| 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
editUSS Grant County (Cuban Crisis Involvement)
editI served on the USS Grant County from Oct 10th 1961 ti Oct 10th 1964. Never did we stop at Camp Pendleton. That's in California! It was Camp LeJuene, N.C. that we stopped and picked up marines and did our thing during the Cuban crisis. I was Radioman 2nd class and served with some great sailors, mainly Melvin Bladen, Jerry Howard, Armando Arredondo, Chuck Chenoweth and Bill Leibold. We stopped at Camp LeJeune several times while I was actively on the ship. Never did we stop at Camp Pendleton. Wow....what an error. Thanks. Richard Warren Rew4219 (talk) 04:53, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- Courtesy link: USS Grant County.
The article could use better referencing, but the statement that the ship was in Camp Pendleton in October 1962 comes from the Naval History and Heritage Command web site, which is an "official U.S. Navy web site". If you are claiming that the US Navy is wrong about the history of one of its ships, you should make your case on the talk page of the USS Grant County article. You will need to present a published source, not merely your memory. CodeTalker (talk) 07:02, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
I want to learn about current English Wikiperia POV.
editHello, this account is 14 years old, but I only did less than 500 edits. I am not a native English speaker, which makes me require fixing Wikipedia pages about my country , made by western views.
I am currently joining an Afd discussion which needs worldwide views. The editor who created the article says, "English Wikipedia is always like this.Fix the article" (I avoid to talk Afd itself).Was it? Was English Wikipedia always biased unless we non-English countries native join to fix? Please understand, I am asking sincerely. It's always difficult to fix western biased articles. Paperworkorange (talk) 05:57, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- I add I noticed there are so many systemic biases here in wikipedia so I joined WikiProject Countering systemic bias.It doesn't mean I understand the current situation.In this 14 years,world changed in crazy way, possibly wikipedia, too. Could you teach me systemic bias is becoming norm or still not? Paperworkorange (talk) 09:34, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Paperworkorange I think it depends on the topic. For example, political views can lead to very heated arguments which in turn make it difficult for Wikipedia to maintain its core policy of a neutral point of view. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try, it just means that the sources which we use are more difficult to summarise to everyone's satisfaction. The same can be said of the way that editors on English Wikipedia may write about controversial topics such as the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, where almost inevitably we will take a "western" perspective. However, for less emotive topics such as almost all science subjects, it is easier to write neutrally, although some would argue we don't allow fringe opinions enough weight. You are welcome to help counter any bias but please remember that your own opinions are simply not relevant when writing articles: we only describe what already-published reliable sources say. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:45, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- When English editors write about non-English speaking country, (Yes maybe Russian invasion is included, but there is international law Russia broke, so it's neutral.) For example, inevitably there are little English sources when it comes to non-English speaking countries. Problem is, we non-English speaker are seeing so many article to fix.
- I'm glad wikipedia don't allow fringe opinions, as what I deal with is fringe opinion.Thank you.Paperworkorange (talk) 13:48, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- I correct. I cannot say I am dealing with Fringe Opinion every time, there are misunderstanding, bad source, improper Anglicization which I am not sure English-speaking editors are aware or not aware.Paperworkorange (talk) 13:57, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Paperworkorange I think it depends on the topic. For example, political views can lead to very heated arguments which in turn make it difficult for Wikipedia to maintain its core policy of a neutral point of view. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try, it just means that the sources which we use are more difficult to summarise to everyone's satisfaction. The same can be said of the way that editors on English Wikipedia may write about controversial topics such as the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, where almost inevitably we will take a "western" perspective. However, for less emotive topics such as almost all science subjects, it is easier to write neutrally, although some would argue we don't allow fringe opinions enough weight. You are welcome to help counter any bias but please remember that your own opinions are simply not relevant when writing articles: we only describe what already-published reliable sources say. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:45, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Are we talking about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-abortion by country? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:00, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- The certain discussion made me feel despair, but not limited to the certain article.Paperworkorange (talk) 13:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- Paperworkorange, you don't have to use English-language sources. You can use sources in any language. They must be WP:reliable sources and WP:Due weight. HLHJ (talk) 21:24, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
- My primary source is Asahi shimbun ,well regarded paper which needs subscription. Is it ok on English wikipedia, as I don't think many people here subscribe Asahi?( I will replace if I have free article, but we don't have much free good papers)Paperworkorange (talk) 06:41, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
- I looked for discussions of Asahi shimbun as a source and didn't find much. I think that as it is one of Japan's major papers it would generally be considered a reliable source. The paywall is a barrier but doesn't disqualify a source by any means. Sometimes when there is a relevant short passage supporting the text which refers to the citation, the editor may choose to include that specific bit in the citation with the
quote =parameter of template:cite news, orscript-quote=ja:in this case. That may give English-only reviewers a bit more confidence in the citation as they can try google translate on it. Including your own Englishtrans-quote=is also an option. - R. S. Shaw (talk) 08:48, 4 September 2022 (UTC)- Thank you for the tips! There's little discussion about non-English source. Paperworkorange (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
- I looked for discussions of Asahi shimbun as a source and didn't find much. I think that as it is one of Japan's major papers it would generally be considered a reliable source. The paywall is a barrier but doesn't disqualify a source by any means. Sometimes when there is a relevant short passage supporting the text which refers to the citation, the editor may choose to include that specific bit in the citation with the
- My primary source is Asahi shimbun ,well regarded paper which needs subscription. Is it ok on English wikipedia, as I don't think many people here subscribe Asahi?( I will replace if I have free article, but we don't have much free good papers)Paperworkorange (talk) 06:41, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
- Paperworkorange, you don't have to use English-language sources. You can use sources in any language. They must be WP:reliable sources and WP:Due weight. HLHJ (talk) 21:24, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
How to nominate day on "On this date" section?
editHow to nominate day on "On this date" section in the Main Page. I don't find any route for nomination? The Supermind (talk) 06:24, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
I've tried to edit a page and want to revert to an earlier version
editHi I have been editing the University of Sussex page to update with our new Vice Chancellor Sasha Roseneil, but in attempting to rectify links I have altered the text at the top of the page. Could someone help? Many thank, Charlie Charlie Littlejones (talk) 09:55, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- Ghmyrtle has reverted your changes to University of Sussex. If you are not confident about editing an article, you can always suggest the edit on the article's talk page.
- You say "our new VC": what is your connection with the university? It is possible that you have a conflict of interest, and if you are in any way employed by the universirt, then you count as a paid editor, and you are required to make a formal declaration of that (see the link I gave).
- In any case, if you are connected with the university, you should not edit the article directly, but should use the Edit Request Wizard to suggest edits to it. ColinFine (talk) 10:10, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @ColinFine, yes, I do work at the University in communications. Apologies, I had not realised we couldn't make factual updates. I will go through the Edit Request Wizard route! Thanks for your help and for coming back to me so quickly! 2A00:23C7:6085:6201:5530:C490:A171:AA5E (talk) 11:35, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- You still have not made the mandatory disclosure of paid editor status, Charlie. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:12, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Courtesy ping: Charlie Littlejones —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:22, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- You still have not made the mandatory disclosure of paid editor status, Charlie. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:12, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @ColinFine, yes, I do work at the University in communications. Apologies, I had not realised we couldn't make factual updates. I will go through the Edit Request Wizard route! Thanks for your help and for coming back to me so quickly! 2A00:23C7:6085:6201:5530:C490:A171:AA5E (talk) 11:35, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Sources needing subscription
editCan I insert a source which needs subscription to be read? Dr Salvus 20:48, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, if it is reliable. See WP:PAYWALL. Note that if you encounter a citation to such a source, you may be able to get access to it through WP:RX. ColinFine (talk) 21:00, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Dr Salvus: You may use such a source the same rules as any other source: it must be reliable (WP:RS) and it must be used as a citation to support some assertion in the article. You may not "insert" any source, paywalled or not, unless it is relevant to the article. Gratutitous "insertion" of a source is called WP:LINKSPAM -Arch dude (talk) 05:26, 3 September 2022 (UTC)