Help desk
< October 3	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 5 >

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 4

Namecalling, to-do list, and any general words of wisdom

Hi there,

I'm a newb Wikipedia editor (joined July and contribute intermittently). I haven't done much editting to actual articles yet (mostly talk pages) because I'm not yet comfortable I know the rules well enough (although I feel my knowledge of the material I wish to edit is excellent). I'd like to move on to focus on article edits themselves now.

Does good etiquette require I always have to discuss an edit on a talk page? For example can't I just make an edit and wait and see if anyone objects before going the talk page route? (seems less time consuming)

Nope, be bold. Of course, if you anticipate the edit being controversial, you should discuss it first. Tan | 39 00:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How does Wikipedia define name calling? For example on a few hot political topics I've already been called irrational, insane, POV-pusher, clueless, nationalist, and several other names. Up to now I just use the exact same words back because I don't want to be someone's dartboard but neither do I wish to overshoot. Ideally though I would prefer no name calling at all (seems immature on a personal level no matter what the issue). Is this practically achievable? I'm sure everyone here has encountered this instigater issue on some level so some good practical advice on how to reply would sure help.

See WP:CIVIL for some information. Follow the golden rule, and try to assume good faith. Take any serious cases to dispute resolution, such as WP:3O or WP:ANI. Tan | 39 00:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a boatload of facts (several pages) that appear to be missing from various Wikipedia articles I'm interested in editting. I'd like to assemble them into a to-do list (formatted to Wikipedia standards) but am unsure where the line between a to-do list and "soapboxing" is drawn.

Any general words of wisdom based on experience?

Thanks for any help in advance --Crossthets (talk) 00:07, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We encourage editors to be bold in their editing. Unless you know something you're planning to do is going to be controversial, you're welcome to go ahead and do it. If someone does revert you, however, you are expected to try to discuss with them to figure out why they don't like what you did.
WP:CIVIL is probably the best policy to link you to here, and WP:COOL wouldn't hurt either. If you're being called names like that, it's usually best to simply stay calm, and avoid retaliating if you can. Should things get really nasty, you may want to seek dispute resolution on the issue to help smooth things over. Something else you can do is look over what you've done to see if the other person actually has a case, and if you're not sure, you can always ask for a third opinion.
You should probably add such a to-do list to the talk page of the relevant article (or a link to one of your user subpages which has the to-do list) and discuss with other editors what is necessary and what either doesn't need to be included or should be placed elsewhere. Some talk pages have a {{todo}} template which allows you to post such lists onto a subpage of the article's talk page, so it's easy for everyone to find and change.
Use common sense, and don't be a dick. Those are the main rules around here, and everything pretty much falls under one of those two, or in some cases both. Don't focus on what is "right", focus on what can be referenced and checked over by others. Consensus is not unanimous, nor is it always majority rule, but it's not a flag to wave around so you can get your way. Most importantly, when all else fails, drop everything and talk. If talking fails, take a breather or two and go back to talking when everyone's ready to go. Everything else is, as I said, more or less common sense. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As Hersfold indicates, the general policy is WP:Be Bold. However there are controversial articles where a more cautious approah to editing is advisable and is specifically requested. See for example Talk:Abortion, Talk:Homeopathy and Talk:Book of Mormon. In each of these talk pages, there are special instructions about how to approach editing. These can be found in text boxes at the top of each talk page. Wanderer57 (talk) 00:39, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(undent) If you've already been called "irrational, insane, POV-pusher, clueless, nationalist, and several other names", that suggests you are selecting controversial topics that are much too difficult for a new Wikipedia editor. You should begin by editing non-controversial articles. Stay away from politics, religion, and other topics that cause people to hate or kill each other in real life. Stick to boring nonpolarizing topics until you develop the sangfroid necessary to contribute effectively to the hysteria-generating articles. You can find lots of safely dull yet important work to do on Wikipedia:Maintenance. Another excellent option is to answer questions on the Help desk - that's one of the best ways to learn what Wikipedia is about, and the environment is mostly positive for the editors who answer questions here, since the volunteers absorb themselves in other people's problems. Also, whenever someone calls you insulting names, it's best to just stick to demonstrable facts rather than get sucked into responding in kind. This could be important if you ever try to become an administrator - in which case other editors will look for evidence of your sangfroid (the ability to avoid flying off the handle when dealing with people who fly off the handle). --Teratornis (talk) 04:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reporting Vandelism

Yesterday, an articles on my watch list ( Goodpasture Bridge ) was vandelised by User talk:216.235.136.195. I reviewed well over a dozen of the hundred or more entries on the user's history page and found nothing but vandelism. The user talk page has many/many warnings, but it appears user-site is a school. Still the site is producing lot's of vandelism. Isn't there any thing that can be done to close that site?--Orygun (talk) 01:09, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An administrator could block the IP address from editing if it continues vandalizing Wikipedia. Neptune5000 (talk) 02:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and on an unrelated note, I am sure it was unintentional and simply a misunderstanding by myself, but "an articles I wrote" sounds like ownership. You might want to read WP:OWN, but as I say, it is most likely just a misunderstanding. :) — neuro^(talk) 10:32, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It means he created the article. Neptune5000 (talk) 16:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Created' can be considered a breach of WP:OWN as well, according to the guideline. I don't hold that view myself, but it does say that. — neuro^(talk) 20:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Regan Mizrahi Article

I wanted to ask about the deletion of the Regan Mizrahi article I posted earlier today. Regan is a young actor who has a starring role in Dora the Explorer as well as having minor roles in two motion pictures. Finally he has been in many commericals which air on a regular basis. I did my best to link to other relevent sites such as his IMDB entry and a site which has videos of all his commericials.

So, what did I do incorrectly and what can I do to remedy it. Thank you. Eteran (talk) 02:16, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It has been deleted because you hadn't asserted why the subject is notable enough to have an article here. This is under criteria A7 of WP:Criteria for Speedy Deletion. Please see Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons for more information about this. Cheers. Chamal ^Talk ± 02:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And see WP:WWMPD. --Teratornis (talk) 04:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

notability/shared name/disambiguation

I share my name with another "person of notability". We are both listed on Wikipedia.

She is listed under our shared name, noted for film contributions. I am listed under a band name, I am a musician. However, I am filmmaker, designer and business owner (as well as a musician) and I do not wish to have confusion over our creative contributions to film or otherwise.

I am aware that one should not create a page about themselves, but feel the need to clarify my name for those who search for my creative work, and not have my film contribution mixed with hers.

I would like to create a small page about myself, link it to the current on Wikipedia information about me and "disambiguate" under our (shared) name. I could substantiate information with several articles of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources.

Is this fair? If so, how do I make my listing if her name already exists?

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maximumalien (talk • contribs) 03:29, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant guidelines are WP:BIO, WP:AUTOBIO, and WP:DISAMBIG. --Teratornis (talk) 04:00, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you want someone to interpret those guidelines for your specific case, you'll have to identify the existing article you allude to in your question, and tell us the reliable sources you have for your biographical information. Note that on Wikipedia, there is not really a concept of "fairness." See Wikipedia:There is no common sense. Instead, Wikipedia is like a giant MMORPG with 48,354,040 other people, in which we all try to guess what we can write that everyone else will refrain from deleting or editing beyond all recognition. This comes as quite a shock to most people, since in most other kinds of writing, what we write tends to stay put until we ourselves decide to change it. Nothing in prior real life experience for most people prepares them for the cruel world of Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 04:28, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the more popular of the women is Monica Breen. The questioner is likely an ex-drummer for the Gore Gore Girls. There is a disambig link on top of Monica Breen now. -- kainaw ™ 04:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently working on the article List of Prime Ministers of Sri Lanka. The table of contents does not appear in the article. I tried using {{TOCleft}}, but that changes the layout of the page. Can someone give me an idea about how to include the table of contents? Chamal ^Talk ± 04:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the table of contents for you on the article. To read on how table of contents are structured, go here WP:Table of contents. This will tell you most everything you need to know on how they are used and how to manually adjust them. Good luck.-JavierMC 04:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks a lot. Chamal ^Talk ± 04:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

did i do it correctly?

I added a character, Orlanda Ramos to the Noble House page, but I have no idea how to position it. Sorry for any inconvenience. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonchildalways (talk • contribs) 06:28, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've fixed it. Consider reading Wikipedia:How to edit a page and Wikipedia:Your first article to learn about editing Wikipedia. Cheers. Chamal ^Talk ± 06:35, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People from Yolo County, California

On the Category:People from Yolo County, California page, the subcategories have parenthesis that reflect that zero people are in those subcategories. Its not because of recent additions, because there were already people in those categories. Killiondude (talk) 08:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The zeros indicate that there are no subcategories under those categories. It does not indicate the number of articles in that category. Chamal ^Talk ± 08:27, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

an incomplte/not correct bio on me published on Wikipedia to be deleted

Hello,

I'm Christian Leotta and I have found on Wikipedia a Bio, searching my name, which is not correct or incomplte. How can be it cancelled? There is actually published a bio on my which I would like to cancel. I can then provide my correct and complete bio.

While awaiting for you reply, I send my best greetings. Thank you for your answer.

Christian Leotta Ludwig11132 (talk) 09:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thanks for using Wikipedia. If your biography is incorrect or incomplete, why not be bold and fix it? GlassCobra 09:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That said, in general you should not edit articles about yourself. If you are editing the facts themselves, make sure to reference them with appropriate sources. :) — neuro^(talk) 10:30, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

this will probably be worthwhile reading for you: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AUTOBIO#If_Wikipedia_already_has_an_article_about_you

Sssoul (talk) 11:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

and this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Help Sssoul (talk) 12:45, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a myth that you should not edit articles about yourself. Provided you comply with the relevant polices, anyone may do so. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 12:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is not a 'myth', please see WP:COI. — neuro^(talk) 12:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, but I am familiar with that page; and nowhere on it does it say "you should not edit articles about yourself". If you disagree, please cite the relevant text. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:41, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it does say, ungrammatically, "It is not recommended to write an article about yourself". The differences between "should not" and "not recommended" and between "editing" and "writing" an article seem inconsequential to me. Gandalf61 (talk) 16:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COI explains some of the pitfalls of writing about oneself. An editor who can avoid all the pitfalls would, therefore, not be one the editors WP:COI is cautioning. However, I would be surprised if someone who is very new to Wikipedia editing could avoid all the pitfalls. I would interpret WP:COI as saying "Here is what usually happens when people write about themselves"; someone who is willing to take the risks could then be bold. What is being bold about anyway? The soldiers who stormed the beaches at Normandy were bold, and they found that being bold carries a price. We could also write guidelines against dangerous hobbies such as BASE jumping - the warnings would deter some, but not all. Some people can only learn by getting smacked. --Teratornis (talk) 17:36, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another alternative is to list supposed inaccuracies or omissions on the article's talk page, and ask another editor to add them to the article. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 12:54, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An article can't be cancelled (unless you are a non-notable person and it gets put to the vote for deletion). The article Christian Leotta exists so, assuming it is kept, it is up to you, or those who know you, to add to it. Don't add any self-praise or "peacock" words like "brilliant" or "talented" or they will quickly be removed. There is no problem in adding the new stuff yourself so long as it is within WP policies. The "don't edit your own article" is a recommendation not a rule - Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 13:09, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm so glad we've cleared THAT up!!! The message I am getting is that original poster either can, or can't, or shouldn't, or should, edit his/her own article. AndyJones (talk) 07:58, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Privileges

If you check, I have recently been allocated Wikipedia:Rollback_feature but find my name to self centered (A Cool Editor). Is it possible to change my username, while still preserving my rollbacking rights?? A Cool Editor (talk) 09:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. If you want to change your user name, just go to Wikipedia:Changing username, I believe your rollback rights will still be preserved. (Why not? :)) Even if your rights is somehow accidentally removed, you can certainly get it back easily without having to go through formal requests (Just ask any admin!). No worries. --PeaceNT (talk) 09:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, the changing of a name of a user is no different than renaming a document file on your computer; the information in the file remains the same, but the name on the file changes. Likewise, when a Wikipedia user is renamed, the entire edit history, along with any user flags and priviliges, is retained. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:07, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sidemenu creation

Does anyone know how to replicate one of the menus on the left with normal wikitext on any page? (Like 'interaction', 'toolbox' etc. and all the links and colours.)

And also, for a second attempt... does anybody else possibly know anything about this? -- Menti sock 12:09, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to ask the latter at WP:VPT, but as for the former, from what I can see Wikipedia will allow the source code to be C&Ped with no blocking of code, but I might be wrong. — neuro^(talk) 12:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What programming language do you use on wikipedia?

Is this HTML or what??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.213.102 (talk) 14:27, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's called Wikitext, and it's not exactly a "programming language". See Help:Editing, Help:Wikitext examples and Help:HTML in wikitext for information and instructions on using it. Cheers. Chamal ^Talk ± 14:37, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And you should take the WP:TUTORIAL. The programming language of MediaWiki software that powers Wikipedia is PHP. However, only a relatively small number of Wikipedia's developers look at the PHP code (it's all freely available if you want to join them). A much larger number of editors on Wikipedia edit in wikitext as the above reply explains. Wikitext is an example of a markup language. The main idea on a wiki is speed ("wiki" is Hawaiin for "quick"), and thus wikitext is a very abbreviated markup language, compared to more complex markup languages such as HTML, XML, and DocBook. When I started editing on Wikipedia, I too wondered "Why didn't they just use HTML?" However, wikitext is easy to learn, and once I learned it, I found it is more efficient than the other markup languages I have used. In particular, wikitext makes it very easy to add links, and as you can see from our replies, that is extremely helpful on the Help desk where we speak in Wikipedia's jargon. Without links on all these jargon terms, our replies would be much more difficult for new users to understand. --Teratornis (talk) 16:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Long Beach, California

In naming districts, you are missing Lakewood Plaza. Sometimes called Plaza Subdivision. I live there and it is not on your site by any name. We are by the Eldorado Park (N) also (N) of Los Altos, West of College Estates, EAst of South of Conant. Thought you might want to add this subdivision in your information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.247.83.99 (talk) 14:51, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This Help desk is for questions about using Wikipedia. It's unclear from your question whether you are requesting a new article about Lakewood Plaza, or asking to add it to some existing article (perhaps Long Beach, California) or to a navigation template such as {{Los Angeles County, California}}. Is this "Lakewood Plaza" a Census-designated place? Is it different than Lakewood, California? What do you mean by "in naming districts"? Be specific enough to allow someone to figure out what you are talking about. You were probably looking at some article on Wikipedia when you decided something was missing. For someone to correct whatever problem you perceived, they must start by looking at whatever article you looked at. Give us a link to it. --Teratornis (talk) 17:09, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A search of: www.census.gov for: "Lakewood Plaza" did not match any documents. What is your County? What is your ZIP code? What city name do you use for your mailing address? --Teratornis (talk) 17:24, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

just guessing from the title of this post, i reckon you mean Long Beach, California and are talking specifically about the "neighborhoods" section of that page. if that's right, i suggest making the change yourself, by clicking the "edit" button at the top of the "neighborhoods" section, or bringing up the omission on the article's discussion page: Talk:Long Beach, California (click the "new section" tab at the top and propose the addition you want). Sssoul (talk) 17:28, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Missing out full stops

Why do people miss out full stops on articles? I have been on a lot of articles and I have seen full stops missing. Why is this? 82.26.189.187 (talk) 15:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is free for anyone to edit, if you see any full stop missing kindly add them.--Adrian 1001 (talk) 15:13, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You may be interested in Wikipedia:WikiProject Punctuation. It mentions some cases where Wikipedia does not use punctuation. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the wikipedia manual of style is no doubt worth looking at too - not sure what kind of "missing full stops" you're referring to, but maybe the section about acronyms & abbreviations will be pertinent to some of them. if you're talking about plain old typos, then yeah, go ahead and fix them! Sssoul (talk) 15:43, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

movie synopsis

Is there a rule on Wikipedia that you shouldn't copy movie synopsis from any site? If yes can you show me where Thanks--Adrian 1001 (talk) 15:03, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, copying anything from any website not licensed under a free license is against copyright law, and Wikipedia policies. If you are looking to add a synopsis, just look at the one on the website and write one similar, but not close to, it. The full Wikipedia copyright policy is located at WP:COPY and WP:COPYVIO. RedThunder 15:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Company Lists

Hello, I am wanting to add a company onto a list of companies, that doesn't seem editable. I am trying to put Cupsogue Pictures onto the following list of companies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Film_production_companies_of_the_United_States and I would be very grateful if you could help me do so. Thank you Grahampitt (talk) 16:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The trick is to add the category to the bottom of the article, not add the article to the category. Anyway, give it a few, and you should see the list updated. Tan | 39 16:27, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

for future reference this link might be helpful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CAT#How_to_categorize_an_article Sssoul (talk) 16:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Google Chrome - IPA problem

I'm seeing a bunch of boxes in IPA when using the new Google browser. What's the deal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.226.186 (talk) 22:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it's happening because Google Chrome doesn't have as much rendering support as Internet Explorer or another browser.. I may be wrong though. You could try changing your browser. Thanks, Genius 101 ^Guestbook 22:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

USS New York LPD 21

Hello On the subject of USS New York LPD 21 there was spamming for ussny.org performed by user name Matt Wilson. Phil Sandifer had repeatedly removed it but it has returned under the new user name of Qlewjris which might just be a sock puppet. I own the web site www.ussnewyork.com and am listed as a link so it might be a COI for me to undo the entry. They are not the official USS New York web site, http://www.new-york.navy.mil/default.aspx is, they are the Commissioning committe. Thanks Scott Koen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottkoen (talk • contribs) 22:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

When your editing fully complies with policies and guidelines, such as when you are clearly removing spam, then in my opinion (which means zilch) WP:COI does not apply. It's only potentially a conflict of interest when your editing expresses some sort of self-serving bias. Such as if I were to edit the Teratorn article with "The mighty teratorn was the most wonderful bird that ever lived. If we overlook the carrion-eating habit." If you really want to avoid all suspicion of COI, you could leave a note on User talk:Phil Sandifer letting him know the spam is back. --Teratornis (talk) 05:57, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

perjury

hello, i would just like some guidense, i have to answer questions such as what year was the word perjury first used? what would be the best way to search for that type of an answer? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.172.174.247 (talk) 22:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might try asking at WP:RD. They may be able to answer your question there. Hope this helps.--JavierMC 23:36, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at Perjury. – ukexpat (talk) 00:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another source for the etymology of the word perjury--JavierMC 01:34, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2008 October 4

Contents