Help desk
< May 14	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 16 >

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.

May 15[edit]

DNA haplotype of my ancestor[edit]

I would like to report an error regarding my ancestor Somerled. I am from the Macdonald Clan and I have DNA evidence that the information provided about Somerled's DNA haplotype is untrue. Somerled had an R1b haplotype and his father was descended from the High Kings of Ireland. He was from Clan Cholla according to our Macdonald history. There had been much misleading information published on the internet regarding his genealogy because the so called 'Chief' of Clan Ranald has an R1a haplotype. This is a blatant attempt to verify his decent from Somerled however we have DNA evidence which proves this is not true. I would like to challenge this information and all of the references to Somerled regarding him having an R1a haplotype and a Norse Father. This is absolutely not the case and is contradictory to all legitimate published information from reputable sources. Somerled was R1b. I will be getting some references together to support this but in the mean time I would like to strongly advise you not to publish defamatory information about our ancestor. If you would like to find out more about our DNA then please contact me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moidart (talk • contribs) 01:09, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a reliable source, you can fix the article yourself, or make a suggestion on the article's talk page. Please read the conflict of interest policy before editing. RudolfRed (talk) 02:06, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Protected page warning.[edit]

Occasionally when I return to a book I was reading the screen shows a protected page warning and I cannot get back to the book. The only solution is to delete/return the book to the library and then download it again. Is there an answer to this problem? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.152.248.191 (talk) 09:46, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried the computing section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Too many cooks spoil the broth[edit]

I had welcomed a new user and his talkpage was on my watchlist. Recently he was wrongly reverted by several (sloppy vandal fighters) due to an apparent lack of edit summaries in his edits, following which I had left a short message about the benefits of edit summary on User_talk:TheBestZebra#Edit_Summary. Now two other users (one of whom had wrongly reverted him) joined the party with irrelevant text and took nonexistent sides, and the end result was the user was left utterly confused. I am not interested in adding another comment over there for fear of continuing a mindless debate, but I also pity the poor User:TheBestZebra, Someone intrested in handling the newbies can take a look over there, regards-- ÐℬigXЯaɣ 13:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to have been resolved now. AndieM (Am I behaving?) 13:22, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure about that perhaps a concluding note to end the discussion from an uninvolved user would be a better idea. but thats my opinion. thanks for the reply-- ÐℬigXЯaɣ 13:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: sloppy vandal fighting and put the blame on BOTs [1] apparently one of the above user is misguiding new users about bot in an attempt to hide his mistake. -- ÐℬigXЯaɣ 13:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He must have just misclicked with Igloo on its advice. He has apologised for his mistakes so I don't see why this should continue any longer. As for TheBestZebra, since the edition of his talk page you linked his concerns have been addressed. AndieM (Am I behaving?) 14:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

reliable sources[edit]

My article keeps getting declined because of reliable sources, even though all of my links are to valid news articles from sources like Crain's Detroit Business, the University of Michigan, the Michigan Daily, and Ann Arbor Area Business Monthly. Does anyone have any suggesstions on what I should do to get this article published? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sean P. Dougherty (talk • contribs) 13:37, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see you figured out how to a request a new review.[2] The old review was from 28 April when there were no sources. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:50, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Purge[edit]

Hi. I tried to purge this file so the correct thumbnail is shown on the wiki page, but to no prevail. It worked on the german wiki, but not here and not on the french wiki. Any help would be much appreciated. Cheers. --Avaholic 15:21, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~I'm seeing the adjusted version in the thumbnail, if your still getting the old version, try opening the thumbnail itself, then~~ Actually, I'm still getting the old one on the french wiki, what I did to fix it is add ?action=purge to the url of the old thumbnail itself, sometimes that helps. Monty ₈₄₅ 15:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I tried that multiple times and added ?action=purge to both the thumbnail and the file on commons, no success. I just deleted my browser cache however, and guess what, it worked. Freaking Chrome. :) --Avaholic 15:31, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The notice "This article has multiple issues" should be reworded.[edit]

Dear Wikipedia:

Often, some article will have atop its content the notice "This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page."

As a language expert, I love to see good English used in Wikipedia. And so I am writing to say that

         "This article has multiple issues."

is a very, very poor use of the word "issues".

The problem is that "issues" has many different meanings. For this reason the word "issues" is an extremely *weak* synonym for "problems".

For this reason I suggest that Wikipedia replace this sentence with one that is unambiguous and to the point, without overstatement. For instance:

          "This article has numerous aspects that might be subject to improvement."

Sincerely.

I am a frequent Wikipedia editor, but I have not found any channel other than this one remotely appropriate to convey to you this particular concern.

(Note: I prefer the British style of placing close-quotes just before commas and periods, because it is more logical than U.S. style.)

You may wish to bring this up on the talk page of the template, or just be bold and edit the template. You may wish to read the 6 years of archives of the template first though (kidding).--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:33, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the word is perfectly suited for its use in the template. "Problems" is not a perfect fit for some of the template's listings, e.g., the fact that a major contributor has a COI is not exactly a "problem" that needs to be solved. Your proposed phrase above wouldn't work for the COI listing either.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:47, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This has actually been brought up before at that talk page but consensus was against a change (the suggested change was to "problems", I think this was a year or two ago). While this use of the word "issues" is more recent, it's still common and conveys the intended message better than any suggested option thus far, even though a pedantic argument could be made that it's incorrect. PS. Your phrasing is still a little weak -- If you're a language expert, you'll probably recognize that it should be, "There are numerous aspects of this article that might be subject to improvement." Although that would still constitute sacrificing succinctness and clarity in favor of pedantic accuracy. See Hypercorrection. PPS. Found the previous discussion: Template_talk:Multiple_issues/Archive_4#Saying_issues_when_we_mean_problems. Equazcion ^(talk) 12:31, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do I move my article from My Sandbox to the Main Page?[edit]

Hello, I have finished editing my article in "My Sandbox" and I am ready to submit it for consideration. Would you please help me with this? Thank you, JayceeCeejay (talk) 16:00, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but it's nowhere near ready - if you moved it now it would most likely be deleted within a few hours at most. Roger (talk) 16:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:JayceeCeejay/sandbox also seems to be a duplication of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Steven Caras: See Them Dance. Shearonink (talk) 21:33, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MEE TOO ::

? ie:

How do I now "create" the actual template page?

After all -- it really is cumbersome .. cutting & pasting this entire html (that I had to send to myself as an email in order for me to pre-use it now .. whenever i hit the tildes ~ thingies.. ie:

This user is from Central Otago, NZ.

µTemplate Central Otago, NZ

QUIX4U (talk) 18:09, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Undoing edits[edit]

Hello, I would like to ask how can I undo an undid edit. Basically, I helped improve an album page of the artist Madonna and I improved on the sections: charts, certifications and commercial reception accompanied with so many reference links and sources which took me a long time to find, searching archives and different websites (some which were dead). Anyway, someone undid everything I improved without giving a reason and now I can't undo that user's action. I'm a bit upset since I spent a long time searching and editing that article. Is there a way to undo this? I tried and I got the message "The edit could not be undone due to conflicting intermediate edits; if you wish to undo the change, it must be done manually". Any suggestions or do I have to write it all up again? Or should I just leave it? WWETrishMickiefan (talk) 16:32, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Don't start an edit war by redoing a reverted edit. Discuss the changes on the articles talk page to buld consensus on what the content should be. See WP:BRD. RudolfRed (talk) 16:35, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mentorship[edit]

Hello, How can I get a mentor? thanks *-Ax10m77-* (talk) 17:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just put {{subst:dated adoptme}} on your userpage or choose an adopter from Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area/Adopters and leave one of them a message on their talk page (see Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user/Adoptee's Area for more information). -- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 17:53, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks *-Ax10m77-* (talk) 18:01, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Web address for my photos[edit]

I am being asked for the web address of my photos and I don't know. What is the web address of my photos?Dee128floyd (talk) 18:21, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This question is your only edit to any project under the WikiMedia banner as a whole. You have no other edits to the English Wikipedia, any other language Wikipedia, or Wikimedia Commons. Without more information, we can't give you any answer. Did you maybe upload your photos to a hosting service such as Flickr and think that this is their support page? Dismas|^(talk) 19:14, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update has corrupted page[edit]

I have just attempted to update a page about myself (Anna Span) as it contains incorrect information and a bad citation source and the page code has somehow got corrupted. Can you revert the page to its previous state so I can try again please?

Also, how do I get alerts when this page is changed as I obviously have a pernicious follower who is reverting my edits to the previous false information (including incorrect basic info like DOB etc)

Thanks,

Anna Span — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.229.125.231 (talk) 19:19, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can add the page to your watchlist. Please read the conflict-of-interest policy before editing pages about yourself or that you are connected to. RudolfRed (talk) 19:25, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted as requested. - David Biddulph (talk) 19:28, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Registered users can make a watchlist. See Help:Watching pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:58, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have repeatedly removed cited information and replaced it with uncited information. This is regarded as an unconstructive edit. Furthermore, once an edit has been reverted, making the same edit again is edit warring: it should be discussed on the article's talk page before making the edit again (quite apart from the conflict of interest).

Nobody is entitled to remove properly cited information just because they don't like it; though if it makes the article unbalanced and there are independent reliable sources that give a different view, then what these sourcces say can be added as well; but you should cite them on the talk page, not in the article, because of your conflict of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 21:46, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice, new script for help desk regulars[edit]

I don't have a question, but I thought I would direct you to Wikipedia talk:Help desk#Help desk talkback script. It is an incredibly useful script in my opinion. Ryan Vesey Review me! 19:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note for anyone who wishes to use this. It currently doesn't work when the talk page for an editor has not been created yet. Ryan Vesey Review me! 20:33, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The problem was resolved. Ryan Vesey Review me! 00:14, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you won't mind if I try it out--SPhilbrick (Talk) 13:52, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dealing with borderline vandalism[edit]

I and a few others are trying to improve a serious article. We are serious editors. A few other editors are hampering the efforts by frivolous edits, asserting that there are BLP concerns when there apparently are not, refusing to discuss the concerns they have, etc. I need some guidance in dealing with this situation. How can I get it? Lou Sander (talk) 19:43, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Read the guidance at WP:DR on how to handle disputes. RudolfRed (talk) 20:31, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]