lost connection to MySQL server during query (10.64.32.25)

So I still don't know what it's supposed to do or to look like. Nyttend (talk) 12:16, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

HHVM may be a poor exsample. The HHVM filter was slow for me but eventually gave a page where all entries were from 10 December 2014 but did not say "HHVM". I guess the tag stopped being applied that day and is still searchable but not displayed, at least not on log actions (I can see it in some edits before 10 December). mw:HHVM/About says "The tags were hidden from the default view on November 10." I'm not sure how to interpret that. It was added on 10 November so it's not meant to say 10 December. Try "mobile edit" instead. That gives meaningful results (but only uploads) for me. Most of the tags will never be applied to a log action. "self-renaming and bad user talk moves" is one that does. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:43, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But why would I want to search tags by log entry anyway? Isn't it easier just to go to Special:Tags, pick the tag you want, and look through its items? After all, the tag filter requires that you specify a tag; you can't have it present you with all tags at once, or even two or three. Nyttend (talk) 14:32, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The tag filter option is in many places like logs, page histories, user contributions, recent changes, new pages. I see no good reason to remove it from one place just because it may be more useful in the others. Some users may not know where else to find the option or that it even exists. There may be other wikis which apply more tags to logs. The tag filter on logs of course only finds log entries with that tag so other pages don't have the same functionality in some cases. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:01, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On your notable people in your article for Person County N.C. I think you should include Demetriss Tapp a Country music singer and song writer who resides in Hendersonville Tenn. And is still involved in Country music and television. Please do some research on her and consider adding her to your notable people list. Thank you and have a great day.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.116.163.245 (talk • contribs)

Lists of people from X should normally only include people who have their own articles as established "notable" persons. It does not appear that Tapp qualifies. In any instance, content would need to be verified by a reliable source. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:04, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you think this person meets Wikipedia's standards for inclusion (see Wikipedia:Notability (music)), you might submit that information at Wikipedia:Requested articles/music/Performers, bands and songwriters or be bold and write the article yourself. After the artist has an article it would be very appropriate to include them on the "Notable people" section of Hendersonville, Tennessee.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  19:42, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would have liked to add some thoughts on the mathematical reference desk, but some of he wikipedia insiders decided to make it only editable to insiders.

What a pity.

Wikipedia, which anyone can edit ... anyone "worth of" ... .

Good bye, everyone.

95.115.149.121 (talk) 18:51, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not "insiders", it's autoconfirmed users, which only means Wikipedia users with a small bit of editing history rather than none at all. And even that is because of recent constant vandalism. Such an action is only taken when there is no other action available, it's not done on a light whim. The page might be restored to be editable by anyone later, after the vandalism has gone away. It's very often I see reactions like these, people see Wikipedia administrators take action against constant vandalism, and immediately think they're making Wikipedia editable by a select few glorified "insiders" only. It's only an act to prevent vandalism, there's no further agenda involved. JIP | Talk 19:35, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Let me clarify a little. The edit protection is temporary, due to a guy using multiple accounts to commit lots of vandalism (example), and hopefully he'll get bored soon and allow us to end the protection. Unless we want to spend hours hitting "undo" every couple of minutes, we have to choose between protection and having no Reference Desk content at all. Nyttend (talk) 01:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you really believe what you are saying, but being accused of being a sock puppet is a cheap accusation which cannot be disproved. Trying to argue against it will be called trolling. I've been accused more than once, and now it is "never again". Cheers! 95.115.181.232 (talk) 13:57, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your IP address has changed between edits. The ability to maintain an editing history is one of the various advantages of creating an account. The idea that editing from an IP address is a better protection of privacy than editing pseudonymously is a myth; in fact, registered accounts have better privacy than IP addresses, which can be geolocated. Registering an account has other advantages also. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To the best of my knowledge, no one has called the OP a sock puppet here. The page is temporarily protected because it has been constantly vandalised. No one has said the OP here is the vandal. This is just a routine measure against vandalism and only temporary. It's not a personal vendetta against the OP, or anonymous users in general. Don't take it personally and claim "Wikipedia is for insiders only! I'm leaving!" just because one page is temporarily protected. JIP | Talk 19:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no. You cn't get an account from a dynamic IP that changes on a daily base.I tried and the account was instantly blocked based on the fact that some real troll had used one of those IPs in the past. So it is a vendetta against anonymous users. 95.115.146.71 (talk) 10:44, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's no issue with short term IP address leases for accounts on Wikipedia. Even if you're stuck in an IP address range that has account creation blocked because of persistent vandalism, you can still Wikipedia:Request an account. Rwessel (talk) 12:08, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have different experience. Once your accused to be a troll for having a tainted IP, everything you do or say is taken as proof that you really are a troll. Kind of a witch trial. User:999Bedbugs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.115.146.71 (talk • contribs) 13:08, 14 April 2015‎

Honestly I'm out of my depth here. The Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Technoquat, in which user:999Bedbugs got included, is huge and complex, and I really can't get my head around it to form any sort of opinion. I can say that there is *no* desire to block an editor unjustly. The SPI archive may give you some information about what the exact issues were. Looked at alone, the edits made by that account don't appear to be particularly objectionable, but my ability to compare them in form, content and timing to the other accounts in the SPI is minimal at best. Since the talk page is blocked, the way to request an unblock is via Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System. There are also some helpful links on that page. I will also comment that the unblock request placed on the 999BedBugs talk page 16 June 2013 was less than helpful, you'll need to provide a real reason in your unblock request. "Your reason here" does not count, and would obviously be dismissed out of hand (as it was), and probably taken as a sign of bad faith (see Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks). Rwessel (talk) 18:04, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's also unclear from [1] whether 999Bedbugs actually wanted to be unblocked or only wanted an explanation. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:09, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I would like to update the table for Australia under the " Joint Issues" article but I don't know how. Below is a copy of the table with my amendments and additions. Maybe someone canhelp with this. The references are the Australia Post Bulletins auspost.com.au/stamps

(Year / Postal Administration / Topic / Note / Date of Issue) ADD 1983 /New Zealand /closer Economic Relations Agreement/ Stylized Kangaroo and Kiwi? Feb 2, 1983 ADD 1990 / USSR / Scientific Cooperation in Antarctica / / June 13, 1990 ADD 1994 /Thailand & Laos / Opening of Friendship Bridge between Thailand and Laos / Views of Friendship Bridge/April 8, 1994 AMEND 1999 / Canada / Maritime Links /“Marco Polo” Joint Miniature Sheet / March 19, 1999 AMEND 1999 / Ireland / Maritime Links / “Polly Woodside” Joint Miniature Sheet / March 19, 1999 AMEND 2000 / Greece / Sydney and Athens Olympic Games / Sydney Opera House, Parthenon and Olympic Flame /September 15, 2000 ADD 2009 / Norfolk Island & Cocos (Keeling) Islands & Christmas Island & Australian Antarctic Territory / Species at Risk/ Joint Territories Issue, including Joint Miniature Sheet / August 4, 2009 ADD 2010 / Papua New Guinea / Kokoda Trail / / April 20, 2010 ADD 2011 / Cocos (Keeling) Islands & Christmas Island & Australian Antarctic Territory / World Wide Fund For Nature 50th Anniversary / Joint Territories issue / August 30, 2011 ADD 2013 / Israel / Battle of Beersheba / / May 30, 2013 ADD 2013 / Germany / Ludwig Leichhardt / Explorer / October 10 &15, 2013 ADD 2014 / Norfolk Island / Centenary of Australian Territory / Norfolk Island Pines / July 22, 2014 ADD 2015 / New Zealand / ANZAC Centenary / / April 7, 2015

I assume this about Postage stamps and postal history of Australia. I have copied it to that article's talk page, where someone may deal with it. Maproom (talk) 21:15, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually probably for the Joint issue article. Rojomoke (talk) 04:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]