Help desk
< January 9	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 11 >

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 10

Ulysses S. Grant High School, Valley View, California

I attempted to add that Grant High School won LA City Championships for swimming in 1964 and 1965 and Cluebot deleted the edits the next day. Somehow Cluebot knows more about the subject than I do even though I was on the swimming team at the time and have copies of newspaper articles and certificates and trophies as evidence. So Cluebot is, in this regard, clueless. What special magic power to I have to obtain from Wikipedia to defeat Cluebot?

Alan Campbell Class of Winter 1967 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opisgroup (talk • contribs) 01:33, 10 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

This may help Wikipedia:Third-party sources Mlpearc (open channel) 01:37, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It should, but it still seems curious that ClueBot would consider it vandalism. A few lines of text being added seems an odd thing to flag; there's certainly no shortage of un-referenced lines there already. Matt Deres (talk) 01:42, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes cluebot makes mistakes. It will only revert once, and would not revert your edit again. (Though, another editor could!) --allthefoxes ^(Talk) 01:44, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Opisgroup My concern above was not the bot, but helping you to include your edit. Wikipedia does not accept personal knowledge of an event, subject or item. THe link I left abouve will explain why and may help you find other references to use. Cheers, Mlpearc (open channel) 02:15, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mlpearc: Opisgroup says above that they have copies of newspaper articles. If they have the relevant bibliographic information (Title of newspaper, date) then that will be fine as a reference. --ColinFine (talk) 20:30, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ColinFine That's fine, that's not personal knowledge as they were implying before. Mlpearc (open channel) 20:47, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Articles about names

I was helping out with some DAB links and noticed something which I hadn't before. We have many articles devoted to specific names. Some, such as Ellie are simply disambiguation pages, while some, such as Matt and Victor are DABs (though note the difference in style between the two) that also have articles that talk specifically about the names (in this case, Victor (name) and Matt (name)). Is there a standing rule about how these are supposed to work? For example, should Ellie remain as a DAB page and/or get moved to Ellie (name) (currently a redirect)? Articles that link to Ellie are flagged as having links in need of disambiguation, but that's not really always going to be the case. Articles like List of most popular given names (which is what started me on this) just want a link to an article about the name. Thoughts? Matt Deres (talk) 01:36, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What I would do is make Ellie a given name page, add various real people to it, and split off the others to Ellie (disambiguation). It's pretty clear what the WP:primary topic is. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:38, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose. Thanks! Matt Deres (talk) 01:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maryse Warda

At Articles for Creation, I requested a random article, and got Draft:Maryse Warda. I reviewed it, and found it to be ready for acceptance. However, Accept was not one of the options from the AFCH tab. I had to Submit it. I then apparently made the mistake of submitting as myself rather than as the page creator. I then accepted it. I was then notified of its acceptance, but now I can't identify the page creator to notify them of acceptance. Can an administrator please help me? Robert McClenon (talk) 03:39, 10 January 2016 (UTC) It seems that the previous history has been destroyed, and I can't retrieve it. This seems to be to be a bug (or misfeature). Robert McClenon (talk) 03:40, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The history for Maryse Warda (not the draft) is intact. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:44, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Updating templates

I am having some problems with updating templates. Earlier, a template updated at one point, updated at all points (on all pages where it is there). Now, the update remains at one point and others remain without being updated: Take for example the following templates: Template:Settlements in Raichur district Template:Siraha District Template:Santhal Pargana Division topics

Can someone please help in updating in a manner it is reflected on all pages on which these are placed? - Chandan Guha (talk) 04:55, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be looking for WP:PURGE -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 05:19, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I am unable to purge the template pages - not even refreshing the pages. Please help. - Chandan Guha (talk) 06:14, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Purging needs to be done on each article where the updated template is not displaying properly. It doesn't involve making changes to the articles. It can be time consuming, but you can also just wait for the pages to be updated automatically. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 06:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The problem seems to be over. Thanks. - Chandan Guha (talk) 12:00, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question of G12.

When said "Unambiguous Copyright Infringement" of an article I've did to help another page, what caused the G12 to happen? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Malachq (talk • contribs) 06:11, 10 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

Malachq Although you can use copyrighted material as examples in an article, it must only make up a small amount (typically 10% max) of the text. Yours makes up most of the article. Having said that, since it's a US federal site, the text is public domain anyway. The privacy page says "information presented on these pages is considered public information and may be distributed or copied." There may or may not be other problems, but the G12 was wrong, so I'll restore Air Stagnation Advisory shortly Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:33, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

To be slightly picky, that quote does not indicate public domain or a free license. But the text is (as you say) public domain as a work of the US Federal government (as the disclaimer page indicates). —teb728 t c 09:41, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question in some foreign language

Heloo, sir/mam mujhy ek assignmet banani hai tu woh punjabi mein krna hai.tu meine language setting par punjabi language choose ki tu hoyi nhi. tu please mujhy bata dijye ki kaise krni hai...... It's Verry-Verry urgent.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjjain560 (talk • contribs) 10:30, 10 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

This is the English Wikipedia, so please try asking your question in English. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:26, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Rjjain560: As your questions mentions Punjabi, I guess you're asking about the Punjabi language Wikipedia. You would need to ask on there and not here- this help desk is only for questions about editing the English language Wikipedia. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:20, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Catalonia and the Basque Country, Spain

There is a serious problem in the articles 'Catalonia' and 'Basque Country'. Some anti-Spanish users —like JaumeR (talk · contribs) and Akerbeltz (talk · contribs)— want to add incomplete maps. They are incorrect maps. All other regions of Spain have the same type of locator map. Please, I request vandalism in those articles prevent, restrict and block vandals users. Excuse my limited English proficiency. Satesclop 20:53, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The maps for Catalonia, Valencia, etc. are not incomplete. It wasn't me who added them, but other users, and I just restored them because an anonymous person was vandalising them and changing official names (like PSPV and Gipuzkoa). This person seems to reject the conception of Spain as a complex country that has many nationalisms, and pretends to hide the actual situation by removing and changing official terminology. — Jɑuмe ^(dis-me) 20:57, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism does not mean "expressing a view with which I disagree". It does not even mean "expressing a crassly stupid view". It means "a deliberate attempt to damage Wikipedia". Please do not accuse people of vandalism when that is not what they have done. Maproom (talk) 21:41, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

VAndalism is changing official names like PSPV and Gipuzkoa. It also includes changing images that other users have agreed to use. And as you can see it wasn't me who added those maps in the first instance. I would advice you also to stop imposing your view and discuss in a democratic way before doing more changes. — Jɑuмe ^(dis-me) 21:51, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, JaumeR, you have just been told what vandalism is. I agree with your call on others to discuss the disagreement, but Wikipedia is not a democracy: it works on consensus, and if you refuse to hear any view but your own you will find it difficult to participate consensus. --ColinFine (talk) 22:23, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, but this person's statements are not right. For example, the Statute of Autonomy of Catalonia used the term "nation" before being modified by the Spanish Constitutional Court, so we can't say Catalonia is defined as a nationality (a neologism created in the Spanish transition) by its Statute of Autonomy. — Jɑuмe ^(dis-me) 22:57, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be a content dispute, and as such should be discussed at an appropriate venue (for example the article talkpage, or WP:DR)- it doesn't appear to be about asking for help editing Wikipedia, which is what this help desk is for. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:19, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response, could we move/copy this conversation to WP:DR? — Jɑuмe ^(dis-me) 23:24, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A VERY brief history of what happened. Prior to a certain date, all maps for the provinces of Spain were the "green maps". At some point, someone comes over from the Spanish Wiki and changes them all to the "red maps" because "red maps are used on the Spanish Wiki". Most of us gave up fighting this on the other pages but the issues with the Basque map is that the province has an odd shape plus an enclave, which is really hard to see on the "red map" but clearer on the "green map" because it does not show ALL of Spain, just a subsection. This has been debated ad nauseum in the talk page.

Every now and then, someone breezes through and changes the "green map" to the "red map" with some bombastic edit summary. And gets reverted.

As for the names for the provinces we use for the Basque provinces on the English Wiki, this was debated openly and consensus was reached. Akerbeltz (talk) 12:44, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]