Help desk
< January 21	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 23 >

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 22

timeline

can somebody fix the timeline on the Panic! at the Disco page — Preceding unsigned comment added by PacoDaKing14Sportz (talk • contribs) 02:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Probably, but I'd suggest asking on the article's talk page. There are 656 watchers, so the chances are good you can get some help there. Or, maybe someone else here knows how to fix it. In the meantime, however, it's so messed up that I think we should revert your edit, and I will do so. Anyone who wants to see what it looked like after your edit can easily display that revision from the page history. ―Mandruss ☎ 02:56, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Upload Company Logo to Wikipedia Page

Hi

I hope this email finds you well.

I'm hoping you can help me add our company logo to the approved Wikipedia page, I've created. MessageMedia

How would I do this?

Thanks Rey — Preceding unsigned comment added by MessageMediaGlobal (talk • contribs) 06:54, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MessageMediaGlobal see Wikipedia:Uploading images and WP:FU. Your company logo would be treated as Fair Use.

There are some problems you need to solve, however. Your username is not supposed to be the same as that of your company; see WP:CORPNAME. See WP:CHU to find out how to change it (and I see the name has been blocked).

According to the history, the majority of the article MessageMedia was created by Kitkatwalk. Is that you? If so, do not post with the other name (not a concern now). And you have a conflict of interest which should be disclosed on your user page. By "approved", I assume you meant someone in your company approved of the content (this is not necessary for Wikipedia, and it is in fact discouraged), but at this point it appears the Wikipedia community has approved of this version, at least enough not to delete it.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:43, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Daddy Dewdrop

I am confused about the issue of conflict of interest or any other issue. It's true that I am trying to edit my own page. anything I posted is easily verified and I did not try to amplify it's importance just listing it as my involvement with music. I am open to any corrections as long as it is factual. I only did this revision to correct some of the stuff that was posted erroneously. Your suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I am very honored to be represented in wikipedia and would not want to do anything against the rules. I have viewed other song writer pages that have done similar posts so I forged ahead out of ignorance. Thank you for your help. Dick MondaDaddydewdrop (talk) 07:06, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia strongly discourages people from writing articles about themselves, and the Daddy Dewdrop article shows why. You have done a pretty good job (compared to other self-written articles), but it still needs a lot of work. For example, clauses like "the creation of original music was beginning to take over his attention" and "he felt one of the songs had commercial potential" need to go - these are subjective, and cannot be be supported (as Wikipedia requires) by independent reliable published sources. Also, it would be better to have more references to such sources for the objective facts in the article. I have tried using Google to search for some, and failed to find any; this surprises me, as even I, with no interest in modern music, can remember some of your lyrics. Maproom (talk) 10:25, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! You are welcome to help, but WP is VERY strict on HOW you should do that when you are the subject of the article (or employed by, related to, friend with, etc). In general, help us to find WP:RS about you and suggest them on Talk:Daddy Dewdrop, but don´t edit the article directly. A start can be to take the time and read Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Good luck and keep asking questions! Wikipedia:Teahouse specialise in helping new editors. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:21, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Restore article

How do I enquire about getting an article restored when the user who deleted it no longer exists? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Heshs Umpire (talk • contribs) 09:48, 22 January 2015‎

If you provided the name of the article or the user that deleted it, it would make it easier for someone to help you - X201 (talk) 09:59, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Heshs Umpire: If the administrator is no longer active, you can post a request to the administrators' noticeboard. You can also contact an admin in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles. If you believe the page was deleted in error, you can go to deletion review, where a consensus will form as to whether the deletion was proper or not. Make sure you review our deletion policy before you instigate a deletion review. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:03, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably the poster means Laois Intermediate Football Championship. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:45, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all Heshs Umpire (talk) 14:22, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sun also rises (novel) anti-Semitism

I want to submit the following (after Beegel) in Sun Also Rises (novel) article, but cannot manages to do so.

Critic William Adair points that narrator Jake Barnes, unlike his friends, “never refers to Cohn as an unattractive Jew during the ‘real time’ of the story.” His anti-Semitic remarks come months later as he writes his novel – which means either that Cohn’s going off with Brett has turned Jake into an anti-Semite, or more likely, that Jake is trying to “prejudice his 1920s readers against Cohn.”[68] See Adair, William. Page 15 “Ernest Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises: The Novel as Gossip.” The Hemingway Review. 31 (2): 114-18. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.207.51.26 (talk) 13:45, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments are about The Sun Also Rises. The article does mention anti-Semitism. The place to discuss possible changes to the article is the talk page, Talk: The Sun Also Rises. You can also edit the article directly, but any unexplained edits are likely to be reverted. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:12, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

I understand from WP:NOENG that citations in a foreign language are acceptable in en.wiki articles. In one particular article in en.wiki which is a short biography of an Iranian, three out of 12 footnote citations are in Farsi (Persian) without an English translation. Is this high proportion of foreign-language citations acceptable? I understand that they are from Reliable Sources. ~ P-123 (talk) 14:53, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Zero english sources would be acceptable. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 16:26, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So Wikipedia readers of the en.wiki have to take it on trust that foreign language citations they cannot understand have been properly vetted. So "verifiable" in the following quote from the second of the WP:FIVEPILLARS means verifiable by the editors, not the readers :

"All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is controversial or is on living persons."

and "must strive for" is a pious hope, not a requirement. ~ P-123 (talk) 21:30, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That a particular Wikipedia reader (or editor) may lack the skills to read another language has no impact on whether or not the source in question in another language has a reputation for fact checking, accuracy and editorial oversight. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:41, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

P-123 you got a cut clear answer from the help desk: "Yes. Zero English sources would be acceptable". Please allow the help desk to help other editors instead of wasting their time. 193.109.199.242 (talk) 22:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

193.109.199.242: Yes, it was a clearcut answer. I was merely making comment afterwards, was not raising further questions, others have chosen to respond to that comment, I was not the one wasting time. ~ P-123 (talk) 08:47, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We also allow editors to cite books that you don't personally have in your library, and scientific papers that you don't have the technical background to understand. If you have concerns about a particular source, there are many options available to you, including asking someone who speaks the language (including at the Wikipedia Reference Desk), running the text through Google Translate, or paying a translator. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:49, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SAYWHEREYOUREADIT woul apply to this last comment. -- Gadget850^talk 23:05, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My comment was addressed to P-123's concern about his purported inability to personally verify the contents of non-English sources, and the options available to him to carry out such verification. I didn't intend to suggest that Wikipedia editors should commission translations of non-English works and try to cite them in our articles, nor do I recommend or endorse citing non-English sources which the editor is unable to himself read. (In much the same way that I do not support editors who cite scientific papers that they have not read or clearly do not understand.) TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:33, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input

I need help editing the synopsis of the movie Tommy. synopsis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.215.182.11 (talk • contribs) 18:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This may be about Tommy (1975 film), which has a "Plot" section. Tommy (1931 film) has nothing like a synopsis.

What edits do you need help in making? Maproom (talk) 19:11, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Based on Special:Contributions/107.215.182.11 it appears to be about Tommy (album) and not one of the film articles. In [1] you inserted <ref><ref></ref></ref>, probably by clicking a ref link twice. You could have removed this code but your edits have been reverted. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:25, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Need help resolving neutrality flag

now being discussed on the article talk page. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:55, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

I'm seeking help as the author of the page on G. Flint Taylor. A neutrality dispute was placed on the article in October, 2014, and I haven't been able to determine why or what the process is for removing such claim. I've already posted the same request on the article talk page with no success. If an experienced editor could please look at this article page and advise, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks! Carolfowler1 (talk) 20:56, 22 January 2015 (UTC)Carolfowler1[reply]

Viewing the history of the page, I see that User:Graeme Bartlett applied the tag on 26 October 2014. Applying a tag to an article without explanation is sometimes known as drive-by tagging. On the one hand, he didn't say what he thought was non-neutral about the article. On the other hand, you are right that tags should normally not be removed without addressing the concerns. I would advise you to ask User:Graeme Bartlett (at User talk:Graeme Bartlett, to discuss his concerns about the article on the talk page, Talk: G. Flint Taylor. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:10, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article was very one-sided about the merits of the cases G. Flint Taylor was fighting for. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:14, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

infobox Film

I would like to know when the notification of an article being a stub disappears after one edited an article to a page? I would like to know how to add lines to the Infobox Film? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MirisElocin (talk • contribs) 22:18, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Almost nothing "occurs" - changes require a human to make an edit. A human would have to review the current article status and say "yes, this article has progressed beyond the criteria of a "stub" to a "start" (or higher level) rating and remove the stub template. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And an overview of all Infobox Film parameters is at Template:Infobox Film; most templates (atleast the common ones) have a documentation available at [[Template:templatename]]. GermanJoe (talk) 22:42, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If a parameter is not identified in the main template (linked above), you cannot add a new one at the article level. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:52, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@MirisElocin: See Wikipedia:Stub for an explanation of what a stub is. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:55, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The notification is separate code, a template, that is manually added to a page. It's possible for the shortest page not to have the notification, and it's possible to add one to a huge page — it's the code {{stub}}, or a more dedicated type (e.g. {{Germany-geo-stub}}), that is placed at the bottom of a page. Nyttend (talk) 23:29, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What to do on here

I go on here a lot, but i want to go beyond just reading articles
i only know 3 things you can you can do, all of which have problems

1. Vandalizing it

I know, you aren't supposed to vandalize Wikipedia, but i did it anyway. It's only fun when you are actually editing, but there is a constant fear of being blocked by an administrator. Its not really fun either because i did it as an IP, so there are barely any articles to vandalize, and doing certain things will trigger a filter. It also gets reverted by a bot in five seconds, so nobody is really going to see it unless they click 'view history'. I am tired of vandalizing Wikipedia.

2. Reverting vandalism

It's as fun catching vandalism as actually vandalizing Wikipedia. I tried it once, but i sucked at it. The edits i reverted were NOT vandalism and I never got granted rollback.

3. General editing

Not as fun as the two options above. Also, i don't feel like paying attention to detail, so i don't find anything wrong with the articles

If there is another option, let me know. If i have to do the latter two options, give me some advice. Thanks. --67.197.40.222 (talk) 23:04, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

if you have language skills, you can help with translation. if you have mad arts skillz you can help produce and clean up images. if you have a good camera, you can take and contribute images. ~~if you are good at helping others settle disputes you can join the mediation team.~~ -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:44, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that WP:DRN or WP:RFM wants anyone who thinks that vandalizing is "fun". Robert McClenon (talk) 12:30, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

good point. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:47, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I tried hard, but I couldn't think of any activity here that I would call "fun". Rewarding, sometimes, but not "fun". It would be awesome if you could have fun and build an encyclopedia at the same time, but that doesn't seem to be possible. ―Mandruss ☎ 23:56, 22 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Probably the most "fun" way this individual can help Wikipedia is to go live life and come back when mature enough that vandalism is not seen as "fun" . -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We all were thinking it. ―Mandruss ☎ 18:11, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]