Help desk
< June 7	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 9 >

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.

June 8

false information

hello

im khalid alghamdi i would like to let Wikipedia know that there is an issue with the page, the part where i think is 100% wrong and i think its insult to Islamic characters and i would like you to change that.

the link Al-Hakam II

it's at the Personal life

where it says

n his youth his loves seem to have been entirely homosexual.[4] He was known to have openly kept a male harem.[5] This exclusivity was a problem, since it was essential to produce an heir. A resolution was reached[6] by his taking a concubine, Subh, who dressed in boys' clothes and was given the masculine name of Jafar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kanon7070 (talk • contribs) 01:13, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are what appear to be reliable sources attached to each of these statements, which seem to reflect historical fact. Do you have any citable, reliable sources to contradict the information in that section of the article, or are you just objecting because you think it says something derogatory about the subject? You do realize, don't you, that there have been historically important homosexuals throughout history who were adherents of Islam, just as there have been historically important homosexuals of other faiths? General Ization ^Talk 01:17, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And for future reference, the best place to post a message about a proposed inaccuracy or to express other concerns about an article is on the article's Talk page rather than on this Help Desk. General Ization ^Talk 01:23, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help with move request

I created a draft on Vince Cardell (draft:Vince Cardell) because there is already a re-direct. Because re-direct was not created as such, I can not move the draft over the re-direct, so I made a requested move so that an administrator would move it over the re-direct. It went through the commentary period, and the non-admin closer did not close for moving, but instead sent it to Articles for Creation. As a regular AfC reviewer, I certainly could have done that myself. I don't particularly want to wait the normal 2 months an AfC can take, and this is mildly annoying. What process should I have used to move my article to the mainspace over the re-direct? Thanks! 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 03:04, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. 78.26 I have done the move. It seems to me that you acted properly, and the closer of the RM discussion didn't correctly understand what was being requested. posting here was a good way to attract admin attention to the issue. You could also have used {{helpme}} I suppose, or sent a talk msg to any active admin. DES ^(talk) 08:04, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

" also "

NAC:Boxing off annoying discussion of annoying edits. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:54, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

I noticed the word ' also ' is being used to annoy.

I don't use ' also ' when it's obvious the idea expressed is related to the previous statement. It's very bad grammar. Someone amongst you is a middle easterner perhaps.

' also ', someone amongst you is a middle easterner. Also I think you have bad grammar and also it's obvious you have a conflicting interest in there who is using ' also ' when it's an annoyance.

annoying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.119.232.222 (talk) 05:50, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Posts that complain about a problem but don't tell us which article they are referring to are also annoying. AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:56, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Posts that accuse someone of being a "middle easterner", without saying middle east relative to what, are also annoying. Maproom (talk) 07:09, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Editors who assume that what is obvious to them is obvious to everyone are also annoying. So are editors who appear to assume that there is something wrong with being a "middle easterner", however that might be defined. DES ^(talk) 07:56, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Also" in an article can sometimes be an example of editorialising, in which case it is best removed; but it is not always a problem. However, if you see a way in which an article can be improved, you are welcome to do so. --ColinFine (talk) 10:42, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've also been annoyed by the use of 'also' in various biography articles. As a person is a part of more and more projects, their article is often expanded by adding bits of information to the end of the biography or career section of the article. You can see this a lot in biographies of actors as they go from one movie to the next. It's a lazy way of adding more information. That said, you could take it upon yourself to channel your annoyance into cleaning up the prose and making well written and flowing paragraphs of these 'also' sentences. Dismas|^(talk) 10:53, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To the original poster: This is Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. We have more than four million articles and tens of thousands of volunteer editors from around the World. Whatever a middle easterner means to you, I'm sure we have many. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:15, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, DC and occasionally VirginiaNaraht (talk) 14:16, 8 June 2015 (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.

Just creating an article instead of submitting to Articles for creation?

I created a draft, then submitted it to Articles for Creation--however, it's not about an organization or individual, so I could have just moved it to the main space instead of using the AfC process. Is there a way to remove it from Articles for Creation? Rauisuchian (talk) 11:37, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Rauisuchian: anyone can create/move any article directly to live space, but that just means it is immediately going to be subject of heavy scrutiny and subject to potential speedy deletion. After a quick view of the draft I would question if the subject as presented meets WP:GNG - outside of the essentially primary source of the tetra blogs, there doesnt seem to be significant third party coverage. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:23, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

or maybe not, some of the iO9 seems more relevant than initially appeared. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:29, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@TheRedPenOfDoom: Do Articles for Creation get reviewed by multiple people or only one reviewer? Rauisuchian (talk) 14:14, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Rauisuchian: it is generally one editor at a time. If it is initially rejected, then another editor may be the reviewer upon a second submission, or it might be the same one. And there is no way to know how many people may look at an article and decide "no that's not a submission I want to formally review". -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 23:04, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism or just bad editing?

An article that I started in January has been edited by somebody without an account. I'm quite short of time at the moment and I can't work out if he or she was trying to do something useful or just vandalising the article. If somebody has some time to spare, perhaps they would have a look at it for me please? Ernest Stafford Carlos is the article in question. Alansplodge (talk) 13:02, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know if the changes made are correct or not, but the breakage of the infobox appears to be bad editing. I have fixed the infobox. Someone with some knowledge of the subject will have to look at the edits and determine if they are good changes. -- GB fan 13:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks GB and other editors who have helped. Alansplodge (talk) 16:40, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Welcome messages using Twinkle

It was my custom to welcome new users to Wikipedia, using Twinkle, but now I cannot do that. Twinkle works fine for me on Articles, but not at all on Talk pages. Why not?--DThomsen8 (talk) 13:29, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just did a welcome using twinkle and it worked fine. Not sure why you had a problem. Try it again; maybe it was an intermitant. RJFJR (talk) 14:18, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle works fine for me on Articles, but not on talk pages. I am going to try removing Twinkle, and installing it again.--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:05, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Kay aka John Kaciuban

In the history of Bill Haley and the Comets, there is no mention of me, Johnny Kay...lead guitarist June 1960 to Dec. 1966, then on various shows and recordings for several years thereafter. in the 1972 London Rock & Roll Show 8/5/72..Please go to www.jkrockets.com for more info. I was associated with the comets from 1960 to 1972. My last performance as lead guitar was in Las Vegas Sept 1972. Thank yo; JK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.109.109.109 (talk) 18:58, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We would require third-party sourcing for that. Your personal website would not be acceptable unfortunately. I'll see if I can find anything, and add your name to the article if I can confirm it. For future reference, you might do better to post on the article talk page if you have further information - please note that per the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guideline, you are strongly advised not to edit the article yourself. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:57, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some research and the history of "The Comets" after the 50s gets complex See http://www.rockabillyhall.com/billhaley.html for a list of those part of the Comets at one time or another. This does include Johnny Kay. Also Bill Haley Father of Rock 'n' Roll (https://books.google.com/books?id=_l_1NkpGBrEC ) would probably be suitable as a reference.Naraht (talk) 21:09, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Did my page get deleted?

I created a page, "Quality Tubing", and recieved some feedback from some editors. I went ahead and made the needed changes, but now when I search for "Quality Tubing", it has been redirected. How can I find my site again to edit it or has it been deleted? If it has been deleted, how do I try again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kkaplan92 (talk • contribs) 19:38, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your article has been changed into a redirect - but the previous version is still visible in the history: [1] Frankly, I would have to suggest that 'trying again' would be a waste of time though - the business concerned is a part of another company, on which we already have an article, and nothing in your article suggests that the business would meet our notability guidelines as an independent subject. It was also blatant advertising, and cited no sources whatsoever. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:44, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

pages on general guidelines for etymologies, original scripts, pronunciation etc.

I feel very foolish asking this, but where are the pages which describe the policy regarding giving etymologies, pronunciation, etc.? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Telmac (talk • contribs) 20:36, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the relevant manual of style guideline on pronounciation, as far as etymology goes, it varies depending on the subject. Here is a search result listing many topic-specific entries that have something to say about etymology. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:55, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Writing styles - what tense should be used? Present tense as though a narrative or past tense as we recount something

I am translating articles from French into English and have been told that the French write in the present tense and the English wiki writes in the past tense. Is that correct? Where can I find out about house styles?

Many Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.43.203 (talk) 23:36, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can't speak to the conventions of French-English translation, but we do typically write here of events that have already occurred and people who are deceased in the past tense, rather than as a narrative in the present tense. Otherwise, we write about our subjects in the present tense. See MOS:TENSE. And more generally the English Wikipedia Manual of Style. General Ization ^Talk 23:50, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]