![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 715 | ← | Archive 717 | Archive 718 | Archive 719 | Archive 720 | Archive 721 | → | Archive 725 |
When searching Øystein Sevåg by inserting "Sevåg" as search criteria some people might like to find him as a choice among others. Instead the search leads to Sevag without ambiguity. I don't know how to fix that. Hoping for help to resolve. Thanks. Profero ( talk) 13:22, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
the trouble with that approach...was about the choice of action to take (hatnote vs. disambiguation page entry), not about the "be bold" philosophy. The premise behind WP:BOLD is that even a misguided attempt to improve Wikipedia will not damage it permanently, since at worst the error is reverted, and at best corrected and the article improved. If you think you know how to correct a mistake, do it; you will be told if that's not the correct way, but it's no big deal. Tigraan Click here to contact me 14:26, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
insource:Sevåg
only returns Sevåg, though the snippets are in wikitext.
TJones (WMF) (
talk)
20:54, 31 January 2018 (UTC)Hi everyone! I'm looking to get some experience on Wikipedia in terms of editing and creating articles, and thought drafting up one of my own would be a good place to start. I'm a writer and am currently writing a biography on Dr Reginald Pascoe, an Australian equine veterinarian who died late last year. He's widely known in the Australian horse community; famous within both the national and international veterinary community; he published numerous papers during his lifetime and co-authored 6 books; he pioneered various technologies and treatments throughout his career; he played a key role in Australia's horse and racing communities during his career; and, he was awarded an Order of Australia for his services to vet science. So I think that qualifies him as a notable, but I'd love to hear from some other people whether they think this ticks the boxes. Thanks so much! Cheers, Ana AZPascoe ( talk) 23:37, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
I have made four edits and only got notified for the first one. How do I get notified about my edits? Uyu Ita ( talk) 06:47, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi all I seem to be going in circles about posting my new page to Wikipedia. I click on sumbit for review which triggers a pop-up saying to click on publish, but there is no other button to publish the page. Could you help? Thanks Ewa hermanowicz ( talk) 14:17, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
While adding geo-codes to List of observatory codes I realize that starting at line C63 (first column of the table) the two templates per line (one on the flag the other the Coord) are no longer expanded til the end of the article. This happens roughly half way through a table with roughly 2000 rows. Is there a limit near 2000 for the count of templates in an article? - 149.217.40.222 ( talk) 13:34, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Just saw this a while ago and now I decided to care. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morintango ( talk • contribs) 16:38, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear WP,
I am trying to resume working on a better version of a page about the history of the commercial property company, Hiller Parker May and Rowden. All we would like to see is an acknowledgement that the company existed.
On my Sandbox page now, it says, "16:25, 23 May 2017 RickinBaltimore (talk | contribs) deleted page User:Philjones573/sandbox (G8: Redirect to deleted page "Draft:Hillier Parker May and Rowden" (TW))"
What should I do? Grateful for your help.
Philjones573 ( talk) 12:31, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
an acknowledgement that the company existedon Wikipedia is none of our problems; we follow our own guidelines. Tigraan Click here to contact me 12:50, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Is it fair to say that this article as it stands now:
/info/en/?search=Draft:Hillier_Parker_May_and_Rowden
is improved on the first attempt?
I have learned a lot about what WP articles are supposed to look like. And I have learned a lot about the subject. That is why the article is so different now.
My friend Harold made a shorter version of this, with less detail. But I made an effort to study this subject because it was interesting and enjoyed doing it. Why should I abandon details that I found in copies of Estates Gazette from 1950s through to 1990s, the commercial property journal, and have taken the trouble to write up? Precisely which referenced detail is too detailed to be considered? If you can tell me that, then I will be happy to take it out?
No, I am not being paid to sit here and complain. I am doing this to help a friend and this is the knowledge that we wish to share.
Philjones573 ( talk) 15:03, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to know what would be the right course of action in this case? Firstly, an explanation of the issue. An edit was made in the article on 31 January. The edit changed the formatting of an equipment table with the explanation "(pull image(s) not for tables WP:IMAGEMOS)". Upon reviewing the guideline, I saw nothing that would support the rationale for this edit. The guideline only stated that images should not be used in place of tables or charts. I interpreted that as "Don't use images instead of tables or charts", which is backed up by the dictionary definition of in place of. I also later consulted the Manual of Style for tables and there was no mention that images should not be used in tables, only that they should not be used in headers. As far as I'm concerned, using images in equipment tables seems like an extremely common practice in Wikipedia. Furthermore, the edit deprecated the information provided in the table, made it incorrect and also broke one of the references. Based on that I reverted the change and explained my reasoning on the talk page. After this, another edit was made of the same nature. This time the reasoning provided was that the table didn't comply with Aircraft lists guideline. I accepted the reasoning behind removing images based on that. However, because the edit again deprecated information and broke a reference, I decided to restore the table without images. This was followed by what seems to be a badly formatted (posted incorrectly under my AFC sumbission notice) fake warning, which stated that I was in violation of the three-revert-rule. Considering that I had made only two reversions, that was clearly not the case. Following this, I posted an explanation on the Wikipedia editors talk page,again explaining my reasoning behind the edits and specifically emphasized that I was fine with the edits as long as they didn't deprecate information. Today I noticed that another edit was made from an IP (without an account), which was pretty much the same as before. The edit again deprecated information (deleted the notes I had put in a different section) and broke a reference. The comment for the edit provided no clear reasoning for it. The comment stated "(→Aircraft: not applicable for a table this size Help:Table)". I looked up the help page and again checked the aircraft lists guideline (including the talk page) and saw absolutely nothing that would support this reasoning. At this point, it clearly looks like edit warring and I am unsure what to do in this case. I do not want to engage in an edit war, but the information on the page is again incomplete and references broken. What should I do? -- Estonian1885 ( talk) 07:07, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Is there a template to mark articles as being better suited to Wiktionary if they don't have sources (so don't meet the inclusion criteria linked to from {{ Copy to Wiktionary}}), or should they be PRODDED (or left alone)? I came across Melius abundare quam deficere and U.N.P.O.C. while going through orphaned articles and I'm not sure how best to deal with them. None of the options at WP:DICDEF § Handling problems look quite right. Mortee ( talk) 17:10, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
I had last edited this page and removed the indicated blacklisted PDF article
on : /info/en/?search=Susan_Collett
its a month later and the Notice below is still appearing on the page header.... I do not know further actions to whitelisting this link. Can a Wiki editor please rescan and validate this page.? _____________
"An automated process has detected links on this page on the local or global blacklist. If the links are appropriate you may request whitelisting by following these instructions; otherwise consider removing or replacing them with more appropriate links. (To hide this tag, set the "invisible" field to "true")
List of blacklisted links: [hide]
" https://susancollett.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/cr250-58-61.pdf"
Triggered by \bfiles\.wordpress\.com\b on the global blacklist
________________
thank you for input toward solving this issue, Sensoriam Sensoriam ( talk) 21:34, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
There is a map in Pembrokeshire#Demography that needs the Pembrokeshire county boundary marking on it. Is there someone who can do this? Thanks. Tony Holkham (Talk) 21:53, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
My edit was for the Bids section which is labeled incomplete and can be expanded. I cited an article in the New York Times. Went back to find it deleted. I can't figure out why or by whom LiminalNexus ( talk) 18:28, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Author has no talk page RANDOMTHOUGHTS ( talk) 02:49, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I signed up as a wikipedia member today and I practiced in TWA. It is very clear and fun. I read pillars of wikipedia, manners, policies, teahouse talks below,etc. And I will come back for my first article later. I want to help wikipedia by translating English Articles into my native language, Thai. In the future, I might even translate it to other languages as well because I want to be a polyglot. Any helps, recommendations, tips and tricks are very appreciated. See you later, wikipedians :D. Nattapong F. Kaewthanom ( talk) 22:37, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
I wrote a draft about the Positive Displacement Pipette ( /info/en/?search=Draft:Positive_displacement_pipette) to expand on the corresponding section in the main Pipette page. Is it within Wikipedia's guidelines to put a link to the "main article" on positive displacement pipettes on the pipette page, so the link is already then when the page is approved?
Thank you. Cglife.bmarcus ( talk) 15:29, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello! I want to add some info that I found to the article of Mendoza, Texas. Will anyone please tell me if this is a good source? If so, how can I fully cite it, and use it as a repeated citation if I can do this? Thanks for reading, and I can't wait for some more input! Colman2000 ( talk) 23:10, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Nick Moyes: Ok. Thank you, buddy. Regards from Aloha, Oregon, United States, Colman2000 ( talk) 01:54, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
To ne more accurate, I feel the person entering information is not recently up to date with new findings. They continue to enter opinionated attachments to factual items I have entered. What shall I do? Yvonnedelavega ( talk) 08:39, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello! I am new to Wikipedia contributions, I am trying to add a software here, wrote an article and I didnt understand quite why they deleted it or rejected. For the reference parts, I have a lot of them but from my understanding I cannot associate a reference with blogs (even tho I am talking about big blogs in the IT industry, like TutsPlus, CMS critic, who are very important for anyone in this industry and also they are trendsetters). I really want to make it right and make sure I can add it based on Wikipedias requirements therefore I would appreciate all the help i can get with this.
Iuliana Iuliana Constantin ( talk) 11:24, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Where or whom do you go when it appears the "Talk" format on editing does not seem to be helpful and individuals continue to remove your changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RMoses ( talk • contribs) 00:13, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank-you. I appreciate your time and help in this matter. Sincerely Rick Moses
Hi, I have a question. Is an article still viable if it is nothing but a word-for-word translation of a foreign language article off of another foreign Wikipedia? I was reviewing Pedro Pérez Fernández (economista) and decided to nominate it under CSD A2 and an editor removed the tag, only referencing notability. Are translations like that allowed without citations? Snickers2686 ( talk) 05:51, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
That the article lacks citations is another matter, but that's a content dispute that should be handled either by tagging or by due diligence for reliable sources. Ravenswing 07:40, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Is it possible to have multiple wikipedia accounts for an individual? Pranoyz11 ( talk) 10:39, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear friends, see below WIKIs reason for declining my publication request:
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MatthewVanitas was:
"The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you".
Thanks in advance for helping me guys! Mekasnoop4u ( talk) 12:01, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm trying to understand this submission rother:
"The first thing you should do is to go and blank User:Mekasnoop4u, it is a blatant fake article. Please do so now".
How do i blank it brother?
Or do you mean i should change it?
Mekasnoop4u ( talk) 12:34, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips.
Noted brother!
Mekasnoop4u ( talk) 12:37, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
If it truly is for recording your contributions, isn't more like a ledger of good edits than a User Page? How can I use it properly and to its full potential according to the rules?
Morintango ( talk) 17:03, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello,
I am working on an article regarding Dr. Yvonne Spicer, first mayor of Framingham, MA, at /info/en/?search=Draft:Yvonne_M._Spicer. I think it is pretty much done except for a short section on her political background, and I would appreciate some feedback.
Are the general content, number of links, and citations appropriate? Why is the Infobox not displaying? What other issues may need to be addressed?
Thank you.
( talk) 06:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Aatist ( talk • contribs) 06:30, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Marchjuly, I have added those citations, and finished the Political experience section. I have no personal or professional connection with Yvonne Spicer and am not being paid for writing this. I'm writing about her to fulfill a New Year's resolution to help expand the representation of women, particularly women of color, on Wikipedia. Hopefully more to come! So I will go ahead and submit this for review. Thank you for your help and advice.
Aatist ( talk) 15:59, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
This is regarding /info/en/?search=Shaving
LynxTufts is clearly associated with, http://www.lynxexpression.com , a site that sells shaving products. He puts his link on the page http://www.lynxexpression.com/grooming/shaving/tips-on-shaving (Source - 29) which contains products and is a commercial site. He then removes link I post and am not associated with. The link I post is a high quality blog post about razor burns. LynxTufts does not want other sources similar to his source (Source - 29) because he is trying to sell products on that page where as the link I posted does not. 2 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infoonthecloud ( talk • contribs)
User:Infoonthecloud has been posting a 'how to avoid razor burn' link as a reference on Shaving. I have been reverting these edits, because the link is hosted on a commercial website (99centrazor.com). The user has edited my messages I left for them and reposted them on my talk page, while accusing me of posting "the same type of link" (though I'm not sure where I have done this). They have readded their content for a third time of the Shaving article. Before reverting again I want to ask whether I am correct in removing the link due to being hosted on a commercial website. LynxTufts ( talk) 16:59, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
How do I request a review of a page that was deleted citing incorrect information? 92.232.169.228 ( talk) 19:26, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello,
I'm quite new to editing Wikipedia, but have been trying to get more involved. I came across the Joseph Kony page, which I believe has some neutrality and POV issues. I made some edits just now, and I'd appreciate feedback on those, as well as general opinion about whether the page in general is problematic.
Sentences such as this seem worrying: "Kony has been implicated in abduction and recruitment of child soldiers. While there is no doubt that Kony recruited children, the government of Uganda has equally been accused of abducting and recruiting children into the army."
This seems quite non-encyclopedic to me. The claim about the Ugandan government's use of child soldiers, regardless of accuracy, is not evidence that Kony did not use child soldiers. I would say (maybe personal opinion) that it also does not excuse the use of child soldiers. I would be inclined to take it out completely, or at the very least change the phrasing so that it's not presented as a counterargument to accusations against Kony.
There are also some areas where language is a little overly romantic (I changed a sentence saying "Supporters and detractors alike believe Kony is possessed by spirits" because I don't believe that statement to be true of most of his detractors).
I know it probably would have been more efficient for me to flag this article for someone to look at, instead of asking someone to look at it to help me decide whether I should flag it for someone to look at, but I am interested in getting feedback from others if possible, since I'm not an experienced editor. Thanks for your time! Ludicous ( talk) 20:13, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear All,
I carefully created and edited a new article: Stratis Haviaras, that does not yet exist, about an author I admire and I have thouroughly researched to find data about (Stratis Haviaras). How can this article be published from my sandbox as a regular article in Wikipedia? Should I wait for the Wikipedia administrators to check it and publish it or should I do something myself? (I press the publish button but still, it is not shown, no one can see and read it, and I wonder whether I should do something that I cannot find out yet). Thank you for your valuable help MatinaG ( talk) 21:26, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your assistance, MatinaG ( talk) 21:49, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 715 | ← | Archive 717 | Archive 718 | Archive 719 | Archive 720 | Archive 721 | → | Archive 725 |
When searching Øystein Sevåg by inserting "Sevåg" as search criteria some people might like to find him as a choice among others. Instead the search leads to Sevag without ambiguity. I don't know how to fix that. Hoping for help to resolve. Thanks. Profero ( talk) 13:22, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
the trouble with that approach...was about the choice of action to take (hatnote vs. disambiguation page entry), not about the "be bold" philosophy. The premise behind WP:BOLD is that even a misguided attempt to improve Wikipedia will not damage it permanently, since at worst the error is reverted, and at best corrected and the article improved. If you think you know how to correct a mistake, do it; you will be told if that's not the correct way, but it's no big deal. Tigraan Click here to contact me 14:26, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
insource:Sevåg
only returns Sevåg, though the snippets are in wikitext.
TJones (WMF) (
talk)
20:54, 31 January 2018 (UTC)Hi everyone! I'm looking to get some experience on Wikipedia in terms of editing and creating articles, and thought drafting up one of my own would be a good place to start. I'm a writer and am currently writing a biography on Dr Reginald Pascoe, an Australian equine veterinarian who died late last year. He's widely known in the Australian horse community; famous within both the national and international veterinary community; he published numerous papers during his lifetime and co-authored 6 books; he pioneered various technologies and treatments throughout his career; he played a key role in Australia's horse and racing communities during his career; and, he was awarded an Order of Australia for his services to vet science. So I think that qualifies him as a notable, but I'd love to hear from some other people whether they think this ticks the boxes. Thanks so much! Cheers, Ana AZPascoe ( talk) 23:37, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
I have made four edits and only got notified for the first one. How do I get notified about my edits? Uyu Ita ( talk) 06:47, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi all I seem to be going in circles about posting my new page to Wikipedia. I click on sumbit for review which triggers a pop-up saying to click on publish, but there is no other button to publish the page. Could you help? Thanks Ewa hermanowicz ( talk) 14:17, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
While adding geo-codes to List of observatory codes I realize that starting at line C63 (first column of the table) the two templates per line (one on the flag the other the Coord) are no longer expanded til the end of the article. This happens roughly half way through a table with roughly 2000 rows. Is there a limit near 2000 for the count of templates in an article? - 149.217.40.222 ( talk) 13:34, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Just saw this a while ago and now I decided to care. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Morintango ( talk • contribs) 16:38, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear WP,
I am trying to resume working on a better version of a page about the history of the commercial property company, Hiller Parker May and Rowden. All we would like to see is an acknowledgement that the company existed.
On my Sandbox page now, it says, "16:25, 23 May 2017 RickinBaltimore (talk | contribs) deleted page User:Philjones573/sandbox (G8: Redirect to deleted page "Draft:Hillier Parker May and Rowden" (TW))"
What should I do? Grateful for your help.
Philjones573 ( talk) 12:31, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
an acknowledgement that the company existedon Wikipedia is none of our problems; we follow our own guidelines. Tigraan Click here to contact me 12:50, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Is it fair to say that this article as it stands now:
/info/en/?search=Draft:Hillier_Parker_May_and_Rowden
is improved on the first attempt?
I have learned a lot about what WP articles are supposed to look like. And I have learned a lot about the subject. That is why the article is so different now.
My friend Harold made a shorter version of this, with less detail. But I made an effort to study this subject because it was interesting and enjoyed doing it. Why should I abandon details that I found in copies of Estates Gazette from 1950s through to 1990s, the commercial property journal, and have taken the trouble to write up? Precisely which referenced detail is too detailed to be considered? If you can tell me that, then I will be happy to take it out?
No, I am not being paid to sit here and complain. I am doing this to help a friend and this is the knowledge that we wish to share.
Philjones573 ( talk) 15:03, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to know what would be the right course of action in this case? Firstly, an explanation of the issue. An edit was made in the article on 31 January. The edit changed the formatting of an equipment table with the explanation "(pull image(s) not for tables WP:IMAGEMOS)". Upon reviewing the guideline, I saw nothing that would support the rationale for this edit. The guideline only stated that images should not be used in place of tables or charts. I interpreted that as "Don't use images instead of tables or charts", which is backed up by the dictionary definition of in place of. I also later consulted the Manual of Style for tables and there was no mention that images should not be used in tables, only that they should not be used in headers. As far as I'm concerned, using images in equipment tables seems like an extremely common practice in Wikipedia. Furthermore, the edit deprecated the information provided in the table, made it incorrect and also broke one of the references. Based on that I reverted the change and explained my reasoning on the talk page. After this, another edit was made of the same nature. This time the reasoning provided was that the table didn't comply with Aircraft lists guideline. I accepted the reasoning behind removing images based on that. However, because the edit again deprecated information and broke a reference, I decided to restore the table without images. This was followed by what seems to be a badly formatted (posted incorrectly under my AFC sumbission notice) fake warning, which stated that I was in violation of the three-revert-rule. Considering that I had made only two reversions, that was clearly not the case. Following this, I posted an explanation on the Wikipedia editors talk page,again explaining my reasoning behind the edits and specifically emphasized that I was fine with the edits as long as they didn't deprecate information. Today I noticed that another edit was made from an IP (without an account), which was pretty much the same as before. The edit again deprecated information (deleted the notes I had put in a different section) and broke a reference. The comment for the edit provided no clear reasoning for it. The comment stated "(→Aircraft: not applicable for a table this size Help:Table)". I looked up the help page and again checked the aircraft lists guideline (including the talk page) and saw absolutely nothing that would support this reasoning. At this point, it clearly looks like edit warring and I am unsure what to do in this case. I do not want to engage in an edit war, but the information on the page is again incomplete and references broken. What should I do? -- Estonian1885 ( talk) 07:07, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Is there a template to mark articles as being better suited to Wiktionary if they don't have sources (so don't meet the inclusion criteria linked to from {{ Copy to Wiktionary}}), or should they be PRODDED (or left alone)? I came across Melius abundare quam deficere and U.N.P.O.C. while going through orphaned articles and I'm not sure how best to deal with them. None of the options at WP:DICDEF § Handling problems look quite right. Mortee ( talk) 17:10, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
I had last edited this page and removed the indicated blacklisted PDF article
on : /info/en/?search=Susan_Collett
its a month later and the Notice below is still appearing on the page header.... I do not know further actions to whitelisting this link. Can a Wiki editor please rescan and validate this page.? _____________
"An automated process has detected links on this page on the local or global blacklist. If the links are appropriate you may request whitelisting by following these instructions; otherwise consider removing or replacing them with more appropriate links. (To hide this tag, set the "invisible" field to "true")
List of blacklisted links: [hide]
" https://susancollett.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/cr250-58-61.pdf"
Triggered by \bfiles\.wordpress\.com\b on the global blacklist
________________
thank you for input toward solving this issue, Sensoriam Sensoriam ( talk) 21:34, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
There is a map in Pembrokeshire#Demography that needs the Pembrokeshire county boundary marking on it. Is there someone who can do this? Thanks. Tony Holkham (Talk) 21:53, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
My edit was for the Bids section which is labeled incomplete and can be expanded. I cited an article in the New York Times. Went back to find it deleted. I can't figure out why or by whom LiminalNexus ( talk) 18:28, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Author has no talk page RANDOMTHOUGHTS ( talk) 02:49, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I signed up as a wikipedia member today and I practiced in TWA. It is very clear and fun. I read pillars of wikipedia, manners, policies, teahouse talks below,etc. And I will come back for my first article later. I want to help wikipedia by translating English Articles into my native language, Thai. In the future, I might even translate it to other languages as well because I want to be a polyglot. Any helps, recommendations, tips and tricks are very appreciated. See you later, wikipedians :D. Nattapong F. Kaewthanom ( talk) 22:37, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
I wrote a draft about the Positive Displacement Pipette ( /info/en/?search=Draft:Positive_displacement_pipette) to expand on the corresponding section in the main Pipette page. Is it within Wikipedia's guidelines to put a link to the "main article" on positive displacement pipettes on the pipette page, so the link is already then when the page is approved?
Thank you. Cglife.bmarcus ( talk) 15:29, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello! I want to add some info that I found to the article of Mendoza, Texas. Will anyone please tell me if this is a good source? If so, how can I fully cite it, and use it as a repeated citation if I can do this? Thanks for reading, and I can't wait for some more input! Colman2000 ( talk) 23:10, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
@ Nick Moyes: Ok. Thank you, buddy. Regards from Aloha, Oregon, United States, Colman2000 ( talk) 01:54, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
To ne more accurate, I feel the person entering information is not recently up to date with new findings. They continue to enter opinionated attachments to factual items I have entered. What shall I do? Yvonnedelavega ( talk) 08:39, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello! I am new to Wikipedia contributions, I am trying to add a software here, wrote an article and I didnt understand quite why they deleted it or rejected. For the reference parts, I have a lot of them but from my understanding I cannot associate a reference with blogs (even tho I am talking about big blogs in the IT industry, like TutsPlus, CMS critic, who are very important for anyone in this industry and also they are trendsetters). I really want to make it right and make sure I can add it based on Wikipedias requirements therefore I would appreciate all the help i can get with this.
Iuliana Iuliana Constantin ( talk) 11:24, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Where or whom do you go when it appears the "Talk" format on editing does not seem to be helpful and individuals continue to remove your changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RMoses ( talk • contribs) 00:13, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank-you. I appreciate your time and help in this matter. Sincerely Rick Moses
Hi, I have a question. Is an article still viable if it is nothing but a word-for-word translation of a foreign language article off of another foreign Wikipedia? I was reviewing Pedro Pérez Fernández (economista) and decided to nominate it under CSD A2 and an editor removed the tag, only referencing notability. Are translations like that allowed without citations? Snickers2686 ( talk) 05:51, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
That the article lacks citations is another matter, but that's a content dispute that should be handled either by tagging or by due diligence for reliable sources. Ravenswing 07:40, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Is it possible to have multiple wikipedia accounts for an individual? Pranoyz11 ( talk) 10:39, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear friends, see below WIKIs reason for declining my publication request:
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by MatthewVanitas was:
"The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you".
Thanks in advance for helping me guys! Mekasnoop4u ( talk) 12:01, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
I'm trying to understand this submission rother:
"The first thing you should do is to go and blank User:Mekasnoop4u, it is a blatant fake article. Please do so now".
How do i blank it brother?
Or do you mean i should change it?
Mekasnoop4u ( talk) 12:34, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the tips.
Noted brother!
Mekasnoop4u ( talk) 12:37, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
If it truly is for recording your contributions, isn't more like a ledger of good edits than a User Page? How can I use it properly and to its full potential according to the rules?
Morintango ( talk) 17:03, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello,
I am working on an article regarding Dr. Yvonne Spicer, first mayor of Framingham, MA, at /info/en/?search=Draft:Yvonne_M._Spicer. I think it is pretty much done except for a short section on her political background, and I would appreciate some feedback.
Are the general content, number of links, and citations appropriate? Why is the Infobox not displaying? What other issues may need to be addressed?
Thank you.
( talk) 06:45, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Aatist ( talk • contribs) 06:30, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Marchjuly, I have added those citations, and finished the Political experience section. I have no personal or professional connection with Yvonne Spicer and am not being paid for writing this. I'm writing about her to fulfill a New Year's resolution to help expand the representation of women, particularly women of color, on Wikipedia. Hopefully more to come! So I will go ahead and submit this for review. Thank you for your help and advice.
Aatist ( talk) 15:59, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
This is regarding /info/en/?search=Shaving
LynxTufts is clearly associated with, http://www.lynxexpression.com , a site that sells shaving products. He puts his link on the page http://www.lynxexpression.com/grooming/shaving/tips-on-shaving (Source - 29) which contains products and is a commercial site. He then removes link I post and am not associated with. The link I post is a high quality blog post about razor burns. LynxTufts does not want other sources similar to his source (Source - 29) because he is trying to sell products on that page where as the link I posted does not. 2 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infoonthecloud ( talk • contribs)
User:Infoonthecloud has been posting a 'how to avoid razor burn' link as a reference on Shaving. I have been reverting these edits, because the link is hosted on a commercial website (99centrazor.com). The user has edited my messages I left for them and reposted them on my talk page, while accusing me of posting "the same type of link" (though I'm not sure where I have done this). They have readded their content for a third time of the Shaving article. Before reverting again I want to ask whether I am correct in removing the link due to being hosted on a commercial website. LynxTufts ( talk) 16:59, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
How do I request a review of a page that was deleted citing incorrect information? 92.232.169.228 ( talk) 19:26, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello,
I'm quite new to editing Wikipedia, but have been trying to get more involved. I came across the Joseph Kony page, which I believe has some neutrality and POV issues. I made some edits just now, and I'd appreciate feedback on those, as well as general opinion about whether the page in general is problematic.
Sentences such as this seem worrying: "Kony has been implicated in abduction and recruitment of child soldiers. While there is no doubt that Kony recruited children, the government of Uganda has equally been accused of abducting and recruiting children into the army."
This seems quite non-encyclopedic to me. The claim about the Ugandan government's use of child soldiers, regardless of accuracy, is not evidence that Kony did not use child soldiers. I would say (maybe personal opinion) that it also does not excuse the use of child soldiers. I would be inclined to take it out completely, or at the very least change the phrasing so that it's not presented as a counterargument to accusations against Kony.
There are also some areas where language is a little overly romantic (I changed a sentence saying "Supporters and detractors alike believe Kony is possessed by spirits" because I don't believe that statement to be true of most of his detractors).
I know it probably would have been more efficient for me to flag this article for someone to look at, instead of asking someone to look at it to help me decide whether I should flag it for someone to look at, but I am interested in getting feedback from others if possible, since I'm not an experienced editor. Thanks for your time! Ludicous ( talk) 20:13, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear All,
I carefully created and edited a new article: Stratis Haviaras, that does not yet exist, about an author I admire and I have thouroughly researched to find data about (Stratis Haviaras). How can this article be published from my sandbox as a regular article in Wikipedia? Should I wait for the Wikipedia administrators to check it and publish it or should I do something myself? (I press the publish button but still, it is not shown, no one can see and read it, and I wonder whether I should do something that I cannot find out yet). Thank you for your valuable help MatinaG ( talk) 21:26, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your assistance, MatinaG ( talk) 21:49, 2 February 2018 (UTC)