Help desk
< March 23	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 25 >

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.

March 24

Death Certs

How can a death certificate be cited? I'm thinking specifically for citing the cause of death. Dismas|^(talk) 00:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What notable person's cause of death does not appear in news media articles? I don't understand why you would need to cite a death certificate, not that you couldn't, I just don't understand the need. For example, just perusing some of the recent celebrity deaths (Natasha Richardson, Jade Goody, etc.), the press accounts go into great detail about the causes of death. If you do need to cite a death certificate, if it's online somewhere, maybe you could use the catch-all {{Cite web}}. If it's not online, maybe just a {{Citation}}. Or you could join the legions of Wikipedia editors who eschew citation templates and use whatever format they please (not something I particularly like, but millions of people don't care what I like). --Teratornis (talk) 04:56, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Diane Webber. I welcome you to search. I can't find anything online. Dismas|^(talk) 05:08, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you see the death certificate? Has it been published anywhere? If not then it may not satisfy Wikipedia:Verifiability, but I don't know anything about the availability of American death certificates. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:22, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen it. But if it's a public record, which death certs are in the US, it can be had. And I'd like to know how someone might cite something like that. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 13:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I never really thought about this before, but is the cause of death of an otherwise notable person automatically notable? It sounds as if Diane Webber was notable when she was young, and then as she aged she sank into a Stygian obscurity, such that by the time she died, the cause of her death was only of interest to a few bloggers and not to the professional news outlets, biographers, and so on. If the mainstream media doesn't report the cause of her death, is that a sufficiently notable feature to include in her article? --Teratornis (talk) 01:25, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have a point. A couple editors had been going back and forth over which type of cancer she had. One of them claimed to have seen the death cert and it got me wondering how such a thing would be cited. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 03:32, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm probably the last person who would cite a need for notability, given that I think the notability requirement tends to be abused on Wikipedia just a bit (yes, I lean toward inclusionism), but in this case if there are none of the usual reliable sources reporting on an event, then maybe the notability argument is something to think about. Personally, I wouldn't object to citing a death certificate, but it wouldn't be the easiest thing for other editors to verify. I wonder if you could scan the death certificate and send a copy in e-mail to our OTRS? I don't know whether OTRS gets used for this sort of thing, but it would seem like a reasonable way to verify printed information that is otherwise inconvenient to access. As far as how to cite a death certificate, you could Search Wikipedia with Google for: "death certificate" which seems to find some examples, such as:

Baruch Goldstein#cite note-certificate-8

--Teratornis (talk) 03:37, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Her social security death index information can be looked up here (go to advanced search and plug in CA for state and 2009 for death year and her death cerificate can be ordered here. Note that not all jurisdictions list anything other than "natural causes" on death certificates, and even when a cause is listed, it may just say "cancer".--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:41, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To secure or not to secure?

I have just been granted NPWatcher, and I have problems staying logged in in order to use it. I normally log in using the secure server, but it seems to be causing me problems, as I get inexplicably logged out whenever I try to do something that ends up not getting done because I'm logged out. So my question is: am I just as safe not logging in on the secure server as I am doing so? --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 00:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia

If you changed a Wikipedia topic about, and you are not a member, can you possibly get in trouble with the law? Or will it just change automatically. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthew313 (talk • contribs) 01:03, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What topic are you considering editing? What changes do you intend to make? Why do you think you'd get in trouble with the law? As long as you're not comitting libel, copyright violations, or make death/terrorist threats, you really shouldn't be worrying about the law. But please do provide some more context. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In trouble with law!?!? No! If you make a controversial edit, it will simply be reverted, and you may get a notification about your edit on your talk page. If you continue to make controversial edits without discussing them on the talk page after getting multiple warnings, you will be blocked. Law enforcers do not get involved with anything around here, unless you were to do something illegal in real life that correlated to your behavior on Wikipedia, or as the user above said, made any threats of physical harm, libelous claims or threats of a lawsuit towards Wikipedia. --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 01:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You may get in trouble with your work's human resource department if they montior internet use, but trouble with "the law" is a bit of a stretch. Livewireo (talk) 16:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Departing editor vandalism?

Who do I notify about HeMan5? His talk page states that he wants to delete his account, but in the meantime, he is deleting DVD release tables from various TV show articles, citing WP:MOSTV (which does not support his actions). Clarityfiend (talk) 01:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has already filed a complaint against him at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:HeMan5 on an extreme WP:POINT vandalism spree. --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 01:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

cameo jewelry

what isthe composition of antique cameo jewelry —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.232.12.6 (talk) 02:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might find what you are looking for in the article about Cameo (carving). If you cannot find the answer there, you can try asking your question at Wikipedia's Reference Desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer just about any question in the universe (except about how to use Wikipedia, which is what this help desk is for). I hope this helps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for a template

I'm trying to find an article markup template for WP:NOTGUIDE, specifically not medical advice. I don't see one at WP:TEMPLATE, but I have been known for selective blindness. SDY (talk) 02:30, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe {{Medical advice1}} will fit the bill.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. That's a user page template. Athlete's_foot#Prevention_measures_in_public_places is an example of what I'm looking for a template for. SDY (talk) 03:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Template messages/Cleanup shows {{Howto}}. I have not seen a medical specific template for articles. All pages link to Disclaimers at the bottom. I don't think articles should refer to Wikipedia:Medical disclaimer or contain medical disclaimers. There is a discussion about it at Wikipedia talk:Medical disclaimer#why not disclaimer template on the medical articles?. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:15, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) I too was going to suggest {{howto}}. Just add it below the heading of the "Prevention" section. Deor (talk) 12:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the replies, it appears that does the trick. I should probably just invoke WP:SOFIXIT on myself, though. SDY (talk) 00:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Collin palmer

Should this article be here? I have speedied and proposed and the author keeps removing the tags. I left them a note on their talk page after they left one on mine. Can I put the deletion notice back? --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 03:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article could use some editing to remove the peacock language, improve the reference formatting, and fix the odd lettercase in the second word of the title, but I don't see any point in deleting it. Hardly anyone seems to be viewing the article yet which means it is not hurting Wikipedia. Deleting the article won't save any server space, since we keep copies of all deleted articles in the database. If nobody is viewing the article, it isn't using up any bandwidth. As far as I can tell, the only result of deleting the article might be to bite and possibly drive away another new user who might otherwise go on to contribute something worthwhile. --Teratornis (talk) 04:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but the problem is the article doesn't have any reliable sources that cover the subject, other than local newspapers and a Facebook profile. He's been mentioned in ESPN, that's the biggest source I found mentioning him and he has some Google hits, although Google hits alone shouldn't get you an article in Wikipedia. So what now, remove the speedy deletion template and make it go through the normal AFD process? --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 05:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rootsweb

Is Rootsweb considered a reliable source? Dismas|^(talk) 04:02, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For what claims? And considered reliable by whom? If you write something that lots of people are likely to disagree with, a sufficiently determined opponent can find all sorts of guidelines or policies to throw against it, regardless of the reliability of the source. Precedent might be relevant here; a Special:LinkSearch on ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com seems to find a whole bunch of links. If nothing else, you won't be the first to link to this site from Wikipedia. --Teratornis (talk) 04:41, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Teratornis. No offense to you but one of these days, I figure I'll eventually be able to get an answer about Wikipedia policy that is clear and not full of shades of grey... Dismas|^(talk) 04:57, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try asking at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 08:26, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've done so. Thanks for the tip, Dismas|^(talk) 13:16, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No offense taken, since I'm not responsible for the vagueness and contradiction of Wikipedia's rules (WP:IAR, for example, contradicts every rule - including itself). Rather, the fact that we have 48,479,556 registered users is responsible for the difficulty of "getting an answer" - there is no easy way to ask 48,479,556 people representing every opinion on every issue to speak with one voice. It would be nice to reduce Wikipedia to a definitive algorithm, but we're not there yet. If you get an answer from one user, that doesn't predict how other users will react if you act on the answer. What seems reasonable to me probably seems outrageous to someone else (check my talk page for evidence). It would be useful if we had a super-powerful search tool that could show us whether an action one is contemplating now has generated debate in the past. Some heavily-debated issues are relatively easy to look up, but many debates are obscure, scattered around Wikipedia, and hiding behind unguessable synonyms. Sometimes the only way to tell how people will react to something is to just go ahead and do it, and see if it "sticks." As I pointed out above, it seems quite a few people have sliced the Gordian Knot of Wikipedia's vague rules by linking to the Rootsweb site. --Teratornis (talk) 16:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Need to cancel account, and I no longer have the email address

Need to cancel account, and I no longer have the email address registered. How do I cancel this account? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.55.197.195 (talk) 04:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can't "cancel" an account, per Wikipedia:Account deletion. If you wanted to delete your user page, that could be possible provided you can remember your password to log in. If you just wish to no longer use the account, then don't use it anymore. --Whip it! ^{Now whip it good!} 05:11, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But you do have the right to vanish. – ukexpat (talk) 14:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a useful user box Ive seen typed into a user page of an editor that has stopped editing Template:User EX-WP or Template:Retired it doesnt stop the account but informs other users that your no longer active. Ottawa4ever (talk) 16:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

find locations

i having trouble finding the locatoins of different places. how can i have a look at a live map so that i can find places?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.62.92.126 (talk) 08:43, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Try Google Maps, Google Earth or Flash Earth if you want to find places on a map. Wikipedia articles are easier to find if you have the name of the place you want to find though. -- Mgm|^(talk) 09:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

review my first article, please

Hi All, Could somebody review my first article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Csorjan/Sandbox before submission? My first and only question: can I submit it, or has it fundamental problems? Many thanks, Balazs Csorjan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Csorjan (talk • contribs) 10:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you work on Travel technology. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 12:07, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took a quick read, you'll need to fix the refs before submitting. Wikipedia:Citing sources is a good place to start to learn the format. Also you need to check if your article is not already covered in some manor on wikipedia or it may be merged early on in its life. With your user account you should be able to create the article yourself rather than have someone else do so when your ready. Im not the best at writing new articles myself, but i think its starting out okay. Ottawa4ever (talk) 16:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many Thanx!! Balazs Csorjan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Csorjan (talk • contribs) 10:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a contents box

Hi, please let me know how i can create a contents box within my article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacob&beau (talk • contribs) 11:14, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beale Cottage currently has two section headings. The table of contents is automatically displayed when there are at least four section headings. See more at Help:Section. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:35, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I discovered the relevant section had been removed from Help:Section. I have now restored it.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 11:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How to ADD my companies description as an article.

Hello,

I am first time user and i wanted to publish an article about my company and pretty much confused how to go about.

As the content in your website is well respected and people like me tend to come to this website to have more clear insight about a product or service or features or articles.

If you can guide me in completeing my article would be of great help.

Krkrishna456 (talk) 11:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, Wikipedia does not publish advertising. All articles must be written from a neutral point of view and must be supported by independent reliable sources. Also, it sounds like you have a conflict of interest, which means you are discouraged from writing articles about yourself or your company. However, if you feel that you can write neutrally, I would suggest working on the article on your user page and asking other editors to review it. That way you can work on improving your article. TN X Man 11:51, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More at Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations. --—— Gadget850 (Ed) ^talk - 12:08, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And WP:SPAM. – ukexpat (talk) 14:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

linking data with wikipedia articles

Greetings Wikipedia. is it possible to somehow link the data tables in articles to an external source? so that the article always contains the most up-to-date figures?

thanks jerome² —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.124.192.14 (talk) 13:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not directly. You could write a bot to do it. Algebraist 13:45, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

changing the title of an article (when searched for)

I created an article for example, let's say the title is "The Ice age." Whoops! the "a" in "age" is not capitalized, so when people search for The Ice Age, the article DOES come up, but reading "The Ice age". Any way to change the actual TITLE of the article that I wrote so that one of the letters can be capitalized? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gb80 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When your account is autoconfirmed (that's to say when it's four days old and you've made ten edits) then you can simply move the article from the uncapitalised to the capitalised spelling. pushthebutton | go on... | push it! 14:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Although, as Assist america has been deleted, the point is now moot. Bencherlite ^Talk 15:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, in the case of the Ice Age the word 'The' shouldn't be included. - Mgm|^(talk) 19:01, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BLP

If information is added that is accurately sourced and presented as fact, but is placed to insinuate something further is it considered a violation of BLP? I'm referring to material placed in a scandal page. The person's income is placed along with her husband's profession. While both facts are accurate, they have no place in the section other than to insinuate that the income was too high for her position and thus gained fraudulently despite that not being proven. Is that a violation and/or WP:SYN? Soxwon (talk) 15:02, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear, we are talking about Madoff investment scandal? – ukexpat (talk) 15:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe the allegations being made by reporting Annette Bongiorno's income and her husband's occupation were being used in synthesis, especially after getting this justification for their inclusion:

ann the personal secretary has been given perks to keep her mouth shut. there is an article http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE52J4IF20090320 an eyewitness discusses how everyone was overpaid. besides, you deleted the footnoted source. [2]

While the sources support the claim I think the reasoning for its inclusion is not supported by wikipedia policy. Soxwon (talk) 16:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are three things you should do, and give each some time to work...

Start a discussion of the contested information at the article talk page. If that does not resolve the problem after a few days. The most appropriate place to discuss problems with an article is on the talk page of that article...
Ask for a Third Opinion or a request for comment to get outside input, and if that leads no where...
Ask for help at The Biography of Living Persons Noticeboard, which is patrolled by editors and admins with a special interets in solving problems with BLP articles.

Good luck! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:03, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think that it violates WP:OR:

Even with well-sourced material, however, if you use it out of context or to advance a position that is not directly and explicitly supported by the source used, you as an editor are engaging in original research;

Thnx for the advice though. Soxwon (talk) 14:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Entires with the Same Name

There is an entry on wikipedia entitled Fighting Chance. I work for a non-profit company by the same name. This company has registered their name and is interested in posting an entry on wikipedia. Can you have two entries with the same name? Isn't the first entry in violation of trademark law? Please let me know if it is possible to still list our company under their name. Thanks!

WordHampton PR (talk) 15:28, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not in the slightly, "fighting chance" is a generic term and you'd be unable to stop anyone using it. I would guess that your company entry would go at Fighting Chance (Company) --Cameron Scott (talk) 15:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few things of which you need to be aware. First, Wikipedia does not publish advertising. All entries must be written neutrally and be supported by reliable sources. Also, it sounds like you have a conflict of interest, so I encourage you to read our entry regarding that. The best idea is usually to work on an article in your userspace and ask other editors for opinions once it is finished. TN X Man 15:39, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a huge difference between registering a corporate name (ie incorporating a company with a name) and registering that name as a trademark. But that's enough lawyering from me. Please also read some thoughts about single-purpose accounts. – ukexpat (talk) 15:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

10,000 reviewed article

I see that there are 10,357 articles that have passed review at GA, FA and FL. What was the 10,000th article to pass review. I assume it happened during the GAN sweeps, although it might not have been a GA.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My problem or everyone's?

Is the toolserver.org site down? I can't get a geohack page by clicking on geographic coordinates in articles, nor are the "Edit count", etc., links at the bottom of users' contribution pages working for me. (I'd bring this up at the technical section of the Village Pump, but my computer's been acting a bit squirrely lately, and perhaps it's just a problem for me.) Deor (talk) 22:13, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Both Geohack coordinates links and user contributions working fine for me, I'm afraid. Isn't technology wonderful? Ka renjc 22:55, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/toolserver.org says "It's just you". Nanonic (talk) 23:13, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fiction Type

Hello all! I have a question on what the heck kind of a...thing...I'm writing. It's set up almost like a screenplay or scriptment, where everything is presented in detail, save for the dialogue, which is largely paraphrased, and the inclusion of italicized, stream-of-consciousness thoughts. Some of the descriptions also tend to use very odd metaphors. So, what IS this thing? It's like a weird blend of scriptment, poetry, and novel, but whenever I try to pull it one way or the other, it just seems to lose its honesty and the message I'm trying to convey. Is this a funky new fiction type, or am I pretty much in a sinking boat? Because I really do enjoy writing it... Thanks! 74.46.148.173 (talk) 22:56, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried the Humanities section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: click here. I hope this helps. Algebraist 22:58, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]