Help desk
< March 15	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 17 >

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.

March 16[edit]

Apparently Incorrect Birth/Death Dates[edit]

I’ve come across two cases in the past two days where, in the lead paragraph of their respective articles, we give the “official” version of the subject’s date of birth or death, but later down it appears we have good reason to believe this date is wrong. That is, we know the true date, but we still prefer to show the “official” incorrect date.

Lucia Santos is shown as being born on 22 March 1907, as per her birth certificate, yet we quickly discover that, according to Lucia herself, she was really born on 28 March. I’m not sure that we could accept that as independent evidence. I’m not saying she was telling a lie, but she could only have heard this from her parents, who were the very people who were happy to have her shown on the official record as being born on the wrong date. Is her own published statement sufficient to displace the official record?

Edith Piaf is shown in the lead para as dying on 11 October 1963, yet in "Death and legacy" we say this was the “official” date, and she really died on 10 October. There is no cited evidence for this, just a bald assertion. I’ve asked a question on her talk page to discover how we know this is true.

I'm concerned that we seem to be saying contradictory things about people. Much better to be consistently wrong than have a foot in both camps. If we really are satisfied that an event occurred on a particular date, maybe we should say so - and then explain why a different date appears in other publications. OTOH, if we are are bound by WP policy to show only dates that have been published, can we have a footnote or whatever to explain that there is evidence for an alternative date?

What is Wikipedia’s policy in such cases? JackofOz 00:45, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe there is an established policy on this. However, why do you think it is necessarily better to be consistently wrong, rather than to have a foot in both camps? -- Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 00:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the Edith Piaf article, at "Death and legacy", it says:

"At the early age of forty-seven, Piaf died of cancer at Plascassier, on the French Riviera, on 10 October 1963, one day before her friend Jean Cocteau died. Her body was returned to Paris where her death was not announced until 11 October, and it was given as the official date of her death."

However, in the lead para, we say she died on 11 October (with a footnote saying this is wrong).

So, in one place, we prefer the 10 October version, but in another we prefer the 11 October version (but then immediately deny its veracity). This is confusing. We seem to be speaking with 2 voices. Better to choose one date and give it in both places - then explain why the other date appears in the literature and why we prefer ours. If our chosen date later turns out to be the wrong one, we can fix it. JackofOz 01:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say it's better to mention the inconsistencies to avoid edit warring over such dates. - Mgm|^(talk) 06:01, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn't be including dates which are not sourced. Corvus cornix 17:57, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WWI[edit]

how long of a time do you have to be registered to be able to edit World War One?

~~Immediately. Make sure you're logged in.~~ Xiner (talk, email) 01:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, wasn't it like 4 days or so before they are allowed (if newly registered)? --- Hdt83 | Talk/Chat 02:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm getting stupid. I'm staying away from this board for a week. Xiner (talk, email) 02:29, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Restricting edits[edit]

How do I request that a block be put on an article to limit vandalism by non-registered users? Pamela Anderson has been vandalised several times today and that is not unusual.--Vbd (talk) 02:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're looking for WP:RFPP. -SpuriousQ (talk) 02:48, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It has now been blocked, but I am curious as to why the admin has not (yet) put a notice tag on the page. Is that not usually done? Or am I being impatient?--Vbd (talk) 05:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The admin used the {{sprotect2}} which only puts up a little padlock icon on the upper right. Actually, {{sprotect2}} is only used for long-term protection. Short term protection should use the {{sprotect}} without the 2; this shows the "article locked" box. You could talk to the admin about it but the page is still protected. --- Hdt83 | Talk/Chat 05:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it for you. Prodego ^talk 19:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

finding cleanup pages in certain categories[edit]

Is there a simple way to find all pages that are tagged both with a certain category and with a certain template? For example, I'd like to find all articles tagged {{wikify}} in Category:fashion. Thanks for your help! Calliopejen 03:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only way I know of is to use AutoWikiBrowser (WP:AWB): load up your category, and then look for those articles that contain the string "wikify". Though if there's a better solution, I'd be very interested in using it... tiZom_(2¢) 04:30, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Travis McCoy[edit]

The article appears to appeal to vandals. The talk page is becoming littered with comments that feed the trolls. Is it appropriate to clear out the page, especially starting with "Is he half White and Black?" ? I think so, but I thought that I should ask for a second opinion. If you agree, then please clear it. Thanks! Royalbroil^T : C 03:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought that you should never clear talk pages, but may archive them. Canadianshoper 05:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) The vandalism guideline has a section that specifically addresses talk page vandalism. Removing other users comments or blanking the page might be considered an act of vandalism on your part. One option would be to archive the existing comments and start fresh that way. Or if things are really getting offensive, you may need to start putting vandalism warnings (like {{subst:Uw-chat1|Article}}) on users' talk pages.--Vbd (talk) 05:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the replies. I was concerned about the {{WPBiography}} statement: "Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous." Archiving seems like a reasonable solution, so I archive the problematic troll-feeding text. It adds no value to the talk page. I have already handed out quite a few warnings for contributions to the main page on this article. Thanks for you suggestions! Royalbroil^T : C 12:21, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Editing[edit]

Is there a ranking system for contributors to the website?

Indianballer111 04:31, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits. Royalbroil^T : C 04:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note, however, that a user's edit count should be taken with a grain of salt - and is no indication of whether or not that editor is a valuable contributor. -- Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 08:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please avoid catching editcountitis - Adrian M. H. 18:26, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Broome Visitor Centre[edit]

Hi,

The Broome Visitor Centre has moved, could you please update the address and email details to reflect those available at www.broomevisitorcentre.com.au

Many thanks.

Hello, if you could tell us what article this is in then we can change it for you. Also, you can change it yourself. Just click the 'edit' button and change the section. Thanks. --- Hdt83 | Talk/Chat 04:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article on Broome, Western Australia does not seem to mention the Visitor Center. Even if it did, listing its address and e-mail details might violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a directory or the "Yellow Pages."--Vbd (talk) 05:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NSW election candidates[edit]

Hi How are you. I have tried to link a page about myself to my name on the Candidates list in 'Candidates of the New South Wales legislative election, 2007' from Chris Ryan (Labor candidate for Albury) and do not seam to have been successful what do I do. it linked when I did it but the link had disappeared when I reopened it.

Best Regards

Chris Ryan —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kerry1949 (talk • contribs).

The link appears fine for me. Have you tried refreshing the page in your browser? -- Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 08:20, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

india tourism day[edit]

sir, I want to know that why india observe 25th january as india tourism day? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bcdsasasasaa (talk • contribs).

Try asking this at the Reference Desk. This page is for questions about the editing of Wikipedia. -SpuriousQ (talk) 11:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HEADERS[edit]

If I want to change a headr, or have a suggestion for a better one, is there any avenue by which I may achieve this? My suggestion, if you can help, is the match the Sima (geology) article with the Sial article, to create Sial (geology).

WikieWikieWikie 14:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're suggesting a merge or a move. If you think an article should be merged with an existing article (combined into one single text), follow these steps:

Add the template {{merge|OTHER PAGE}} to the pages you want to merge.
Post a discussion on the article's talk pages about why you think they should be combined. Don't forget to sign your comments.

If you think it would be better to simply rename a single article, click the "move" link at the top of the page. Follow the steps on that page, and submit the form. The page will be renamed to the new article.

I hope this helps. Please let us know if this wasn't quite what you were asking. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 20:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who should I alert about {{Uncategorized}} and stub types?[edit]

Currently, it appears that {{Uncategorized}} is automatically added to stubs which have a specific stub category anyway, like Ottoman Empire stubs or whatever. Where should the proposal be made to change this feature of the bot repsonsible? -- Lenoxus 14:14, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhhh. Automated Bots often add uncategorized to uncategorized articles, reguardless of them being stubs or not. Adding them as a stub adds them to a stub category; but this is not a proper category. You should categorize the articles yourself. Which is simple enough. Retiono Virginian 15:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are stub categories not "proper"? -- Lenoxus 15:41, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because as soon as the article is expanded, the stub template will be removed and the stub category will disappear with it. Every article needs permanent categories that aren't dependent on stub (or any other) status. --Tkynerd 16:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So it's not considered a "bad" redundancy for a given article to have both the categories Basketball and Basketball stubs, for example? — Lenoxus 18:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why have my images been deleted?[edit]

I made a new article for Funny Girls, a showbar in Blackpool. I uploaded personal images, and mentioned in the details the correct copywrite details, and permissions, but user 'Jimfbleak' has deleted all of my images, claiming they are not released under GFDL licence whatever that means, but I know these images have no problems, and that they CAN be used! They havent simply been disabled, this user has DELETED them!!

I dont understand why! Is there some way to get my files back and my article reverted to before this malicious delete?!

Many thanks, TR_Wolf TR 18:47, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images must be suitably licensed, otherwise they will be deleted ASAP. And with very good reason; copyright law is a serious matter. That they were "your" images is irrelevant if you do not release and license them in the correct way. Such information can be found in Wikipedia's policy guidelines. Adrian M. H. 18:51, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, your article is unsourced, so I have tagged it accordingly. Adrian M. H. 18:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't accuse other users of being malicious. To keep everything nice we have policies Wikipedia:Be civil and Wikipedia:No personal attacks. I hope we can help you learn what you need about image licensing, on which there are very strict rules to keep Wikiedpa from being sued. If you don't know what GFDL is, that's something we may have to help you learn. What licensing (and conditions) did you put for the images? Notinasnaid 18:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You asked here 14 minutes after you already asked User:Jimfbleak the same question. Why not wait for his reply since he would know why he did anything? Dismas|^(talk) 18:56, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Berkeley Springs article[edit]

I just edited out false information about gang violence in Berkeley Springs and more particularly drive bys in front of my movie theater, the Star, which was specifically named. There has NEVER been a drive by in Berkeley Springs let alone in front of my theater. I have owned it since 1977 and work there every night the theater is open. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.248.250.3 (talk • contribs).

Good catch, the content you removed was vandalism that slipped by for a couple of weeks. This unfortunately occurs once in a while. There's no real need to report it here. -SpuriousQ (talk) 20:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible commercial link spam[edit]

Are all of 70.127.191.142's contributions commercial spam links? Should these be reverted? Thanks for your help. BazookaJoe 20:13, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this definitely falls under 'objectionable amounts of advertising', and the information isn't exactly amazing revelations: "Milk allergy diets. You need to eliminate milk and dairy products containing milk.". I'm going to roll them all back. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 20:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Checking now... Hersfold ^(talk/work) 20:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to tell. It appears the link existed under "External Links" on the Food Allergy article beforehand, and I think the IP may have been trying to add it as an additional resource in good faith to other pages. However, the edits have been reverted. I didn't look at the site myself, so it's possible it was linkspam being spread by the IP, even if it wasn't originally introduced by them. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 20:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC) (P.S. - I'll go with Venior's judgement. Makes sense.)[reply]

Page listed for deletion[edit]

Someone has listed my page for deletion. I've already left a comment in their talk page (slightly angry unfortunately), but if they don't take the proposal off it I was wondering how to appeal to you guys at Wiki for the non-deletion of it. The page is Tyrian Weapons if you want to take a look at it. Alxnotorious 20:15, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

For a proposed deletion, you just remove the template. Note that whoever nominated it will probably then put it up for Articles for Deletion. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 20:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The tag clearly states that you can improve the article and remove the tag. But as stated, the person who put the prod tag there will likely nominate it at WP:AFD for deletion. Dismas|^(talk) 20:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would be wise to correct its shortcomings before removing the tag. Then your argument will be more valid. Though, to be frank, I would seriously question the article's notability and validity. If such information has any value, it belongs in an article about the game itself. I will not do so in this case, but I would normally nominate an article such as this for deletion at WP:AFD. Adrian M. H. 21:11, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, that makes sense to move the article to the game's article. I'll do that right away. Thanks for the idea. Alxnotorious 02:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

How the 113H do I get this to show changes?[edit]

document.editform.submit();
I changed it to:
document.editform.showchanges();,
document.editform.ShowChanges();,
document.editform.Show Changes();,
document.editform.show changes();,
document.editform.show_changes();,
document.editform.Show_Changes();,
document.editform.Show_changes();,
document.editform.show_Changes();,
document.editform.Showchanges,(); and
document.editform.showChanges();.
How come it will not work?????????? -- Darkest Hour 20:21, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Uh... could you explain what you're trying to do? I don't understand. Hersfold ^(talk/work) 20:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to get the autoclick to choose "show changes". I got the save part down and I want the show changes to work but it will not. Whatsoever.... Darkest Hour 21:20, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

You want "wpDiff". -Amarkov moo! 22:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

search on user page[edit]

how do i get [1]

search boxes on my user page?--The Negotiator 20:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you can. Do you see anyone else's pages with search bars? If so, point them out and I'll help you put them on your page. But as far as I know you can't do this. — coel acan — 00:02, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't..--The Negotiator 11:02, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upload file[edit]

I cannot upload this. It says file is M-T (empty). What am I doing wrong? -- Darkest Hour 21:24, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I don't think Wikipedia supports the ICO file format. Please see Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Format. --KFP (talk | contribs) 21:28, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't my page editing permanent?[edit]

Last night I was online editing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Willing_Well_IV:_The_Final_Cut#Music_Video. When I signed back on today, the page had returned to the previous night's original text, word for word. Why?

Because someone reverted your changes. I reccommend discussing with them. -Amarkov moo! 22:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Links[edit]

What if I add a link that doesn't work the way it's supposed to? I added a link to the archenemy page labeled Spike that's supposed to lead to the page about the fictional character on the tv series Buffy The Vampire Slayer, but instead leads to a disambiguation page. The same is true of the Buffy link I added, and the Angelus link leads to something that has nothing to do with the tv character.

Try this: Wikipedia:Piped link. — coel acan — 00:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Spike is a common name and has many other uses. You need to redo the link. I assume you want to link to Spike (Buffyverse). To have the link show up as Spike, write it as [[Spike (Buffyverse)|Spike]]. Again with Buffy, to go straight to the character, [[Buffy Summers|Buffy]]. For Angelus, use [[Angel (Buffyverse)|Angelus]]. Mr.Z-mantalk¢Review! 00:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Basically, instead of using Spike, use [[Spike (Buffyverse)|Spike]]. -- Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 00:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]