Help desk
< October 15	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 17 >

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.

October 16

arnold schwarzenegger page errors. misrepresentation of govt employee

Arnold Schwarzenegger

publishing errors: 1. "eponymous" just means name. it is too fancy and queer. 2. "then-governor" or "then-president" is a criminally ignorant phrase, a problem promoted by imitation of industry writers.

legal or archival errors: most personal pages begins with their birth date and age on the right. the page lists the actor as a "governor" (religious hero story), not as a normal human. this person is an "actor" by trade, for most years known as a muscle model and <redact a personal attack>

the page should mention that all primary government officials are preselected or hired and bribed by a team of old rich church people who own world industry (including the "movies" and TV) before the very small part of the population is allowed to "vote" in secret. pre-paid candidates are false and not valid by law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:36A9:F430:149A:CCB3:21BF:C700 (talk) 00:26, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. If you have suggestions about how to improve an article, the place to make them is on the article's talk page, here Talk:Arnold Schwarzenegger. However, please be aware that your opinion of the subject (and my opinion, and anybody else's opinion) is not relevant to Wikipedia. A Wikipedia article must be based on what reliable published sources have said about the subject and nothing else. Schwarzenegger was elected and served as Governor: that is a fact, reported in many reliable sources, so the article should say so, whatever your opinion of him. If you can point to reliable published sources that criticise him along the lines of your opinion, then they may be referenced in the article. --ColinFine (talk) 09:18, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Two articles that cover the same topic

Hi, I noticed that the Al-Sanadid Forces and Jaysh Al-Sanadeed articles cover the same topic. What is the correct procedure? Should I add a merge tag? Thanks, David O. Johnson (talk) 00:55, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

David: There seems to be a clear-cut case for merging these two very new articles, but the respective creators may have views. Wikipedia:Merging sets out the process for opening a discussion. One point to determine will be which of the two page titles is the more appropriate transliteration of the name. Please let us know if you have further queries: Noyster (talk), 09:56, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help; I was able to merge the pages after the the involved parties agreed with it.David O. Johnson (talk) 20:23, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong "John Davidson" pictured on hockey biography

Hey Wikipedia,

You've got the wrong headshot of John Davidson, the former NHL goaltender, showing up when I did a bing.com search. It's showing the actor John Davidson by mistake. Just thought you would want to know for the sake of accuracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.11.231.159 (talk) 04:30, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not control the images selected by bing (or for that matter google) when a picture is displayed as part of their search results in addition to Wikipedia based information. The actual article on John Davidson the Hockey Player (John Davidson (ice hockey)) has no picture. You should contact bing.
This isn't the first time I've seen this question for bing, a template similar to {{subst:HD/GKG}} or {{subst:HD/YKG}} might be useful.Naraht (talk) 04:37, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{{HD/GKG}} was based on posts by me and I made {{HD/YKG}} but I don't see a knowledge graph equivalent at Bing so I cannot write about it. Maybe it matters that I'm in Denmark. It doesn't help to choose English interface. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:46, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wolf Tegethoff and Mies van der Rohe

Here are two links Wolf Tegethoff deserves. He researched and wrote The Villas and Country Houses of Mies van der Rohe, which was translated and and published by The Museum of Modern Art in conjunction with an exhibition of van der Rohe's work. His research led to the discovery of the plans for the Barcelona Pavilion and was directly responsible for its reconstruction. Ada Louise Huxtable called the book "the most important contribution to Mies scholarship to date."; (The New York Times, 1985.) http://www.nytimes.com/1985/12/01/books/the-making-of-a-master.html?pagewanted=all

Disclosure: I was the editor of the MOMA/MIT book, but I did nothing worth mentioning. Tegethoff did an excellent job and his work should at least be discussed in the Pavilion article and included in the Further Reading lists.

I have written this here because I can't figure out where or how to send the information otherwise.

Bill Dyckes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.14.3.50 (talk) 07:02, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion. Normally, I would suggest that you simply add the material to the article Wolf Tegethoff, particularly since you have a citation to an independent reliable source (which is the gold standard for information in a Wikipedia article, and something sadly lacking for almost everything else in the article). however, because of your conflict of interest, the best thing to do is to make your suggestion on the article's talk page Talk:Wolf Tegethoff. If that talk page gets little traffic, you could also add {{edit request}} to it (with the double curly brackets) which will bring your suggestion to more people's notice. (I considered adding it myself, but I see that the article has severe problems, as it is almost unreferenced and liable to be deleted). --ColinFine (talk) 09:28, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Searching the archives here

I cannot find my recent question posted here titled: Can blocked editors get thanks?. When I search the archives I only get 2 results posted in 2013. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 10:37, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Either omit the question mark or place the whole string in quotation marks. Otherwise the question mark functions as a wildcard for a character and you only get two hits on "thanks4". See more at Help:Searching#Syntax. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:47, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The thread is in the Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2015 October 12 archive. You can also search for things based on the month you asked them. October is here and the links are all displayed by header names. --Stabila711 (talk) 19:37, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a confirmed user

I created an account less than a week ago and have confirmed my email account several times but still when I try to upload files or make changes, they are challenged and removed since I am not a confirmed user for some reason. I try upload photos and get the same message.

Please advise ASAP — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hassan.o.daoud (talk • contribs) 10:52, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Hassan.o.daoud: Autoconfirmation is not related to email. Your account must be at least four days old. Special:Log/Hassan.o.daoud shows you are 20 minutes short. If you refer to saved edits disappearing then click the "View history" tab of the page to see what happened. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:57, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted article archives

I would like to know if it is possible to still access the text of a completely deleted article. I wrote an article entitled "Snooker commentary" ca. 2005 so a long time ago, which was then significantly pared down after a formal discussion and vote (which actually the article won about 11-9 in favour but was still pared down). Then it was at some point completely removed from Wikipedia or somehow moved into a subsection of some other article that I cannot find. I am interested in the original text of the article "Snooker commentary" because a friend has expressed interest in seeing it. I don't care that it's no longer on Wikipedia I just want to show him it. If somebody with a bit more Wiki-savvy than me could track its history I'd very much appreciate the effort.

Warm regards

Kris (talk) 12:00, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Snooker commentary was deleted in 2012 after two deletion nominations (see this and this). Only admins can see the content, so you should ask an admin to move it into draft space. Pinging the deleting admin, Sandstein. Supdiop (T🔹C) 12:14, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Poolkris: Deleted articles can only be seen at Wikipedia by administrators (see Wikipedia:Perennial proposals#Deleted pages should be visible). External sites sometimes display an old version of articles. This is outside Wikipedia's control. In this case you can go to the Internet Archive at https://archive.org/ and enter the old url https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snooker_commentary. You can make the url by getting "Snooker_commentary" from the url of the red link. Admins can see and restore the whole page history. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:21, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the deleted content available at http://pastebin.com/nZNDdWUK. It will be automatically deleted there after a week because of licensing concerns. Sandstein 12:48, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sandstein Thank you but I am not interested in the deleted post-deletion-nomination version of the article, that one deserved a deletion because it became boring, very short, and with no real content. I was interested in the original text of the article, i.e. its first entry in its History, which was much longer. The version that originally instigated the first deletion nomination. It was correctly accused of OR and essayism. Is that possible? Kris (talk) 13:01, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, see http://pastebin.com/XBfkw7PU. Also expires in a week. Sandstein 16:33, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this has been dealt with now, but for the future, if you want to request temporary viewing access to a deleted page, the centralized place to do so is at WP:REFUND. (Mention that you just want temporary viewing access, rather than restoration of the page.) --ais523 10:21, 17 October 2015 (U T C)

API access to list of articles

I am looking to download a list of articles (titles only, not content) from the English Wikipedia and Wiktionary. I know how to do this by going through Special:PrefixIndex and parsing the HTML, but I am wondering if there is an API or other, more straightforward way to get this information. And the same question for new pages.

If it matters, the reason I am doing this is to create a web app to enable users to search for "words" meeting specified criteria. For example, you could search for words containing all of the letters AGNT and no others, and it would find Atangana, gnat, tangana, etc. And the reasons I'm doing that are both out of personal interest and as a demo/learning project for web development. Ma^t_chups 12:01, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just found Wikipedia:Database download, which answers the first part of my question, in part. That article notes that redirects are included. Are they flagged in some way? (I know I'll eventually find out when I download it, but am curious.) Still looking for a good way to get new articles. Ma^t_chups 12:22, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Matchups: Wikipedia's API can be found via the link Wikipedia:API. mw:API:Allpages looks a good starting point for you. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:41, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If it is of any help, you can also grab the data as an RSS stream. Just tack on ?feed=rss to the end of your URL, such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:NewPages?feed=rss

New page

How do I create a new page for myself? I am a artist of some notoriety. Eallenwarren (talk) 13:41, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As someone with a conflict of interest you generally shouldn't as Wikipedia is not a promotional platforma and it will be difficult for you to present the content in a neutral manner that reflects how third party mainstream views you and your work . see WP:AUTOBIO as well. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:51, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please note, "notoriety" is not the same as "notability" which is what the subject of any article needs - in your case specifically defined here - Arjayay (talk) 15:57, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tense in timeline articles

I recently put together an article called Timeline of the United Kingdom home front during World War I and on rereading it, notice that I have put some entries in the present tense and some in the past. Looking at other timelines, Timeline of imperialism is in the past tense whereas Timeline of World War I is in the present. Is there a consensus on which should be used? Alansplodge (talk) 15:31, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:TENSE says past, WP:TIMELINE says nothing about it, and Timeline of chemistry - a featured list - uses present. Confusing. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 18:03, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So my next move is....? Alansplodge (talk) 12:13, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Begin a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Timeline?--ukexpat (talk) 13:16, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Accepted links

trouble that Wiki doesnot accept certain hyperlinks needed for verifiaction & reliability — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardo2410 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Leonardo2410: Does WP:BLACKLIST answer your question? If not, could you be more specific about what you need to know? Dismas|^(talk) 17:30, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to John Beaton (Canadian Football Player)

He has three children, and he has a loving and kind heart. He is very considerate of others. What ended his career was too many surgeries due to injuries on his legs. He is my second cousin. He has been divorced to Jennifer. At this time, I am uncertain if he is seeing anyone at this time or if he is. He was watched by family members cheering him on. Even though I called him an uncle, he was my second cousin, my dad's first cousin. He was admirable to me. So some of us did look up to him.

Please can you either rearrange it or add it in by family members. Thank you for everything.

Sincerely, E. Beaton

P.S. that is in my opinion but I am sure others can agree if they saw this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.168.53.50 (talk) 20:32, 16 October 2015 (UTC) have t[reply]

Hello, E. Beaton. I'm afraid Wikipedia doesn't work that way. Everything in it should be cited to a reliable published source: unpublished information (and especially any evaluations or opinions) is not acceptable. As it is, the existing article John Beaton (Canadian football) is entirely without citations, and I have tagged it as such. Unless somebody finds some reliable published material about him by people unconnected with him, the article may get deleted. According to what is in the article, he has played in a major league, and so, according to WP:NGRIDIRON he meets the criteria of notability; but that fact, like everything else in the article, should be supported by a published reference. --ColinFine (talk) 22:08, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Audio revision

How do you make an audio revision of a page?—Eat me, I'm an azuki (talk · contribs · email) 22:52, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:08, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Bidlo

I have begun to compose an accurate and unbiased page for a well now artist Michael Bidlo, aka Mike Bidlo. I am doing this with the artist's assistance in getting copyrighted photographs and in verifying facts of his exhibition history. I am providing a bibliography and links.

The current page has been repasted and I believe this must have been by Wikipedia personnel. The profile that replacing the "official" one I am composing is generic, uninformed and misleading in that the author is ignorant of the artist's complete history. How can the reversion be controlled? Do I have to just cut and paste over the generic that is taking over my revisions?

History is of course by definition something an individual has contemplated and presented; the profile I am composing will be as accurate and unbiased as possible in presenting the person and work of Michael Bidlo. Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LBrandonKrall (talk • contribs) 23:42, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia LBrandonKrall. Articles here run off of reliable sources and verifiability. They also run off of a neutral point of view. As you have a conflict of interest in this area it is suggested that you do not edit the article directly. Please post on the article's talk page. As to "controlling" the content that is not how Wikipedia works. We are a collaborative project and articles are open to be edited by anyone. In addition, repeatedly replacing content without discussing changes is a violation of our 3RR rule and can result in your account be blocked. Discussion is key here and it is preferred that you do so on the article's talk page. Also remember that Wikipedia runs off of sourced information. Your edit that was removed mentioned "Joseph John" as part of the artist's name. This information would require a published source to confirm that information. We cannot just take your word for it as we also do not allow original research in the articles. --Stabila711 (talk) 23:52, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, LBrandonKrall, you should be aware there Wikipedia does not have "profiles", much less "official profiles". It has encyclopedia articles about subjects, which are in no way controlled or approved by those subjects, but instead are supported by reliable sources, as explained above. Moreover, Wikipedia does not have "Wikipedia personnel". All editing is done by unpaid volunteers. Some are more experienced and frequent editors than others, but all are simply volunteer editors. Also, please note that Wikipedia can make only very limited use of copyrighted works, unless they are released by the copyright owner under a free license. This would mean that anyone in the world could reproduce and modify the image (or other work), including for profit, with only the need to acknowledge the original source, but no need to pay any royalties. If the copyright holder wants to so release a work, see this page. DES ^(talk) 00:29, 17 October 2015 (UTC) If you do have a bibliography of citable relaible published sources, do please list them on the talk page. DES ^(talk) 00:31, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]