Help desk
< September 1	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 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.

September 2

Reverting on Template:Pirates

This is the first time I have asked a question here because I can usually figure things out on my own. The template in question is Template:Pirates. Just wanted to give the link because it is then easier to explain. An IP added a privateer to the notable pirates. I reverted it because I don't think the privateer was notable enough. The IP also added a link to the list of female pirates. All of those pirates were listed in the main list of pirates (which also included a link to the list of female pirates) so I also took that back off. Now the IP has added it again. Since I want to avoid an edit war, I was confused about what to do so I came here. Thanks! Deflagro ^Contribs/_Talk 00:53, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a concise answer, but here is where to find all the documents describing how to handle content disputes: WP:EITW#Conten. Good luck. --Teratornis 02:18, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm gonna try and talk with the IP and see why they are adding it. I dunno if they will respond or not. Thanks again! Deflagro ^Contribs/_Talk 02:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New entry?

Hi, I want to add an entry! How do I do this? Thanks, Kate Suisman

<email removed to prevent spam>—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ksuisman (talk • contribs) 03:32, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before creating an article, please search Wikipedia first to make sure that an article does not already exist on the subject. Please also review a few of our relevant policies and guidelines which all articles should comport with. As Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, articles must not contain original research, must be written from a neutral point of view, should cite to reliable sources which verify their content and must not contain unsourced, negative content about living people.

Articles must also demonstrate the notability of the subject. Please see our subject specific guidelines for people, bands and musicians, companies and organizations and web content and note that if you are closely associated with the subject, our conflict of interest guideline strongly recommends against you creating the article.

If you still think an article is appropriate, see Help:Starting a new page. You might also look at Wikipedia:Your first article and Wikipedia:How to write a great article for guidance, and please consider taking a tour through the Wikipedia:Tutorial so that you know how to properly format the article before creation.--Fuhghettaboutit 05:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merging

I would like to merge two articles which have been tagged for suggested merging. However, I do not wish to upset people by merging them if the consensus is not to. But in the talk pages, there is maybe only one or two people's opinions on it. This is the same for many articles tagged for merging.

Is there a time limit after the articles have been tagged when it would be okay to go ahead? Otherwise, how do I know if it's okay or not to go ahead with the merge? -- Matthew Edwards 04:12, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it depends on how long the suggestion has been there, and if the comments support or object to the merge. Links? i ^said 04:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For instance List of notable Chicanos and List of Mexican Americans which has been tagged since October 2006. Most of the articles listed at Category:Articles to be merged since October 2006 to be honest.-- Matthew Edwards 04:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For those examples, since the discussion is way old, I would make a brief comment asking if anyone had any objections, and after maybe three or four days, if no one does, I would merge. But I'm just over cautious like that. i ^said 04:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then that is what I shall do :) Thank you. -- Matthew Edwards 04:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1973 comet

hi my name is cheri i am looking for an article the was wrote in 1973 around may. my uncle passed away on the comet boat that sunk his name was ralf nickerson my mother once has the book with this article in it and i would like to know how i myself can get this seeing i was very close to him and it would mean alot.

thank you cheri —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheri1967 (talk • contribs) 04:24, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia wasn't around in 1973. Do you have any other information? -- Matthew Edwards 04:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try: google:comet sank 1973. That finds Foundering of the Motor Vessel COMET Off Point Judith, Rhode Island on 19 May 1973 with Loss of Life. "Comet" is a common name for boats and ships, however, so you would have to be more specific about where this sinking occurred to narrow it down. Wikipedia has a Point Judith article, but it is only a stub at the moment. --Teratornis 10:05, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signature

My signature doesn't appear to be working. Why would this be? --BrianFG 06:30, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

In "My preferences", under "User profile", you have "Raw signature" checked - this is a slightly more advanced feature, and your signature will work if you uncheck it. -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 07:39, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. BrianFG 23:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with editing a section

I would like to add a more complete note (a link to the article referenced) for a note (footnote) in the article about J.S. Bach, but the text shown on the main page does not show up when I press "edit this page". What should I do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michelle Rasmussen (talk • contribs) 08:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely the problem is that you forgot to close a <ref ...> tag with a matching </ref>. (This is a very common mistake, and one that in my opinion the MediaWiki software should check for, instead of just blanking everything after the unmatched <ref ...> tag.) See WP:FOOT. --Teratornis 09:56, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but you misunderstood me. When I clicked on the "Notes" there was nothing -- Then I figured out that you have to change the footnotes in the section of the text above where the reference comes. So, now I have solved my problem. Thanks for your response anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michelle Rasmussen (talk • contribs) 12:53, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

agricultural land

definition of "net sown area" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.113.137 (talk) 10:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

try the reference desk.--Kerotan ^{Leave Me a Message} Have a nice day :) 10:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try a Google Search. I found this page which says:

Net Area Sown: This represents the total area sown with crops and orchards. Area sown more than once in the same year is counted only once.
Total Cropped Area: This represents the total area sown once and/or more than once in a particular year, i.e. the area is counted as many times as there are sowings in a year. This total area is known as gross cropped area.

When I first read your question, and before I googled, I was puzzled about what the net sown area could mean, since it seemed to me that land would either be sown or not sown. I wasn't thinking about multiple sowings per year. I wonder what terms "they" use for similar areas in aquaculture? --Teratornis 03:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig query

There are two persons named Michael Grant who are authors, and there is already an article titled Michael Grant (author) - what is the correct way to title an article about the other author named Michael Grant?

Salmanazar 13:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Find something else that is different, maybe nationality, genre, or a middle initial. Without knowing who the other is, I cannot give more precise advice. PrimeHunter 16:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The disambiguation at Michael Grant suggests there is a Michael Grant (crime writer), is that him? Kappa 16:34, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I decided to just add "(crime writer)" bearing in mind that both Mr Grants are devoid of middle initials. Salmanazar 19:26, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Birth date and death date

I saw this in the biography of Gregory Peck

birthdate = birth date|1916|4|5|mf=y

deathdate = death date and age|2003|6|12|1916|4|5|mf=y

What does "mf=y" mean ?

Tovojolo 13:20, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may know that users can set their preferences to display (linked) dates using particular formats such as day, month, year versus month, day, year. In these templates the default was month, day, year so they came up with "df=y", which apparently stands for "day first=yes" and use that for articles where the subject is from a region that uses that date formatting. Since "month first=yes" ("mf-y") apparently results in the default, I'm not clear why it's needed at all, but the result is that it displays month, day, year.--Fuhghettaboutit 13:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Word

how to find the meanings of any word..? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.248.111 (talk) 14:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please start a new question to have it answered in the future. Wikipedia is NOT a dictionary. For definitions of words please use Wikipedia's sister project, Wikitionary. Thank you, Perfect Proposal ^{Speak out loud!} 14:47, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to Wiktionary, you can try Google Search for word definitions. For example: google:define:numinous, google:define:irredentism, google:define:zymurgy, google:define:fatuous, google:define:ineluctable. --Teratornis 18:26, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GKMilner

GRAHAM MILNER (GKMilner) b. 3/12/1952 Lancashire, England. Arrived in Perth, Western Australia 1967. Socialist activist and writer.

Began revolutionary activities in final year of high school (1970) in Perth, Western Australia. Published underground journal 'Sacred Cow', distributed clandestinely in school.

Published underground magazine 'Revolt!' in 1971, and distributed in high schools in Perth. Arrested in Perth for protesting against South African rugby team during apartheid tour of 1971. Jailed for one month in late 1971 for throwing a shit bomb into St George's Cathedral in Perth, a protest against exploitation of the radical youth culture by Anglican Dean of Perth Rev. John Hazlewood.

In 1972 experimented with hallucinogenic drugs and attracted to counter culture for a while. Magazine co-edited 'King Mob'.

In 1973 I travelled to Melbourne and Sydney. I briefly worked with the Young Socialists (youth organisation of the Socialist Labour League) in Sydney. I met Jim Percy, national secretary of the Socialist Workers League, at a Socialist Youth Alliance (forerunner of Resistance) national conference in Sydney and was persuaded to join SYA (youth organisation of the SWL). The SWL was one of two groups in Australia at that time sympathising with the United Secretariat of the Fourth International. I was invited to join the SWL later that year, and was actively involved in Sydney branch until early 1974.

In January 1974, I returned to Perth to live. In the WA capital at that time there were no members of (apart from myself), still less was there a branch of, the SWL/SYA. Having not resolved in my own mind and to my own satisfaction the political issues involved in the dispute within the world Trotskyist movement, I resigned from the SWL and SYA in early 1974, and remained for a time not formally affiliated with any organised tendency in the international revolutionary socialist movement. Towards the end of 1974, I was instrumental in producing in WA the first issue of a theoretical journal 'The Socialist Bulletin', which declared its political solidarity with the United Secretariat of the Fourth International.

In 1975 I enrolled as a mature age Arts student at the University of Western Australia and became a founding member of an SYA club that was set up for the first time that year on that campus. The other members of the club were Peter Boyle, who is now national convenor of the Socialist Alliance in Australia, Maria Rabbone, and Peter Conole. Nevertheless, branches of the SWL and SYA did not exist in Perth and I decided to concentrate on my studies, withdrawing from my at-large membership of SYA midway through 1975.

In 1977 my partner, Anthea Parker, and I drove over by car from Perth to Melbourne to attend an SYA National Conference in the Victorian capital. Anthea had joined SYA in 1977, and I myself had rejoined the socialist youth organisation at the same time.

When the Socialist Workers Party (as the SWL became known following its fusion with the Communist League, the other group of Australian socialists sympathising with the Fourth International) had chartered and set up a branch of the party and SYA in Perth in late 1978, Anthea soon joined and I soon rejoined the party (in early 1979). This was not long after we had returned to Perth from travel overseas together during 1978 (which had been undertaken following the successful completion of our BA pass degrees in 1976 and 1977 respectively).

In mid-1979, Anthea Parker transferred from Perth branch to Wollongong branch of the SWP, with the aim of finding a job in the steelworks in that NSW city. I remained in Perth, and was active in the party branch there for another twelve months. From fairly early on in 1979 I had been elected to, and continued to be re-elected to, the party branch executive in Perth, and held the portfolios of education director, 'Direct Action' sales director, and 'DA' copy director. During my time on the branch executive I also organised two subscription drives for 'Direct Action', and wrote articles for the paper. I worked full-time in industry for over six months in 1980, in a tractor factory and a foundry.

Around July 1980 I put in a request to the SWP National Office for a transfer from Perth branch to Sydney branch (Sydney being also where the party's National Office was located). The request was granted, and several weeks after arriving in Sydney in about August 1980 I was offered a job by the party's national secretary, Jim Percy, as a journalist on 'Direct Action'. However, shortly after commencing work on the paper I suffered a breakdown in my health, spent time in hospital, and then returned to Perth to convalesce at the end of 1980. I had hoped to be able to return to active involvement in the struggle as soon as possible, and I went back to Sydney in January 1981, attending the SWP national conference in that city, although not of course as a delegate. Because of my uncertain health situation, I felt obliged to resign my membership of the party shortly after the 1981 SWP conference, but I stayed in Sydney for the whole of that year and continued to research and write articles for 'Direct Action'.

In early 1982 I returned from Sydney to live in Perth, and I decided, after repeated and exhaustive attempts by myself during the course of that year to gain readmittance to membership of the SWP had proved fruitless, to prepare to go back to university the following year and complete my Honours degree in modern history. My health was pretty unpredictable, but I successfully completed Honours in History over three years at the University of Western Australia, with a dissertation on Lenin's 'The State and Revolution', written in the final year (1985). I won a University scholarship to research a Master's thesis, and chose for my topic 'Trotsky's Analysis of Stalinism'. I successfully completed the thesis in 1993 and was awarded the MA degree in 1994. I completed a further degree, a B.Litt, with a major in Classics and Ancient History, in 2002.

In 2003, during the mass mobilisations in Australia against the invasion of Iraq, I saw the opportunity of rejoining the revolutionary movement in the form of the Socialist Alliance, which had been organised to regroup the far left in Australia at the beginning of the new millennium. I was accepted as a member of the Socialist Alliance in Perth in mid-2003, and I continue to be actively involved today in the Alliance in that city.

- Graham Milner, January 26, 2010

current email address: grahammlnr@yahoo.com (date: September 24, 2017)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Graham MIlner (talk • contribs) 16:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's nice. Do you have a question for the help desk? --Fredrick day 16:51, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not the place for personal biographies.--Max Talk (+) 00:07, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Autobiography. Also see WikiBios, where anyone may write an autobiography, without the bother of Wikipedia's notability requirements. --Teratornis 03:18, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unlocking attachments

I have important document's that I have been trying to unlock, however i'm having no luck. I have tried everything possible and just don't know what else to do. Please Help!!!!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.233.128.154 (talk) 19:04, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean documents on your own computer, then you need to ask on our reference desk. The Help desk is for questions about Wikipedia itself.

Now, if you're asking about unlocking pages on Wikipedia, then your best bet is to first ask on the article's Talk page. If you post there about the changes you want to make, someone should be able to add it in for you, provided it's relevant to the article and properly cited. -- 68.156.149.62 19:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I place the "biassed article" warning label on a page?

I think the entry for Sir Arthur Bryant should have the same warning label that appears above the entry for Douglas MacArthur.

Philiphurst 19:34, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That particular template is {{NPOV}}. In case you aren't familiar with templates, you go in to edit the article as you would any other article. You place that text at the top along with any other templates. It will automatically expand into the warning. --Moonriddengirl 19:42, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But just putting the template on the page won't do the job. You then must go to the article's Talk page and explain why you feel it's biased. If you don't somebody will come along and remove the tag without actually changing anything. Corvus cornix 17:11, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

citation question

I have a question on which of two formats is preferred. I asked at WT:FOOT and nobody seemed to know. Please only answer if you know which format is correct. Both are in use in different places.

Version 1: Blah blah (blah blah blah.¹) blah blah.
Version 2: Blah blah (blah blah blah.)² blah blah.

I know they go after the sentence punctuation, but should it go inside or outside the parentheses? Does it matter? --JayHenry 19:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've not been able to find a hard-and-fast rule on this. My personal feeling is that if the footnote/citation only applies to the content inside the parenthesis, then it goes inside the parenthesis. If it applies to the entire sentence, then it should go outside the parenthesis.

That said, I'd have to actually pull out a style handbook to see what they say, but even those are likely going to contradict each other. - 68.156.149.62 19:54, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you happen to have one, Wikipedia follows the Chicago Manual of Style on notes. I don't have a CMS. I do have Turabian, but can't put my hands on it at the moment. I believe you're correct, but somewhere in the manual it will probably say. --Moonriddengirl 20:01, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, we have an answer!. The footnote goes after the closing parenthesis... most of the time. D'oh. -- 68.156.149.62 21:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've always gone by what looks better. :-) --Max Talk (+) 00:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(UI) I think I'd agree that when the footnote references only the information inside parenthesis, it should go inside. The rules of punctuation state that when the parenthetical comment stands alone, the punctuation goes inside. Where it contributes to a sentence that would be complete even if the parenthetical portion were left out, they go outside. For instance:

I think my old car is about to give out on me, I'd like to buy a new car (corvette).^[1]

The salesman at the dealership (the man with the blond hair) was very patient with me.^[1]

I had to test drive two cars before I decided. (The first car was an automatic transmission.^[1])

For the first two instances, I'd place the ref at the end of the sentence, and the punctuation goes outside the parenthesis. For the last one, I'd place the reference inside the parentheses. That's how I do it, at least. And that's how most style guides suggest using punctuation with parenthesis, so it would seem to follow for inline citations. ^Ariel♥Gold 22:37, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Flagging for style

I've forgotten the template to flag something for having unwikilike style. Could someone please flag Bioregionalism for me? Capitalization, style, etc., is all off, and I'm afraid I don't have time to go through and do the editing myself. Cheers, samwaltz 20:10, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

done. The template is {{wikify}}, btw. Cheers. --דניאל - Dantheman531 20:29, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLP interpretation requested

Interpretation requested:

WP:BLP talks about "unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material" and some of the templates refer to questionable material which is unsourced or poorly sourced. How do you assess what is "contentious" or "questionable". For example, I came across an article on Clifford Olson, a serial killer. Everyone knows he brutally killed a number of people: this is neither "contentious" nor "questionable" material. But when dealing with a BLP, should not such statements still be credibly sourced?
The most innocuous example I found in this page was the statement that Olson killed 11 people. This statement is unsourced so the correct number could be fifteen or five, for all I know. In my opinion this material should be removed until it is sourced, but because WP:BLP uses words like contentious, the intent of the policy becomes unclear: i.e. it is not contentious that Olson is a murderer, and most people would readily agree with the statements that he was "rumoured to torture and kill animals" or that he was "known as a bully and a show-off", but all of these statements are unsourced.
I picked this example because I believe all Wikipedia BLP pages should maintain the same Wikipedia standard, even when they are written about the worst "scumbags" on earth.
Advice on how I should interpret this bit of WP:BLP would be appreciated. Thanks. --- Taroaldo 20:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I 100% agree this is a major problem. However bad someone is, we must not say anything derogatory about them without demanding solidly reliable sources. I'll look at the page and report back. AndyJones 20:54, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Much of the article seems referenced by "external links"--needs clarification, to be sure. --Moonriddengirl 21:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Reporting back. I've looked through the history and this page has never had a reliable source. Someone may have seen your question as they added a {refimprove} tag to the article. That is not good enough. I have removed it and put a {db} tag. Whatever this guy may or may not have done, wikipedia accusing him very publicly of very serious crimes with inadequate sourcing is not acceptable. The article must be removed until it can be restored with adequate sourcing. AndyJones 21:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is CTV Television Network not a reliable source? That was the one inline citation I found when I tagged it refimprove and began looking for more verification. --Moonriddengirl 21:34, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- - - Wikipedia is only supposed to contain information that is verifiable. There have been famous Wikipedia hoaxes, such as one in which an innocent man was stated to be suspected of involvement in the John F. Kennedy assassination. Therefore, even if someone remembers sitting through the trial, or reading about it in the newspaper, an article that says someone was a mass murderer, serial killer, rapist, drug addict, wife beater, syphilitic, pedophile, adulterer, prostitute, criminal, gang member, suspicious character, or professionally incompetent MUST be sourced to WP:RS reliable sources. Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons is an official policy of Wikipedia and bears reading. An article with defamatory material about a living person (and some would say also a recently deceased person) which lacks reliable sources, may be stubbed down to just basic verifiable facts, unless and until someone takes the time to find references to prove the allegations. This article presently has an external link to a website operated by Court TV, an operation of Time-Warner, with a signed article outlining the murders. That is not a bad source. It has two Canadian TV sites as other sources. It does not read like an attack page directed at an innocent person, or like a hoax. It could be improved by inline citations to shown which allegations are sourced to which reference. I would go with improvement rather than deletion at this point. It should not take too much editorial time to match up many of the statements with the appropriate sources and add the needed inline citations. If anything, it should be stubbed rather than deleted. Edison 21:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - It seems reliable sources have been added in the last few minutes. I think the article has been saved. However WP:BLP should always be applied mercilessly. AndyJones 21:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        This is the wrong place for BLP concerns. Suspected BLP violations are best taken to the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard as well as the talk page for the article itself. The article really needs the Court TV material brought in via inline citations. Then any allegation of wrongdoing that is not backed up by any of the present the 3 reliable references should be deleted if a serious allegation of wrongdoing or at least tagged with {{fact}} if a less contentious statement, so that someone might check Newsbank, Proquest, or newspaper backissues on microfilm (the imprisonment occurred before the era of most newspapers having electronic archives) to see if the claim can be documented. Exculpatory information, if any, from reliable sources should also be added. The same standards apply to someone one might think was railroaded or someone one thinks is satan's own disciple. It is also better as a matter of NPOV and style to say someone was a "convicted" or "admitted" murderer rather than flatly stating he was a murderer, since there are literally hundreds of well documented cases of "murderers" who were later shown to be falsely convicted. Wikipedia is not a tabloid with lurid headlines about "fiends." Edison 21:37, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        I think it is the right place to ask a general question about an interpretation. The Olson article was used as an example. There has been no dispute with another editor which would require posting on the Noticeboard. Also, I do not believe that CourtTV is a solid source. I have seen a few of their crime articles, and many of them read like articles from tabloid rags. Can you write salacious statements about someone in a WP:BLP as long as you cite a media source which contained the same salacious statement? I think media sources, for one, need to be used judiciously. --- Taroaldo 22:03, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very uncomfortable with the CourtTV information. It's shockingly lurid. I have neutralized the tone of the "murders" section sourced by it and am considering clipping the "early life" section out, as CourtTV is the only source for much of that. --Moonriddengirl 22:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't think the Help Desk is the place for this discussion. If it needs continued, please do so on the Village pump policy page. -- 68.156.149.62 23:32, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2007 September 2