Help desk | ||
---|---|---|
< May 9 | << Apr | May | Jun >> | May 11 > |
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. |
Almost all of my edits have been resulting in edit conflicts as of late, but when I check the page history there is usually no edit I can see that would have conflicted with mine. This generally only happens to me when I am editing articles, not anything else. Additionally, this has only started happening since I completely revamped my preferences, but I have been unable to locate which preference or gadget may be the source of the problem. Can someone help me out here? Thanks. Bzweebl ( talk) 01:44, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
I would like to be able to edit my edit descriptions.
I find it quite astonishing that after correcting grammar or spelling mistakes in an article, if I then make a spelling mistake in my edit description I can't correct it.
Editors who are logged in should be able to correct or change their edit descriptions. If its a case of "then everyone will be back-tracking through thousands of their edit descriptions" - then at least allow us one revision of the last edit description we wrote. Thats all thats needed really.
It also quite disconcerting to see that you've spent quite a bit of time editing and then you've let yourself down by making the same mistake in your edit description as the one you were trying to correct in the article.
I think allowing editors to change mistakes in their edit descriptions would improve the article's history page. Its also quite nice for editors to feel as though the article and edit description are under their full control and that the edit description is of equal importance.
It would also allow for those silly moments to be redressed. For example, someone vandalised the article on "William the Conqueror". I spotted the vandalism because I was reading the whole article and the vandal had buried the vandalism half-way through. It was quite a big article and for most people scanning the article it may have been missed. I corrected the vandalism. The thing about this vandalism was that it could have only been done in that way by the vandal reading the article; at least to the point of the vandalism. In my edit description I wrote jokingly "at least he read the article before he vandalised it". Obviously vandalism is a serious matter on Wikipedia and my flippant comment may have been seen as counter-productive by admin and other editors. I should have been able to change it.
Does anyone else have an opinion on this or is there some reason this is not practical
Sluffs ( talk) 02:07, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. The "dummy edit" may be an option and I will go to the Village Pump to see if it may be put as a proposal. Quite right that most edit summary mistakes are not serious issues but editors do take pride in their work. The future may think better of us if the edit summaries had less mistakes. Imagine if every edition of Encyclopedia Brittanica had mistake-ridden footnotes to articles that were never corrected and were carried forward to the next edition and with new mistakes added. Just as we have trouble reading Chaucer without an understanding of old English; so we are leaving future historians and editors a minefield of mistakes in the edit summaries which will be made more problematic by the simple fact that language evolves.
Sluffs ( talk) 00:53, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
The page on James Randi [ [1]] is higly biased and one-sided. Any attempts to provide supplemental information that indicates his "One Million Dollar Challenge" might be a hoax is constantly deleted, giving the impression that Randi's honesty is above reproach. Is there some particular reason to keep readers from fully evaluating the integrity of his "Challenge?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.81.105 ( talk) 02:35, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Who would you contact to report such an individual when they are personally attacking you and accusing you of sockpuppetry instead of solving the dispute? TylerDurden8823 ( talk) 03:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure I remember a tool to separate out references into a separate editbox when editing an article. Can anyone help me find it again? Rd232 talk 09:50, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Is there a guideline on whether category-like articles need references or not? What I mean by "category-like" are for example list articles that could also exist as categories. -- Toshio Yamaguchi ( tlk− ctb) 12:26, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
If I check the contributors page on an article it shows (for example)
34 (24/10) Chaheel Riens
What is the significance of the 24/10? Undo? Rollback?
Just wondering thanks. Chaheel Riens ( talk) 12:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedia, I have reedited my article and want to go live again, but have a few questions; 1) When I last went live, my name appeared online before the subject name, which of course was very embarrassing. Why did this happen, and how can I avoid it happening again? 2) When I press “Show preview”, the box on the top right that shows my subjects name, birth place and website, is missing other bits of information that I intended it to contain (ie “medium”, “active” and “instruments”. Why is this? 3) Also when I press “Show preview”, the “Categories” do not appear at the bottom. Will they appear when I go live with the article,or have I made an error? Thank you very much for your kind help. Maya Frida Barr ( talk) 12:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
On NPP, I came across this article
Documentary film of the Netherlands and don't know what to do with it. Although passably well-written and well-intentioned it seems to be original research if one takes the lede sentence "A Dutch Documentary film is a documentary film made by a director of (partly) Dutch origin. Dutch documentary films are not necessarily bound to Dutch topics or locations in the Netherlands."
This would appear to be the page author's opinion and a rather vague definition. Also no other articles exist along the same lines (i.e. documentary films by country/nationality), is this SYNTH? I mean if a half-dutch guy/gal makes a film about the taco trade in Mexico, is that a Dutch documentary? Some input from other editors required. Cheers.
CaptainScreebo
Parley!
13:19, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
I need to import a template to Wikibooks that will turn a name of a script into its
ISO 15924 code. (For example, Latin
→ Latn
). There are
many ISO 15924 templates on Wikipedia, but I am not sure which one does what I want. Please advise on the one that will best do what I want. Thanks,
Liam987
14:16, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering how to put the 'see also' links all onto one line on the following article... Liverpool City Region. The links are found on the Transport section of the article. Also, I'm not sure if I've written the links in the correct format...for example one see also link reads 'St Helens, Merseyside#Transport and infrastructure'. Is this the correct way to write it, looks a bit strange to me?
Richie wright1980 ( talk) Richie wright1980 ( talk) 14:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Much appreciated, thankyou! Richie wright1980 ( talk) Richie wright1980 ( talk) 15:00, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
It is certain I may have the right to keep this image I uploaded to "Lessing Photo Archives", whereas, a number of users have (I was once a student of Erich Lessing in his arts class). Although, I have the right to upload certain images I have uploaded to Wikipedia, from what I have photographed and yet have permission, from the person who created it, and yes I took the photo, but may upload the photo
to the main site of a zodiac sign is my question, sir. I know some administrators will pick on others due to they may not like the photo or just becoming rough, but delete another permission photo of a snake decoration from North America on the Snake (zodiac) article is inappropriate as the rest of the zodiac articles as well have different photos from other countries, unlike, User:Future Perfect at Sunrise who only picked on the snake (zodiac), because of a simple edit I have made, and the rest the user did not seem to bother, so please at least give me some assurance of might to add this photo and stop disruptive edits by this high ranking ,yet doing the right-thing user called User:Future Perfect at Sunrise and I know the user means well. I am looking forward talking -- GoShow ( ...............) 14:04, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Okay, I did thanks-- GoShow ( ...............) 17:04, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
To this day I have not yet figured out how to pick the right venue to resolve simple questions. I don't think it's WP:3O or WP:DRN. Can somebody just pop over, peruse a couple articles, Brammo and Craig Bramscher, and then close Talk:Brammo#Merge proposal? Merge, don't merge, {{ resolved}}, {{ unresolved}}, whatever, just something so we can move on. Thanks! -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 17:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
The idea was to drop off a semi-personal message on another's talk page--more to h/h benefit than mine. I tried it a number of times in the sandbox. The latest is here. When I click "show" all I see is "{{{2}}}". I've tried to see if there was any breaks in the script, and being still a bit of a novice, I've spent a few hours on this to no avail. What am I doing wrong (and I doing anything wrong)? Thanks. Civic Cat ( talk) 18:20, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
|2=The origin of my username
etc (and "You’re user pages" should be "Your user pages", incidentally!)
Bencherlite
Talk
18:25, 10 May 2012 (UTC)Not sure what has happened but everything that is links in watchlist an contrubitions etc instead of beeing the normal it appears to be bolded so very vibrante in colour and quite off putting-- Andrewcrawford ( talk - contrib) 18:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
An article was recently submitted from this account about entrepreneur Dan Carey. Now the article can't be found and the deletion log on the account is also empty. I also can't find any record or saved version of the article. Is there any way I can find out where it is or what happened to it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjasc ( talk • contribs) 19:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
This is a
minor edit
Watch this page
By publishing changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 4.0 License and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
If you do not click on Save Page, the edit will not be kept. Adrian J. Hunter( talk• contribs) 15:15, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
How can I turn them off and have my watchlist appear as it was before? -- Toshio Yamaguchi ( tlk− ctb) 20:11, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Why is there an annoying green star next to the page names in my watchlist? Fifelfoo ( talk) 22:05, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
What is the difference between rollback (AGF), rollback, and rollback (VANDAL)? Tboii99 ✉ 23:29, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Help desk | ||
---|---|---|
< May 9 | << Apr | May | Jun >> | May 11 > |
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. |
Almost all of my edits have been resulting in edit conflicts as of late, but when I check the page history there is usually no edit I can see that would have conflicted with mine. This generally only happens to me when I am editing articles, not anything else. Additionally, this has only started happening since I completely revamped my preferences, but I have been unable to locate which preference or gadget may be the source of the problem. Can someone help me out here? Thanks. Bzweebl ( talk) 01:44, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
I would like to be able to edit my edit descriptions.
I find it quite astonishing that after correcting grammar or spelling mistakes in an article, if I then make a spelling mistake in my edit description I can't correct it.
Editors who are logged in should be able to correct or change their edit descriptions. If its a case of "then everyone will be back-tracking through thousands of their edit descriptions" - then at least allow us one revision of the last edit description we wrote. Thats all thats needed really.
It also quite disconcerting to see that you've spent quite a bit of time editing and then you've let yourself down by making the same mistake in your edit description as the one you were trying to correct in the article.
I think allowing editors to change mistakes in their edit descriptions would improve the article's history page. Its also quite nice for editors to feel as though the article and edit description are under their full control and that the edit description is of equal importance.
It would also allow for those silly moments to be redressed. For example, someone vandalised the article on "William the Conqueror". I spotted the vandalism because I was reading the whole article and the vandal had buried the vandalism half-way through. It was quite a big article and for most people scanning the article it may have been missed. I corrected the vandalism. The thing about this vandalism was that it could have only been done in that way by the vandal reading the article; at least to the point of the vandalism. In my edit description I wrote jokingly "at least he read the article before he vandalised it". Obviously vandalism is a serious matter on Wikipedia and my flippant comment may have been seen as counter-productive by admin and other editors. I should have been able to change it.
Does anyone else have an opinion on this or is there some reason this is not practical
Sluffs ( talk) 02:07, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. The "dummy edit" may be an option and I will go to the Village Pump to see if it may be put as a proposal. Quite right that most edit summary mistakes are not serious issues but editors do take pride in their work. The future may think better of us if the edit summaries had less mistakes. Imagine if every edition of Encyclopedia Brittanica had mistake-ridden footnotes to articles that were never corrected and were carried forward to the next edition and with new mistakes added. Just as we have trouble reading Chaucer without an understanding of old English; so we are leaving future historians and editors a minefield of mistakes in the edit summaries which will be made more problematic by the simple fact that language evolves.
Sluffs ( talk) 00:53, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
The page on James Randi [ [1]] is higly biased and one-sided. Any attempts to provide supplemental information that indicates his "One Million Dollar Challenge" might be a hoax is constantly deleted, giving the impression that Randi's honesty is above reproach. Is there some particular reason to keep readers from fully evaluating the integrity of his "Challenge?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.81.105 ( talk) 02:35, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Who would you contact to report such an individual when they are personally attacking you and accusing you of sockpuppetry instead of solving the dispute? TylerDurden8823 ( talk) 03:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
I'm sure I remember a tool to separate out references into a separate editbox when editing an article. Can anyone help me find it again? Rd232 talk 09:50, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Is there a guideline on whether category-like articles need references or not? What I mean by "category-like" are for example list articles that could also exist as categories. -- Toshio Yamaguchi ( tlk− ctb) 12:26, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
If I check the contributors page on an article it shows (for example)
34 (24/10) Chaheel Riens
What is the significance of the 24/10? Undo? Rollback?
Just wondering thanks. Chaheel Riens ( talk) 12:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Dear Wikipedia, I have reedited my article and want to go live again, but have a few questions; 1) When I last went live, my name appeared online before the subject name, which of course was very embarrassing. Why did this happen, and how can I avoid it happening again? 2) When I press “Show preview”, the box on the top right that shows my subjects name, birth place and website, is missing other bits of information that I intended it to contain (ie “medium”, “active” and “instruments”. Why is this? 3) Also when I press “Show preview”, the “Categories” do not appear at the bottom. Will they appear when I go live with the article,or have I made an error? Thank you very much for your kind help. Maya Frida Barr ( talk) 12:30, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
On NPP, I came across this article
Documentary film of the Netherlands and don't know what to do with it. Although passably well-written and well-intentioned it seems to be original research if one takes the lede sentence "A Dutch Documentary film is a documentary film made by a director of (partly) Dutch origin. Dutch documentary films are not necessarily bound to Dutch topics or locations in the Netherlands."
This would appear to be the page author's opinion and a rather vague definition. Also no other articles exist along the same lines (i.e. documentary films by country/nationality), is this SYNTH? I mean if a half-dutch guy/gal makes a film about the taco trade in Mexico, is that a Dutch documentary? Some input from other editors required. Cheers.
CaptainScreebo
Parley!
13:19, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
I need to import a template to Wikibooks that will turn a name of a script into its
ISO 15924 code. (For example, Latin
→ Latn
). There are
many ISO 15924 templates on Wikipedia, but I am not sure which one does what I want. Please advise on the one that will best do what I want. Thanks,
Liam987
14:16, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering how to put the 'see also' links all onto one line on the following article... Liverpool City Region. The links are found on the Transport section of the article. Also, I'm not sure if I've written the links in the correct format...for example one see also link reads 'St Helens, Merseyside#Transport and infrastructure'. Is this the correct way to write it, looks a bit strange to me?
Richie wright1980 ( talk) Richie wright1980 ( talk) 14:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Much appreciated, thankyou! Richie wright1980 ( talk) Richie wright1980 ( talk) 15:00, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
It is certain I may have the right to keep this image I uploaded to "Lessing Photo Archives", whereas, a number of users have (I was once a student of Erich Lessing in his arts class). Although, I have the right to upload certain images I have uploaded to Wikipedia, from what I have photographed and yet have permission, from the person who created it, and yes I took the photo, but may upload the photo
to the main site of a zodiac sign is my question, sir. I know some administrators will pick on others due to they may not like the photo or just becoming rough, but delete another permission photo of a snake decoration from North America on the Snake (zodiac) article is inappropriate as the rest of the zodiac articles as well have different photos from other countries, unlike, User:Future Perfect at Sunrise who only picked on the snake (zodiac), because of a simple edit I have made, and the rest the user did not seem to bother, so please at least give me some assurance of might to add this photo and stop disruptive edits by this high ranking ,yet doing the right-thing user called User:Future Perfect at Sunrise and I know the user means well. I am looking forward talking -- GoShow ( ...............) 14:04, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Okay, I did thanks-- GoShow ( ...............) 17:04, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
To this day I have not yet figured out how to pick the right venue to resolve simple questions. I don't think it's WP:3O or WP:DRN. Can somebody just pop over, peruse a couple articles, Brammo and Craig Bramscher, and then close Talk:Brammo#Merge proposal? Merge, don't merge, {{ resolved}}, {{ unresolved}}, whatever, just something so we can move on. Thanks! -- Dennis Bratland ( talk) 17:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
The idea was to drop off a semi-personal message on another's talk page--more to h/h benefit than mine. I tried it a number of times in the sandbox. The latest is here. When I click "show" all I see is "{{{2}}}". I've tried to see if there was any breaks in the script, and being still a bit of a novice, I've spent a few hours on this to no avail. What am I doing wrong (and I doing anything wrong)? Thanks. Civic Cat ( talk) 18:20, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
|2=The origin of my username
etc (and "You’re user pages" should be "Your user pages", incidentally!)
Bencherlite
Talk
18:25, 10 May 2012 (UTC)Not sure what has happened but everything that is links in watchlist an contrubitions etc instead of beeing the normal it appears to be bolded so very vibrante in colour and quite off putting-- Andrewcrawford ( talk - contrib) 18:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
An article was recently submitted from this account about entrepreneur Dan Carey. Now the article can't be found and the deletion log on the account is also empty. I also can't find any record or saved version of the article. Is there any way I can find out where it is or what happened to it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjasc ( talk • contribs) 19:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)
This is a
minor edit
Watch this page
By publishing changes, you agree to the Terms of Use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the CC BY-SA 4.0 License and the GFDL. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
If you do not click on Save Page, the edit will not be kept. Adrian J. Hunter( talk• contribs) 15:15, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
How can I turn them off and have my watchlist appear as it was before? -- Toshio Yamaguchi ( tlk− ctb) 20:11, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Why is there an annoying green star next to the page names in my watchlist? Fifelfoo ( talk) 22:05, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
What is the difference between rollback (AGF), rollback, and rollback (VANDAL)? Tboii99 ✉ 23:29, 10 May 2012 (UTC)