Help desk
< October 1	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 3 >

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.

October 2[edit]

Pippa Middleton[edit]

Resolved

Corrections made by PrimeHunter. Czoal (talk) 02:59, 2 October 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 have returned the ancestry section on the Pippa Middleton page. But I cannot do the chart (Arbathenal) which is underneath it - I have mucked it up somehow. Please help. Cheers M.125.168.85.156 (talk) 00:10, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed.[1] You apparently tried to copy from the diff page [2] but that will include text from the presentation of the diff. You should have clicked "edit" at the time stamp of the old version and copied code from its source. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:30, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I hope it doesn't turn into an edit war. The editor who removed the content started a talk page discussion. IP 125 responded to it, then immediately restored the content (4 minutes later). Czoal (talk) 00:36, 2 October 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.

Question about supposed Pending AFC submission in article space[edit]

This is an inquiry about the category Category:Pending AfC submissions in article space. Browsing its parent category, Category:Pending AFC submissions, I see that it has one entry. That entry turns out to be Bruce West (newspaperman). However, there is no obvious reason why that article is in that category or the related category Category:Possible AfC copy-and-paste moves. I see that the article was promoted from draft space to article space yesterday by User:Anne Delong using the AFC Helper Script, not by a copy-and-paste, and the script should remove the Pending AFC category. I don’t see a template in the article that can be removed in accordance with the instructions. First, can someone explain to me why this article is in the category, when it seems to have been properly moved into article space? Second, can someone either remove the article from the category or explain to me how to remove the article from the category? Thank you.

This is an AFC question, and normally AFC questions go to the Teahouse, but this is a question for AFC reviewers and other experienced editors, and I don’t need tea at 2115 local time, or top-posting. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Robert McClenon. I looked at the page and saw that Category:Pending AfC submissions in article space and Category:Possible AfC copy-and-paste moves are added when an AfC page is submitted for review. They are deleted again when the page is accepted into mainspace. I presume that they are used as markers to trigger maintenance operations such as checks for duplication and cleanup of AfC comments, etc., after acceptance. I can't explain, though, why the page still appears in the categories when it has been accepted, and the categories no longer appear on the list at the bottom of the page.—Anne Delong (talk) 02:32, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. So you and I are both unsure. I did read the explanation, and seems that it didn't help either of us much. Maybe a third experienced editor can explain. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:35, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I have changed Bruce West to a disambiguation page, which now directs to two people and a former electoral district. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:35, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reformatted per WP:MOSDAB.--ukexpat (talk) 02:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea.—Anne Delong (talk) 07:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The page is no longer in those categories. Maybe it was a problem of delayed indexing?—Anne Delong (talk) 07:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Frederic Moberly Bell[edit]

Please check what is wrong with the "other sources' section in this article. Thanks Mike125.168.85.156 (talk) 01:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That is part of the {{MW 1935}} template. The red link indicates that we don't actually have an article on The Modern World Encyclopædia. There is nothing wrong with that. --Stabila711 (talk) 01:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unremarkable software updates[edit]

WP:NOTCHANGELOG is pretty clear that we shouldn’t list changes in software updates if primary sources are the only sources available. But what should we do if third-party sources only announce the update’s availability and list some changes (without republishing primary sources), and the update has barely any WP:WEIGHT? For example, if the total secondary coverage is limited to something like, “Users of Foo will be able to update to Foo 1.2 tonight, and enjoy extra widgets on the kajigger. The devs have also fixed a mildly annoying bug.” So, two main questions:

If our article on Foo includes a version history, should a description of this version be included?
If all updates have this kind of coverage, should the article include a version history at all?

Thanks. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 01:54, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it would depend on the article. For example, iOS version history has every version update along with updated features. I guess if the update was only a bug fix update that could probably be grouped with the last update with a single line bugs x, y, and z were fixed with update Foo.1 and it wouldn't need its own entry. --Stabila711 (talk) 02:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The tables in that article seem a gigantic, blatant violation of NOTCHANGELOG… but I suppose that’s for another discussion. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 02:23, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not really. Apple is so widely talked about that every single update has at least a few reliable sources talking about it. A few of those updates rely on Apple as a source but most of them don't. Same thing with Android version history. It all depends on what sources are talking about it. If your hypothetical product has the same thing I don't see a problem with you including the updates but since you haven't really given us an article to work with we have to use what we already have. --Stabila711 (talk) 02:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Right, iOS isn’t a good example of what I’m asking about here. Hence I said it’s for another discussion. A better example might be less well-known embedded software, such as the firmware/system software for a video game console (which was what prompted these questions). —67.14.236.50 (talk) 02:53, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well then no. If there isn't reliable secondary sources then they don't get individually listed. There isn't an article List of Xbox One updates (it is redirected to the main article). There just isn't any secondary sources talking about every update Microsoft releases for Xbox. On the other hand there is an article List of Ubuntu releases since each major update does have sources talking about it. It just depends on what exactly we are talking about. I'm sorry if I am not getting my thoughts across clearly. --Stabila711 (talk) 03:08, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That should probably redirect instead to Xbox One system software, which did list every single update in a table with very few non-primary citations. (That listing has been removed and replaced with prose [if WP:Proseline] with adequate sources. Other “console system software” articles are much the same, but need more work.) —67.14.236.50 (talk) 03:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Would WP:VPP or another page be a better forum for this question? —67.14.236.50 (talk) 03:01, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You can try another forum but they are going to have the same issues. NOTCHANGELOG is dependent on what other sources are saying. If we don't have an exact example we can't really decide where it falls. --Stabila711 (talk) 03:08, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve started a discussion there, asking whether NOTCHANGELOG is even relevant, after you pointed out other articles that violate it. So my questions here may be moot. —67.14.236.50 (talk) 04:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lupton family[edit]

Resolved

Answered (again) and I made the edit. Czoal (talk) 02:56, 2 October 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.

please place accent over nee - Baroness von Schunck nee Lupton- in the section Olive Middleton. Also the words "Anne" and "Olive" in the Francis Martineau section on this Lupton family page need to be linked into the section Olive Middleton, nee Lupton which in the 20th century section at the bottom of the page, I need yoyur help here. thanks again 125.168.85.156 (talk) 02:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{nee}} - How many times have we explained how to do this?--ukexpat (talk) 02:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough, apparently. Haha. Czoal (talk) 02:51, 2 October 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.

Lupton family (2)[edit]

Please help - you will see how I am struggling to get a link in the "Francis Martineau and descendants" section on this page - the red words - Olive Middleton, nee Lupton - need to be able to link into her section which is in the 20th century section at the end of the article.

ALSO - Please remove the little dots underneath the word "nee" in the nane "Baroness von Schunck (nee Kate Lupton)" in the sub-section headed "Olive Middleton (nee Lupton)". Srbernadette (talk) 05:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no point in continually asking the same questions if you don't remember the answers (or look them up in the archives). See this, and then this about the toolip on née. I've also left a note on your user talk page, so that you can refer to it in future.

As for the link to a section in the same article, the way to do it is with a hash sign in front of the section name in the wikilink, so [[#Olive Middleton (née Lupton)]], see this edit. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Olialia Group[edit]

To whom it may concern,

Few days ago i made an article about the Olialia Group (https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olialia_Group <https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olialia_Group> ), unfortunately it was deleted by administrators with the explanation that it is kind of advertisement.

It is not!

I found many articles about Virgin Group, Virgin Radio and so on. So why you deleted my article about the Olialia Group but leaving those kind of articles about virgin? It is very unfair, and I request you to return my article.

If you want you can read about Olialia or Olialia blonde island and etc.

Will wait for your reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arunev (talk • contribs) 07:37, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Arunev: This is the help desk for the English Wikipedia. The different language Wikipedias are completely separate entities with their own administrators. We have no control over what happens there. Please ask your question at the Lithuanian help desk. Thank you. --Stabila711 (talk) 07:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Arunev if Lithuanian Wikipedia is anything like English Wikipedia, other stuff exists. If the other articles aren't up to standard, they shouldn't be there either but were overlooked.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:30, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dead links to a source[edit]

The internet resources

"QL history FAQ: Hardware". http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/roklein/ql/Hardware
" QL History FAQ: Firmware" http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/roklein/ql/Firmware

referenced in List of Sinclair QL clones, Preemption (computing) and possibly other pages, seem dead. However they have got archived:

—how can I find all references to subpages of http://www.staff.uni-mainz.de/roklein/ql/ to replace links with WebArchive ones? --CiaPan (talk) 08:54, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@CiaPan: Special:LinkSearch does this job - Results. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article Wizard Saved[edit]

It's under Melissa Mccarty the article is in saved draft mode for help, its short sweet with 3 reference links did I do it right? I was told you could help look it over and see before its published.. .its in save mode. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melissa2121 (talk • contribs) 09:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Melissa2121: I cannot find any article called Draft:Melissa Mccarty or Draft:Melissa McCarty. Are you sure you saved it? Once you get to the last page of the Wizard you can enter your draft title. You then have to click the Save page button to save your draft. If you did save it you can place {{subst:submit}} on the top of the article. That will signal the editors at articles for creation that it is ready for review. --Stabila711 (talk) 09:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Melissa2121, I'm not sure what you mean by "its in save mode". If you mean the draft has been created in your browser, but you have not clicked the final save to come to the end of the article wizard, then it has not been saved, and no one but you can see it, so no one can help with it. If the wizard is still open on your computer, save the contents as Stabila711 explained above. That will not "publish" it it will only create a draft, and anything that seems to be a problem can easily be changed. Your post starting this thread is the only edit you have made to Wikipedia with this account so far. DES ^(talk) 14:38, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lupton family (3)[edit]

Great news - I did a link on one page to another section below. I DID IT myself!!!Please understand that I find editing very hard. I know that helpers have given advice - but it is hard for me to follow and even find on the various talk pages. I am sorry for my slowness.

BUT I NEED HELP WITH THE DOTS PLEASE:

I am hoping that you will remove the little dots underneath Olive's name in her OWN section (which is underneath the 20th century section of the page). Cheers again and please be patient MikeSrbernadette (talk) 11:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well done on the linking! The dots are created by the {{nee}} template (which generates a small popup to define the terms when a reader hovers their mouse over it). In Wikipedia terms it's preferred, but if it really bothers you you can always remove the curly brackets to get rid of the template. Bear in mind that others may feel differently, and might well put them back, though. Yunshui ^雲 _水 12:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

... and see the answers in the section from a few hours ago. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a company[edit]

Hello, I am confused as to why the page I created is being deleted. How do I go about getting it to stay up? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allergy Partners (talk • contribs) 14:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You can see Wikipedia's policy regarding the addition of articles about companies to Wikipedia at WP:CORP. You should also read WP:COI. -- The Anome (talk) 14:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Allergy Partners. The article Allergy Partners was deleted by User:RHaworth with the logged reason "A7: Article about a company, corporation or organization, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject". It could also have been deleted as "blatantly promotional". You have a pretty clear Conflict of interest, and are strongly discouraged from creating or directly editing such an article. If you do go ahead, I would recommend the use of the article wizard to create a draft, and submitting that draft for review via the articles for Creation project. Note that any such draft must be neutrally written, not at all promotional, clearly indicate why this firm is significant, and establish notability through citations of independent reliable sources. See the golden rule and the links provided by The Anome above. Also Wikipedia:Username policy prohibits accounts that have Usernames that unambiguously represent the name of a company, group, institution or product. Please change your username promptly or you will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Changing username. Please remember that any Wikipedia account should be used by one and only one person, shared use is not permitted. DES ^(talk) 14:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Page creation[edit]

Hello, I would like to add a page to Wikipedia, however I am not sure I can because I work there. It is a national company and I am the digital marketing specialist for them. Any ideas on how I should go about this? We have magazine articles and such to support our case. :) Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quel Bach (talk • contribs) 14:40, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Quel Bach:. No, as someone with a conflict of interest you should not create an article about the company, and if you do make any edits about the company, you would need to clearly identify yourself as a paid editor. See the terms of use.

As far as an article about the company being appropriate for Wikipedia, the company would need to meet the basic requirements for an article or the special options for companies. If the company does meet those criteria, you can make a request that a third party create the article and if you provide links to the reliably published third parties that discuss the company, it is more likely that someone will take up that task. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you read Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with close associations. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How to create an article[edit]

Hi, I am new and I am trying to create some articles about textile designs and designers. I started one but it says User:Gingerswitchel:Sandbox at the top, I can not title it. Also, I'm unclear on whether or not it's published. Very confused! Help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gingerswitchel (talk • contribs) 16:13, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The text currently exists as a draft in your user space. To submit it for review, please edit it to add the text {{subst:Submit}} to the top and click "save page". However, at the moment the draft would be rejected because it does not cite a single source to demonstrate that the subject is meets the notability guidelines. Please see WP:RS, WP:REFB and WP:BIO for further assistance.--ukexpat (talk) 17:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The actual title of the draft is User:Gingerswitchel/sandbox.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. I think I understand.

How to fix Congressional term end dates?[edit]

Someone or several someones has been changing Wikipedia articles on US Senators and Congressman who served before 1933 to indicate that their terms ended on March 4.

In fact, Congressional terms ended on March 3. Presidential terms ended on March 4 because the US Constitution mandated an oath taking at noon on March 4. As a result, cabinet appointments also ended on March 4.

Terms for members of the US House and Senate ended on March 3 because there was no requirement for a noon oath taking on March 4.

I've been making corrections when possible, but I could use some help because there are so many March 4 errors. Is there a way to get these corrections made and get other contributors to stop making edits which incorrectly state March 4 as the end date?

You can verify that Congressional terms on March 3 with these references:

Here; Here; Here; and Here.

Thanks,

Billmckern (talk) 18:40, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Billmckern: Have you considered one of the Wikiprojects like Wikipedia:WikiProject United States presidential elections or maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject Politics? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

if the edits were made by a single editor during a fairly consecutive run with no other changes, if you can find it on their contribution history and can right click ~~"undue" "undue" "undue"~~ lol .... -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 19:07, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think TheRedPenOfDoom means "undo" "undo" "undo" ;-) but that option is not available in the standard contribution history, it needs an extra script like Twinkle or Huggle, which you may not have installed. - Arjayay (talk) 20:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! and Ooops! Without the tools, you could still right click on the (diff) choose "open in new tab" again and again and again, and then from each of the tabs "undo" - its a lot more work but you can see where the damage has been done. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 20:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? "undo" is always available to everyone; otherwise IPs couldn't do it, but they can. Perhaps you're thinking of rollback, which requires special tools or additional user rights. Nyttend (talk) 20:37, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

While "undo" is available on individual diffs at the individual article page level; on the page of contribution history of a user, "undo" is not directly available as an easy option for a user to be able to click click click on each of the edit lines. I was thinking of the "rollback", but that is not appropriate as the edits would not be "Vandalism". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Undo is not always available in the "contribution history", only the individual edits, as TRPOD has explained above - Arjayay (talk) 21:28, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you meant Special:Contributions. It's on every line in the history of contributions to a page (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia&action=history, for example), and that's what I thought you meant. Nyttend (talk) 01:38, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think a big mistake has been made here and that the March 3 end date will have to be reverted back to March 4 in hundreds of articles where Billmckern changed it. Please see the discussion below. Czoal (talk) 03:13, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Remark: Dear all, a question has been posted in the helpdesk below with concerns about end date of congressional terms [3]. Please stop all editing concerning this topic until the issue has been resolved. I have started a central discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Politics#US Congressional term end dates. Please post your arguments there so people can discuss them. Do not edit (concerning this topic) until this has been resolved. Any editing can cause edit wars on a dozen articles. A situation noone wants. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 10:46, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request help to fix blatant vandalism[edit]

I am posting here to request help to remove several instances of vandalism from the Pierre Nanterme article. In each case, the edit was made recently, but doesn't seem to have been caught. As you'll see, the changes are clearly incorrect and are very confusing for readers, so I hope someone can help.

On the article's Talk page, I've left a full request listing out the issues, but to summarize:

Throughout the article M. Nanterme's name has been changed to "Ramon Politan"
His birthdate, nationality and birthplace have likewise been changed, including in templates and categories

The reason I'm asking here is that I'm not able to make these fixes myself as I have a conflict of interest. I'm making this request on behalf of Accenture, contracted via PR agency Burson Marsteller. Since I follow the "bright line", I do not edit live articles myself where I have a COI. Would someone be able to remove the obvious vandalism from this article? Thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 19:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article has repeatedly been attacked by unregistered vandals. I have reverted the latest series of such edits. Maybe an admin could semi-protect. Maproom (talk) 19:33, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In fact I didn't, because Dismas got there first. But I have made a couple of other reversions of recent vandalism, as you requested on the talk page. Maproom (talk) 19:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! I think the only thing remaining is the mention of "Bulacan" in the infobox, which is definitely not his place of birth. Really appreciate the quick response! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 20:03, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's clear (from the length of time that vandalism hangs around) that few people have the page watchlisted, I've pending-changes protected it. Deor (talk) 02:05, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Search suggestions[edit]

Some hours ago, when I searched wikipedia, nice suggestions popped up so I didn't have to type the whole term to search.

Not anymore (mobile and desktop view, Chrome for Android, Android 4.3, works in android stock browser despite being older).

Thanks guys... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.151.198.7 (talk) 19:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry that I don't have an answer for you but this is probably a better question for WP:VPT than here. The Help Desk is a place for questions about editing and not really for technical issues. Dismas|^(talk) 19:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One Sided News on wiki homepage[edit]

i'm disappointed by news staff who post news covering certain regions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.160.68.12 (talk) 19:39, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent news items, in chronological order, have been about:

US
worldwide
Saudi Arabia
Afghanistan
India
Syria

So there's a bias towards the "Middle East". But that is things have happened: two civil wars, and a stampede that killed hundreds. Maproom (talk) 19:53, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Every user, even those without an account, are welcome to discuss what should appear in the news section at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates. So, the content is, at least somewhat, in your hands. Dismas|^(talk) 19:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "news staff", only users. The only staff are the people who run the servers, and manage the Wikimedia Foundation, all content is created by users, and that includes you. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:18, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Image Storage[edit]

I am a new user intending to create a single article and do not intend extensive edits to other articles. I would like to include images in the article and have the images stored on my account. However as I read the requirements for upload, my status as not having initiated a number of edits will not allow me complete the upload as an auto-confirmed user. Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by S051125E (talk • contribs) 20:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just wait a few days. Autoconfirmation requires at least ten edits, and it's not granted until four days after you register your account. You already have more than ten edits, and you just registered today, so you'll be autoconfirmed four days from now. However, what do you mean by "have the images stored on my account"? When you upload an image, it's noted as being something you uploaded, but it's possible to use any uploaded image on any of Wikipedia's 60,565,681 pages, even pages where an image shouldn't be used. Nyttend (talk) 20:54, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

THANKS; assumed "10 edits" applied to editing articles other than one I was creating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by S051125E (talk • contribs) 21:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@S051125E: I will note that you have an awful lot of edits to go. The draft version of your article does not establish that the subject meets our criteria for a stand alone article and none of the the content is appropriately verified by a citation to a reliably published source. As you add footnotes, they should be to third party sources discussing the subject so that it is clear that the article reflects the mainstream opinions of the subject and is not merely a Wikipedia editors personal opinions and analysis. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, "ten edits" means ten times clicking the "save page" button; as far as autoconfirmation is concerned, the software doesn't care what kind of page it is. Nyttend (talk) 21:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I wasnt clear. My comment about "more edits to go" was not about getting auto confirmed to be able to load pictures, but getting the article to the point where it would be appropriate for main space. having pictures in an article that doesnt have references does not help it get to "live". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Page for Alex Rocco[edit]

I notice that you have a photo of him with Sandy and his award, yet you do not state the year he received that. frankly I'd like to see that listed. I knew this man as he was my neighbor And I baby sat his kids. a good guy who turned his life around and should not have experienced his (step)son going before he did. thank you kindly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.235.2.98 (talk) 20:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused. Elsewhere in the article, we read "He received an Emmy Award as Best Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series for this role in 1990", and the "Television" table also mentions him being awarded a 1990 Emmy. Were you talking about something else? Nyttend (talk) 20:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention that the caption of the photo in Alex Rocco is: "Rocco at the 1990 Annual Emmy Awards, September 16". PrimeHunter (talk) 22:05, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the IP's eyes prevent him from seeing "1990", which is mentioned three times in the article in relation to that award. Czoal (talk) 00:49, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Obscenity Guidelines[edit]

Life is full of things that are perceived as obscene/indecent by some people and yet they are part of reality. What are the guidelines for reporting historical events on wikipedia that some people may find distasteful? Thanks Sliven2000 (talk) 21:41, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. The policy in question is WP:NOT#CENSORED; if it serves an encyclopedic purpose, it can stay.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 21:47, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jo-Jo. Well it says "Material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available". In the case I have in mind it would definitely be less informative/accurate so it means it should be included. Having said this, I imagine if you report events containing "obscenities" it will likely be subject to a high level of edit-warring, i.e. people that find it offensive will keep coming along and deleting it, How can you prevent this as it is just a waste of time and energy to keep toing and froing over an issue? Sliven2000 (talk) 22:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

only very very rarely is anything done in the name of preventing potential disruption. we deal with actual disruption of all kinds from pointless trolling, POV pushing and actual vandalism in the same way. revert. give increasing levels of warnings to the user. take measures to prevent the user from continuing to disrupt. The third level may be a block or a ban of the user or if intensive level of disruption from wide array of IPs, a limited time of "protection" of the article so that only autoconfirmed users may edit. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 22:15, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks. I think I will put a pointer to an item on the Talk page pointing to WP:NOT#CENSORED to reduce potential conflicts but deal with anything that happens when it occurs. Sliven2000 (talk) 22:20, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]