Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2016 January 12

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.

January 12

Légion d'honneur recipients

DOCUMENTATION ON FRENCH LEGION OF HONOR RECEIPIANT (MY BLACK GRANDFATHER JOHN T. VAN RENSALIER)

Results: "List of Légion d'honneur recipients by name Vigneault Jean-Félix-Albert-Marie Vilnet, Catholic Bishop and Council Father at Vatican II Galina Vishnevskaya John T. Van Rensalier, 150 US Battalion Headquarters 39 KB (4,407 words) - 23:36, 4 January 2016"

BUT WHEN I GOT TO THE LIST... HE IS NOT LISTED.

please help!!!!!!

Dolores Van Rensalier

I assume you are referring to List of Légion d'honneur recipients by name. The list does not aim to be complete. As it says in the paragraph at the top, "the number is estimated at one million". Maproom (talk) 00:00, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

However, Rensalier is listed when you click on the "V" in the white box (or scroll down manually). Don't click on the "V" in the blue box, as that link leads to a different, even more incomplete, list. Those lists are a bit of a mess and could use some re-organization (as mentioned on the list's talkpage). GermanJoe (talk) 00:06, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

So he is! I missed that, as he was right at the end of the Vs, out of alphabetical order. I have re-ordered the Vs (putting John T. Van Rensalier next to Ninette de Valois, which worries me a bit – I guess WP has guidelines somewhere on alphabetising compound surnames). As you say, the lists are a mess. Maproom (talk) 08:31, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Referencing errors on Roger Morgan (designer)

Reference help requested.

Thanks, TheatreSmart (talk) 04:53, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Your stray unterminated <ref> tag on 27 March 2014 was corrected the following day. The problem with an unterminated ref is that the rest of the text following it is regarded as part of the ref, so doesn't get displayed properly. Note that, even if correctly formatted, the ref wouldn't have been valid as it pointed merely to the index page of a database, not to any page which specifically supported the statement made. Welcome back after your long break from editing! --David Biddulph (talk) 05:09, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Creating a page for a person

Hi how do I create a page for a person? Regards Jo — Preceding unsigned comment added by AngelCake1111 (talk • contribs)

Hello, Jo. You create an article about a person the same way as you create any other encyclopaedia article: by assembling high quality independent published sources which talk at length about that person, and write an article based almost entirely on what those independent sources have said about the person. (If you cannot find such independent sources about them, then they are probably not notable in Wikipedia's special sense, and no article about them will be acceptable, however it is written). For the details of how to proceed, please read your first article; and I strongly suggest that you use the article wizard to create a draft which you can work on and then submit for review. I would also, personally, suggest that you spend some time editing existing articles before you embark on the difficult task creating a new one. --ColinFine (talk) 13:50, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Rachael Lillis (Faragonda winx)

Hi, Rachael Lillis say it that she was Faragonda in winx. Vut how can it that her voice don't like same with her normal voice?! I don't believe that she was.--Maxie1hoi (talk) 17:00, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, and thank you for asking your question. This page is about how to edit wikipedia. It appears your question is disputing the accuracy of Rachael Lillis being the voice-actor for Faragonda. While I am not authoritative in this specific area, multiple third-party sources confirm that she is the voice for Faragonda. Tiggerjay (talk) 17:41, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Charles 'Kid' Keinath

This is my great grandfather. I inherited hundreds of primary source documents (newspaper articles, magazine clippings, Photos, letter, etc.) The current wiki description, while accurate is very brief and lacks a great amount of pertinent detail around his life, and accomplishments in sports. For instance it was "because of his great proficiency with the double dribble that this rile was changed". I have several sources to cite for that assertion alone.

I am wondering if i may submit a more comprehensive update and/or whole narrative. If so, what is the process? I can provide any supporting documents necessary at any time as well.

thank you for your consideration. Bart Keinath — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.222.100.210 (talk) 18:36, 12 January 2016‎ (UTC)

Hi 170.222.100.210, welcome to Wikipedia! If you want to edit the page, go ahead and do so! Just remember to cite your writing to reliable sources. I would suggest you read WP:REFB as a great tutorial on referencing. (Just note that primary sources on their own may not be OK all the time, see WP:PRIMARY). Also, as the article subject is your relative, please be aware that this may be a conflict of interest (COI), if you stay neutral in your edits and make everything verifiable, this probably won't be a problem, see WP:SIMPLECOI for another great page on this issue. I know that this may be a bit overwhelming, so if you need any help or clarification, ask a question on your talk page with a {{help me}} template. Thanks.  Seagull123  Φ  18:53, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

The article in question is Charles Keinath. Please discuss on the article talk page, Talk: Charles Keinath. By the way, what you describe as primary sources, such as newspaper articles, are considered by Wikipedia to be secondary sources and so are acceptable. Letters may not be acceptable. Please discuss on the talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:58, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello, Bart. The answer is that you are very welcome to provide more information, but because of your conflict of interest, you are discouraged from editing the article directly. Instead, you are invited to make suggestions on the article's talk page Talk:Charles Keinath - pick the '+' or 'new section' at the top to create a new section of the talk page for your suggestion. Essentially you will be asking an uninvolved editor to check your suggestion for appropriateness, so the easier you make it for them, the more likely somebody is to come along and edit the article. In particular:

1. be specific: suggest some actual wording. If the other editor thinks that it is not neutral enough, they may change it, but if you've given them something to work with, rather than "It should mention X,Y,Z somewhere", it makes it easier for them.
2. give a published source for any information you want to add. Ideally, every single piece of information in a Wikipedia article should be cited to a reliable published source. Your newspaper cuttings will be ideal, provided you have sufficient bibliographic detail that a reader could in principle find the source, say in a major library: the title of the newspaper, where it was published, and the date, would be enough. Unpublished information, whether from your scrapbook, or your own knowledge, cannot be used - though you might be able to find confirmation of some of it somewhere on line.

Because there may not be many people looking at that talk page, I suggest adding {{edit request}} (with the double curly brackets) to your suggestion: this will bring it to the attention of more editors.

If you look at Talk:Bradford Playhouse you will see where I made a request of that sort because I had a conflict of interest. (I put my suggested text on another page, and linked to it, rather than putting it directly on the talk page, but that is of no consequence: I could just as well have put the suggestion on the talk page itself.) --ColinFine (talk) 19:02, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

ColinFine's advice is (in my opinion) better than mine, I think you won't go far wrong if you follow Colin's help.  Seagull123  Φ  19:12, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Deletion Question About Poshter Girl (2016)

I am here rather than at the Teahouse because I am not asking for advice for an inexperienced editor, who isn't seeking advice anyway, but for myself. I reviewed Draft: Poshter Girl when it was in draft space, and declined it. The author then removed my decline notice and moved the article to WP:Poshter Girl. I then nominated it for deletion at Miscellany for Deletion. The consensus is running in favor of deletion. The author then made edits to the article that don't address the basic film notability question that unreleased movies are seldom notable unless they have had extensive press discussion prior to release. The author removed the MFD template and moved it into article space as Poshter Girl (2016). My question is: Does the MFD continue running, and it is now at day 7, or does the move into article space negate the MFD, so that it needs to be taken to Articles for Deletion from the start? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Also, there are warning templates for removing CSD templates and for removing AFD templates, but not for removing MFD templates. I warned the author for removing an AFD template, figuring that is close enough. Do other editors agree? Robert McClenon (talk) 19:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

You made an error by nominating it at MFD, but not at AFD. You should have moved it to the main space and then started an AFD. However, the deletion request continues to run with or without the template on the article. I think it is advisable to move this discussion to AFD. Ruslik_Zero 20:32, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Why are you saying that I made a mistake in nominating it at MFD? Are you suggesting that a non-notable draft that is disrupting the AFC process should be moved into article space before being nominated for deletion? That seems to go against common sense. I will nominate it at AFD, but if the MFD is closed and results in its deletion, the AFD will become moot. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:09, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

It was in the Wikipedia space when you nominated it, not in the draft space anymore. The author wanted to move it into the main space but moved to the Wikipedia space. Ruslik_Zero 19:38, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Need help changing pagename

I have located an error in the pagename "The Proud and the Damned", but I've failed at several attempts to correct it. The correct title should be "The Proud and Damned".— Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.48.198.83 (talk • contribs)

 Done@50.48.198.83: I've moved the page to The Proud and Damned. To be able to do it, you need an account that's at least 4 days old and has 10 edits. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:44, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

@Joseph2302: The cover image of the film shows that the name is The Proud and the Damned. You can see the word "the" before the word "damned." --Majora (talk) 20:45, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

@Majora: I did not see that, woops. Hastily requesting a move back to The Proud and the Damned, which needs admin help. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:48, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

 Done _└ ^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 20:49, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

But note that IMDB does refer to it as The Proud and Damned... _└ ^UkPaolo/_talk^┐ 20:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Just another reason why IMDB is not a reliable source (I was trying to see if it was possible to change the IMDB name but I don't really want to create an account there so meh) --Majora (talk) 20:57, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, but if you look at other box covers on IMDB's page, you'll see that it is also titled without the "the". So, I guess someone would actually have to watch the movie to see that the film says?? Dismas|^(talk) 21:02, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

@50.48.198.83, Majora, UkPaolo, and Dismas: I've started a requested move, although I'm personally on the fence about it (due to it not being my area of expertise). Joseph2302 (talk) 22:24, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Now that it has been moved to the correct title, it desperately needs some WP:RS to establish notability.--ukexpat (talk) 02:16, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

The correct title is obvious, as is clearly displayed in the opening of the original film, "The Proud and Damned". No question about it. Is it an issue of common usage, even if it's inaccurate? Seems to me accuracy should trump. Sorry for being so ignorant about Wiki policy and procedure. Thanks for you patience and help everyone.

Copyright question

Answers to Wikipedia_talk:Copyright_problems#Copy_headwords_from_a_dictionary are welcome. Iceblock (talk) 20:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Book= Solar System - Rendering Failed (two separate days)

From the article on Pluto I followed the links at the bottom of the article to the listed Wikipedia Books. I received the following error at 36.67% trying to render the Wikipedia Book: Solar System to both an A4 and Letter sized PDF.

I was able to successfully render and download a PDF (Letter) of the Wikipedia Book: Dwarf Planets of the Solar System & Their Satellites (210 pages).

I did also follow the link to PediaPress, and generated (uploaded), customized, and was able to preview the Wikipedia Book: Solar System without issue. I did not order that because the ~1210 page (2 volumes) Hard Back & Color book would cost $144.10. I am remembering this is an option to downloading a PDF.

Thank you, John Cogar

Johncogar139 (talk) 21:25, 12 January 2016 (UTC)johncogar139

@Johncogar139: That happened to me too - same error and everything. I'm not sure what's wrong, but I would suggest asking at the technical village pump. The editors there will probably understand this sort of stuff a bit more. Another editor here might be able to help though. (Sorry this hasn't been much help). I'll put a note at that village pump asking for some input here though.  Seagull123  Φ  23:37, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

There's been some answers about this query over at WP:VPT, I've copied them below just in case you haven't seen them, Johncogar139.

Going by Help:Books and Help:Books/Feedback, the book creator is quite broken for many cases. Broken to the extent that someone created a template, {{Bookcreatorstatus}}, to warn about it:

Status last updated 23 August 2020.

The biggest immediate issue is that it doesn't appear to give any web-visible diagnostics to help investigate what it is choking on.

--Murph9000 (talk) 01:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

The inability to diagnose / debug errors is covered in phab:T94308#1549095. As cscott explained in phab:T100979#1463646 he basically has no time allocated by his employer (the Wikimedia Foundation) to work on Offline Content Generator issues, which is a pity. --Malyacko (talk) 14:35, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

— Originally posted at WP:VPT, on 13 January 2016 (UTC) in WP:VPT#Book:Solar system not rendering

-- Seagull123  Φ  18:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

This error was in at least one case due to the use of foreign-language characters for which book creator did not have a font. There is more about this incident here. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:19, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Most Wikipedia pages have a "Download as PDF" link in the left hand navigation menu. The PDF generator for a single page hits the same font issue but gives a more specific error message. You can work through the pages in the book, opening each and building its PDF in turn (no need to download afterwards), to see which page/s crash and why. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:37, 14 January 2016 (UTC)