Help desk
< July 12	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 14 >

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.

July 13

Lady Susan

Ref. number 1 - I have done as a book - but I have failed. Please fix and leave in quote. Srbernadette (talk) 00:56, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Srbernadette: Consider using the Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books, which will automatically fill in all the required fields for you and help you avoid such mistakes. - NQ (talk) 01:08, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Articles based on a fallacious premise - relevant policies?

Hi, I nominated the article Irregular chess opening for deletion because (1) I believe it is a WP:REDUNDANTFORK containing material already covered by List of chess openings and (2) I believe the entire basis for the article is fallacious.

By way of explanation, in chess openings classified as ECO code "A00" are often described as "irregular", however not all openings described as "irregular" are classified as ECO code "A00". Don't worry about the precise meaning of these terms unless you're really interested in chess, the point is that "all A are B" does not imply that "all B are A", this is affirming the consequent. The opening sentence of the article "Irregular openings or uncommon openings are chess openings that are categorized under the ECO code A00." is a clear example of this.

I seem to be having difficult getting this point across at the deletion discussion (maybe I'm just not good at explaining things), but I'm wondering if there is a relevant policy that can be cited? Any policy concerning articles based on a false premise? MaxBrowne (talk) 03:23, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The !voters at an Afd would not necessarily focus on the contents of the article, but rather at the notability worthiness of the article title. By arguing on the article contents primarily, you would not be able to convince the Afd regulars. The Afd is a lost cause as of right now; I would !vote keep, for information, because of the article title and the references supporting the same. The appropriate method for you would have been to directly raise a proposal to merge the article rather than taking it to Afd. Let the Afd go through. Subsequently, after the Afd has closed, on the talk page of this contested article, raise a proposal to merge (keeping the redirect) the contents of the said page into the existing page that you quote. You'll get a better response then. While merging, you can delete OR while ensuring referenced details are not missed out. Lourdes 03:38, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it looks like mismatch between an article's title and content is not grounds for deletion. Still the issue of whether the article should be called "A" and be about "A" or whether it should be called "B" and be about "B" remains unresolved. The status quo is that the article is called "A" and is about "B", except that one of the participants is convinced against all reasoning that "A" actually means "B". I tried to force the issue by taking it to Afd which did at least generate some discussion after attempts to explain that "A" does not equal "B" were made on the talk page. MaxBrowne (talk) 01:24, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Barrister

Ref 21 may not be correctly done. Please check - it is from a "free dictionary". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srbernadette (talk • contribs) 04:17, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Srbernadette: It was almost good. I just corrected a minor point: the website's title goes in the "website" field, not "publisher". ("title" is for the specific page on the website).

Also, please remember to sign you posts by typing four tildes (like this: ~~~~) at the end of them.Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 11:05, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

I am sorry, but ref 17 on this page is OK but a new edit has seen ref/citation number 18 vanish. I have done something wrong when copying and pasting. I am sorry. I will not be able to do this by myself. Please help. Please fix and leave in the quote. Thanks so much 123.2.36.6 (talk) 04:51, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Help:Referencing for beginners, though I suspect that you are not a beginner. This tells you some of the basics, such as the fact that a reference starts with the tag <ref>. If you honestly feel that you are not capable of editing Wikipedia competently, nor of learning the basics when you are repeatedly advised by numerous users, then please leave it to those who can. --David Biddulph (talk) 07:51, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Bingham Page

There appears to be errors on Laura Bingham's Wikipedia page which I am trying to sort but I don't understand the problems?

Please can you advise on what is wrong with the page and how this can be fixed?

37.77.179.15 (talk) 08:29, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed what you unsuccessfully formatted as a reference in your question to a wikilink, and removed the stray reference tags. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:32, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you mean the problems identified in the box at the top of the article, the words in blue are wikilinks, leading you to specific advice in each case. --David Biddulph (talk) 08:35, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

A message to David Biddulph

Please help.

The editor called "maproom" also failed to fix up the bad edit on the page Family of Catherin, Duchess of Cambridge" please Fix up the accent sign after citation number 17, it is all wrong. There are accents that should not be there. It looks like a quote that should be in citation number 18 which has vanished - section is there too, when it shouldn't be. Please fix. Maproom and I cannot do it. also, I hope my new citation on the Barrister page is acceptable. I get very nervous about getting it all wrong. Thanks again— Preceding unsigned comment added by Srbernadette (talk • contribs) 09:00, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Did this fix the problem that you saw on Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge? — crh ₂₃ (Talk) 11:19, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest to User:Crh23 that a citation ought to be surrounded by ref tags, as reinstated in this edit; all that was previously missing was the < of the opening <ref> tag. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:29, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, that's what was up. I was confused as I don't often see quotes in citations (mainly reading technical articles), and was using visual editor, cheers. — crh ₂₃ (Talk) 11:34, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm just being stupid, ignore me. — crh ₂₃ (Talk) 11:35, 13 July 2016 (UTC) [reply]

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge - one tiny thing more please

I see now that the quote in citation number 17 on this page is not needed -the quote is certainly needed in citation number 18. Please remove the quote from citation number 17 - but do not remove the citation itself. Thanks so much. I cannot do this as I will stuff it up. I need to go to bed now.101.182.141.11 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:57, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please use Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions for further requests for help with editing and references. - NQ (talk) 13:31, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NQ, this IP is a long-term user who frequently forgets to sign in before posting (See the previous section here). The Teahouse is designed as a friendly place for new users to seek advice. SrBernadette's problems are better addressed here. Rojomoke (talk) 17:21, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am aware of who they are. I feel they have exhausted everyones patience here at the help desk (judging by the latest revert) and perhaps the friendly people over at the Teahouse might be more inclined to help. - NQ (talk) 17:31, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps some friendly encouragement that we are happy to help clean up a citation or two, but at some point it is time for the editor to learn how to do it (or find a different hobby).--S Philbrick (Talk) 17:45, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Cyrus Warner

Arthur Cyrus Warner ( February 14,1918-July 22,2007) was arguably the most significant figure in Mattachine East before Frank Kaminy upstaged him in 1967 with "Gay is Good". With an AB from Princeton and a law degree from Harvard as well as PhD from Princeton. He fought for decades to remove the sodomy laws. Unlike Frank Arthur kept his Jewishness secret until shortly before his death. Unlike Frank Arthur hid his life under a bushal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:182:C703:81D0:D180:6B48:DCC8:AE00 (talk) 14:32, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Mattachine Society has an article as do the following of its members: Hal Call, Rudi Gernreich, James Gruber, Harry Hay, Dale Jennings, Frank Kameny, Jack Nichols (taken from the list at Template:Early U.S. gay rights movement. So notable members of the Mattachine Society certainly would be appropriate for articles. I would suggest that the LGBT Wiki Project might be the place to look for others who might have suggestions on getting referenced information to establish the notability of individual members.Naraht (talk) 14:50, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Official" fan site

Hello. I recently added an official fan site for an old and influential TV show to the 'External links' section of The Wallace and Ladmo Show. The site is maintained by folks associated with the original show and is considered to be the most authoritative source for historical information about the subject. It contains no advertisements and bills itself as "the official website for the Wallace and Ladmo Show". My addition was reverted with comment: removed fansite. Would it be okay to undo the revert? I am not affiliated with either the site or the show and am seeking a third party opinion and/or policy clarification. (Site:[1]) --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:A073:98E5:BA6B:E905 (talk) 16:29, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No. Don't undo it. Take the discussion to the talk page of the article and follow consensus (with the non-inclusion of the fan site being the stable state, not vice versa). Lourdes 17:07, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion should be on the Talk page, as Lourdes says. But I will point out that WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided, no 11, says "Blogs, personal web pages and most fansites (negative ones included), except those written by a recognized authority.". --ColinFine (talk) 17:10, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have added sources to my deleted/unposted page and I've personally deleted info that cannot be sourced. How can I make this page live?

Hello, Today I sent several links to verify my professional sources. I began over a month or more ago, but had very bad family health issues, so I forgot to follow up. I looked today and saw that the info was still there but deleted/not posted. I want to know if my today's links are sufficient to verify my professional history. My page is titled Drew GeraciDrew Geraci (talk) 16:37, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Best, Drew Geraci

Hello, Drew. What you've created is a user page; those do not "go live" in the sense that they become part of the mainspace. They are optional and intended to provide other editors some basic background about you, your interests, what sort of articles you've been editing, etc. I am sure there will be additional replies, below.

--2606:A000:4C0C:E200:A073:98E5:BA6B:E905 (talk) 16:57, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. Geraci, while the links you've given are not enough to develop your biography, I've done some preliminary research on you and am wondering why you did not have an article here till date. I'll churn something up next week and work it up over time. Check here in around ten days or so. Thanks. Lourdes 16:59, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

False copyright claim

Someone claimed that 1995 elections South Korea directly copied Encyclopedia Britannica while it had been worded completely differently. How would I make an appeal? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drewvader1009 (talk • contribs) 17:00, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Drewvader1009. It's not a matter of an appeal: you should discuss the matter with Diannaa on the article's talk page. It looks as if DGG might be in agreement with you, so I've pinged that user as well. If you can't agree, Copyright problems might be a place to go. --ColinFine (talk) 17:18, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Drewvader1009: DGG declined to delete the article on copyright grounds, but I thought there was enough of an overlap that the content shouldn't be here as first posted, so I paraphrased it. I will send you a comparison of the two via email if you like. You will have to activate your Wikipedia email if you want me to do this. — Diannaa (talk) 19:24, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's a good idea to be safe, so I endorse Diannaa's rewrite. DGG ( talk ) 01:30, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At least the article is still up unlike I had previously thought and all I really care about is that people can access adequate info. So I'm happy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drewvader1009 (talk • contribs) 12:19, 15 July 2016 (EST)

Use of "Flourished"

Someone just alerted me to the fact that on the "Kors" disambiguation page that distinguishes me (Alan Charles Kors) from Michael Kors, I am indentified as having "fl." [flourished] in the 1990s. Since I have published four books (two this year) since then, co-founded and led a major non-profit, and won national awards, I do not think of myself as having "fl." over 20 years ago and not since, in the minor sense of "flourished," let alone not today. Can someone help?

<https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss/190-9697558-6452846?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=Alan+Charles+Kors%22> <http://www.history.upenn.edu/people/faculty/alan-charles-kors>

98.115.14.78 (talk) 17:58, 13 July 2016 (UTC)Alan Charles Kors[reply]

See Floruit—it doesn't mean "this is when you were active", it means "we don't have a source for your birthdate and this is the earliest time we can find sources to prove you were around". ‑ Iridescent 18:04, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Professor Kors, I've replaced it with "Alan Charles Kors (born 1943)" - NQ (talk) 18:10, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

KLRD (KLoRD) or Shepherd Communications page gone

There used to be a page on this radio station/broadcast company that I worked for that was a pioneer in contemporary Christian format music. But now I can only find reference to the call letters as they are now owned by EMF. Were these pages deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.132.13.122 (talk) 18:49, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@64.132.13.122: Is KLRD or Air 1 the page you're looking for? CaptRik (talk) 21:11, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect and/or name change?

Resolved

– 19:19, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

There needs to be a redirect for Simeon Charles Lee → S. Charles Lee -- or, perhaps an article name change, with back-redirect? --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:A073:98E5:BA6B:E905 (talk) 19:05, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect created. -- GB fan 19:09, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:A073:98E5:BA6B:E905 (talk) 19:19, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to create a page for info on the book I've written.....

Hello,

I'd like to create

a) a page for myself (Dan Santoro) as an author and be able to link/be linked to

b) a page for Where the Boys (and Girls) Were!Bold text

How do I get started?

thanks! dan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rugbydan23 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If I may, I'd suggest reading over WP:AUTO and WP:COI first. Wikipedia really frowns upon autobiographies and promotional/self-referencing articles where there is a clear conflict of interest. Also, I'd recommend reading WP:NBOOK as well for what would give your book notability. RickinBaltimore (talk) 21:00, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Going through the articles for creation process is often the easiest way to write an article about which you have a conflict of interest. This way, experienced volunteers will review the submission and hopefully offer assistance. Or, if you can provide links to coverage from professional journalists, such as book reviews at The New York Times or The Guardian, someone will likely create the articles for you. Wikipedia has grown pretty bureaucratic and complex, so you might be interested in looking at this very brief explanation of our inclusion criteria. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:14, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]