Help desk
< May 22	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 24 >

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 23

Article header

Dear Sir/Madame,

How can I edit the header of the article?

Kind regards, Dhana — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srirajata (talk • contribs) 00:43, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You probably want to rename the article. To do this the page has to be moved to the new title. Your account is too new to have permission to do that so you need to make a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves. However, before doing that, I think you need to discuss the issue on the article talk page. There is some discussion there on the proper transcription of his name to use and your changes to the page may well be controversial. Spinning Spark 01:03, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Defaultsort problem

Defaultsort doesn't seem to work in conjunction with the SIA template - see The Colleen Bawn (film). Is there a workaround? Clarityfiend (talk) 01:36, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You might try posting your question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation if you don't get an answer here C. MarnetteD | Talk 02:49, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey CF. The template's documentation provided the answer.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:59, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh. Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:26, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

editing issues.....

I was trying to edit a page to add the details of my recent trek across Australia.

However I have made a formatting error that I do nt know how to rectify.....

the page is List of people who have walked across Australia

the error is at the bottom of the table....

I tried to put my details into the table but for some reason (obviously my error in formatting) my details were included below the table, rather than in the table.

Coulod you please rectify this, or maybe tell me how to rectify this.

It would be great if you could email me through my wikipedia account (username trombologist) when the issue is rectified so I can check the page.

Thanks

Brendon E.D.Alsop — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trombologist (talk • contribs) 01:41, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, see Help:Table for more information on tables. Spinning Spark 07:28, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest?

I'm an Australian comic artist (http://www.koala-hugs.com.au) and I'd like to appear on this list: List of Australian comics creators If I add myself though - is that a conflict of interest? What about a wiki page? Do I need one? (I noticed a lot of names in this list don't have them). I shouldn't create one for myself - that would definitely be COI... right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarinetina (talk • contribs) 02:02, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you creating or even editing it could be a COI. Take a look at WP:COS. If there was an article, and you add 100% facts, that should be ok. Now, whether you need an article or not, if you meet WP:N, then you should have someone else create an article at Wikipedia:Requested articles CTF83! 02:36, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So I can add myself to the list because that's a fact. But someone else needs to create an article for me (if I want one). OK, ta :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Clarinetina (talk • contribs) 04:11, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's generally preferred or even required that people on lists are notable, however. Like it may be a fact that I am a singer, but I am not notable, so it's unlikely I have a place on a list of singers here at Wikipedia. - Purplewowies (talk) 04:30, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Most lists here require that an article about the person/thing already exists when they are added to the lists - see WP:WTAF for further information. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:03, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note that nobody needs a Wiki page. Wikipedia articles are created by volunteers, are about notable subjects, and are based on material appearing in reliable sources. Articles are not a means to advertise your writing/drawing. Astronaut (talk) 10:01, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion Box

This page here Arvind Iyer has a proposed deletion box on top but the discussion and deliberation regarding keeping the article seems to have reached a consensus.When does the 'This article is being considered for deletion' box get removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suntug11 (talk • contribs) 09:58, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's listed at WP:AFD, so generally it lasts a week. However, as is the case here, if not enough discussion has occurred, (I've seen 2 or 3 people in agreement be enough), an admin will relist it for another 7 days, and perhaps a third 7 day period, then they will decide to delete it or not based on the consensus. CTF83! 10:22, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.How does one get an admin to take a look at it and decide if it is time to have that removed.It has been quite some time now.I need to get an admins attention on it.thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suntug11 (talk • contribs) 11:13, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~:::I am afraid that you will just have to be patient, there is no urgency, there is no deadline.--ukexpat (talk) 13:46, 23 May 2014 (UTC)~~[reply]

It has been closed as keep.--ukexpat (talk) 14:11, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A.L. Simpkin & Co. Ltd

dear sirs someone has set up a wikipedia page about our company and there are various areas that are factually incorrect or wrong the page is A.L. Simpkin & Co. Ltd

please advise how we can log in and amend the article as well as improve it greatly! kind regards ADRIAN SIMPKIN — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.137.252.155 (talk) 10:06, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can edit articles without logging in, just as you have posted here without logging in. However, as a person associated with the subject of the Simpkin article, you have a conflict of interest, and should not edit that article at all. If you are aware of inaccuracies in the article, you should give details on its talk page, where an unbiased editor can decide how to deal with them. Maproom (talk) 10:23, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, as a page that is not watched by many editors, you will probably need to use the template {{request edit}} in order to attract the attention of an editor to service the request. Spinning Spark 12:31, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gaite Parisienne (ballet)

I added a new reference in the History section, but lost the template for the reference list. Please correct so that the reference list appears on screen.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claudeconyers (talk • contribs) 11:00, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Claude. It's fixed. What happened was that you mistyped the closing code ended the NYT citation with "</ref)" instead of "</ref>".--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:15, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Global account has been in migration for months

Title (hopefully) says it all. I started migration to a global account months ago (forget exactly when, but my global account info says registered September last year). Is migration a process that doesn't finish or something? Or did I do something wrong in the migration, or what? I'm confused. This isn't exactly causing me any problems (at least yet) but seeing that In Migration on my preferences page haunts me (okay, I may be getting a bit overdramatic). Thanks in advance for anyone who can solve this mystery. -DK (talk) 14:02, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The status of your global account is here. Go to prefences>User_profile and click on "Manage your global account". When you press this the system should attempt to automatically attach you to all accounts in your name. You should get information on any wiki that has a problem doing that. Spinning Spark 14:22, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know for sure but I suspect "In migration" from MediaWiki:Centralauth-prefs-migration will be displayed as long as there are unattached accounts at Special:CentralAuth/DK. The only way to avoid it would be to get all the accounts by usurping them one by one, or changing the password to the same if the accounts already belong to you. https://tools.wmflabs.org/quentinv57-tools/tools/sulinfo.php?username=DK shows some of the acounts have many edits so you will not be allowed to usurp them if they aren't already yours. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:45, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Cummings (writer)

The boomerang has flown. Original poster blocked for edit warring, conflict of interest editing, and misleading edit summaries.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

People keep making editorial comments about my book The Pied Piper. These comment are malicious and should be deletedl — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cummings01 (talk • contribs) 16:54, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the link to the NY Times book review you deleted. Please note that you should not be editing the article directly due to your conflict of interest. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:02, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Convenience link Richard Cummings (writer) - Arjayay (talk) 17:03, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cummings01, I see you're ignoring this and using misleading edit summaries [1], [2]. Probably not a good idea. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 17:38, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

How users can verify already posted references

I would like to know if users can verify already posted sources instead of piling them up.

Example:

This is an information which requires citations[1][2][3].

Instead of me adding the [4][5] etc can I put more realiability on [1] and/or [2] and/or [3]?

I tried to find this on Wikipedia community but I could not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fmv1992 (talk • contribs) 20:15, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not 100% sure what your question is...but why would you want to add a 4th and 5th reference? 1 is usually enough, maybe 2. CTF83! 20:59, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly the OP is asking what to do about deadlinks. If you can replace them with a better source, that is fine, but you should not just remove them as you did here. Even though they have gone dead, they still remain the source of the information. It is always possible that another editor can retrieve the source if the information of what the source was is left on the page. Spinning Spark 01:17, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A General Reminder

This WP:Help Desk is a very visible forum, like the noticeboards WP:AN and WP:ANI, and several of its regular editors are administrators. Although the Help Desk is not as contentious as the noticeboards, it is still not a good idea to bring complaints to the Help Desk if one's own conduct has been problematic. The boomerang essay is informative. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:39, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, it's not a good idea for editors to post here drawing attention to their own problematic conduct. But I would not want to discourage them. It helps in getting competent administrators to deal with problems; and boomerangs provide entertainment for ordinary editors like the undersigned. Maproom (talk) 06:58, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You make a good point there. We shouldn't try to discourage problematic editors from posting here for the reasons that you mention. Their postings are useful for reasons that they did not intend, getting the original posters blocked. I had not been thinking of entertainment value, but why not? There is value to cautioning editors about using the noticeboards. Postings by problematic editors to the Help Desk are useful and provide entertainment, and seldom are disruptive. Postings by problematic editors to the noticeboards are often disruptive, and inflame existing conflicts, and the resulting flame wars are sometimes so long that any entertainment value is lost. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:54, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Zbydniewski

Hi!

There is an issuing occurring on Brian Zbydniewski' page. The user DMC511 "sourced" information is incorrect. If you look at the information right before his sourcing the correct source was listed. This is especially important with the pronunciation of his name; as it Zeb-ah-new-ski. Many media outlets come to this site to find correct information. The user DMC511 is leaving biased information against Zbydniewski and using incorrect sources. I have sourced the correct information but DM511 keeps undoing or changing the cited correct information. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by FanZEB (talk • contribs) 22:52, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please start discussing your differences on the article talk page and invite the other editor to join in. You should only be seeking outside intervention after attempts to reach consensus have failed. Continuing to edit war in the article is not a good idea. Spinning Spark 01:05, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's interesting how this question was posted immediately below the General Reminder, considering that the OP seem to have ignored you suggestion, continued edit warring and pushing the POV of a previous COI editor...--Otus scops (talk) 08:45, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I'm mistaken. Its another user with almost the same name and a similar POV.--Otus scops (talk) 09:18, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]