Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests

Help:Contents

Editor Assistance: Requests

The description of the issue with which you need help should be concise and neutral. If you are asking about an article that was deleted, please provide the exact title so that we can check the deletion log. Please avoid copying large quantities of article text to this page. Remember to sign your posts. Please click here to post your request. As always, please do not include an e-mail address or other private details. Discussions related to content disputes might better be addressed at the dispute resolution noticeboard.

If you would like quick access to some advice for the most common questions and issues, this can be found in the Editor Assistance FAQ. Resolved, stale and other old discussions are archived, but if you need to return to an archived discussion, you can start a new section and note the old discussion. You may search old discussions using the search box in the Previous requests & responses section adjacent to this pages contents index. Assistants: Please tag old requests using the appropriate templates, e.g. resolved, answered, unclear, unresolved, stale, moved or stuck, after approximately five to seven days of inactivity. These templates and notes on their usage may be found at Template:Ear/doc. A thread can be archived after being tagged for two days.

Archives

Other links
Frequent requests Talk Third Opinion Incident Noticeboard

Notability

Draft:Aleksandar Rogic (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Hello,

I have submitted an article a month ago and other users provided me feedback about article, what should I correct. I had to add references about the subject, which I did(several news articles) but got no answer. Could you please tell me what can I do to get some information about the status of my submitted article?

Thank you in advance. Kind regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mici quattro (talk • contribs) 10:04, 15 April 2016‎ (UTC)

i need to know who the land owner back in late 1800s who owns the land that there are about 30 tent cottages left most of the time it was religious camps and we have been trying to find out

i think it dates back to 1867 i know one of the names downs camp ground and del mar va camp ground could you please try to look into it for emergency purposes i live at (Redacted) my name is maryann mcnicholas my original address same house was (Redacted) this is becoming a big messs not knowing who owned or owns the property now you can also call me at (Redacted) thankyou — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.80.132.212 (talk) 19:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but Wikipedia isn't the place to find this sort of information. It sounds like you need an attorney. If you cannot afford legal representation you may be able to find free assistance or a referral to reduced cost legal assistance via local legal aid clinics or your state bar association. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 20:24, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Or check with your local county assessor's office, which keeps those kinds of records. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 20:49, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Web coinventor

World Wide Web (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Greetings. A number of individuals are editing the article World Wide Web to say that Robert Cailliau was its coinventor. I have met the man and don't believe this for a minute. He was of great help to Tim Berners-Lee, but he did not invent HTML, URIs and HTTP--all of which Berners-Lee did invent singlehanded, read the sources in the lead. I'm sorry I am too close to this to participate. The talk page has lit up with at least two long discussions. Sorry this isn't a completely neutral request, but this campaign sounds like a birther argument. Or maybe that the USA did not land on the moon. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:32, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Resolved. Thank you very much. User:Andy Dingley raised this at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Inventor.28s.29_of_the_World_Wide_Web.3F and the page is now protected. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:08, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

It's far from resolved. ANI closed it immediately without discussion and as soon as the protection expires in a few days, I expect the same editor will be back. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:45, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Oh brother. This reminds me of the climate change and the Church of Scientology arguments. If not for one strong editor who must have been here 24 hours a day I think all would be lost. I wrote to a former colleague and asked her to write to Wikimedia Foundation but really, they can't be expected to babysit. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:23, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Explaining COI, Promotion & Notability Guidelines to New Editor

User talk:Sebagr (edit | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

I am currently experiencing some problems with a new editor Sebagr regarding 142 edits from the one site, in which, they've added external links to one website likely directly related to the editor. I reverted all these pages, because they clearly violate adopted policies. I.e. Conflict of interest, and likely with an agenda, etc.

I have tried to explain these policies regarding advertising, promotion and notability, on the User's talk page, but this User now make wild claims to justify their edits, and is now starting to throw insults around.

My only wish to avoid further confrontation here and have acted as neutrally as possible. I would like a third party to examine the problem and reinforce adopted editing policies, as I feel I'm only escalating this issue. Thanks. Arianewiki1 (talk) 06:18, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Please ignore. The editor in question has been likely confirmed as having WP:COI. It have been referred to the associated noticeboard. Thanks. Arianewiki1 (talk) 08:21, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Acelity

Acelity (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Hello,

My name is Laurel Harper, and I am reaching out on behalf of the Corporate Communications team at Acelity.

I'm reaching out because we have some additional and more recent information about the company that we think would be relevant for the Acelity wiki, and wanted to make sure we reached out to submit this information for consideration and talk through any of these points as needed. I have a draft with cited sources that I can email.

Many thanks in advance for your help!

All best, LEHarper2016 (talk) 16:08, 31 May 2016 (UTC)Laurel

@LEHarper2016: It would be better if your draft could be posted at the article's talk page, Talk:Acelity, so that it could be reviewed by any editors there. Trying to do reviews by email would probably be pretty painful, and it's preferred that any such would be done publicly. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 19:51, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

esterification in human body

can a seperate article or a section in esterification page be made,detailing the processFAMASFREENODE (talk) 16:09, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Need help with overcoming anti-IP bias

Splendidworld12 changed the text of a direct quote in the Mother Angelica article from "feckless" to "reckless", perhaps because he didn't know the meaning of the word "feckless". I reverted this change to a direct quote. Materialscientist reverted my edit, labeling it "vandalism". I reverted this corruption of a quote again. ClueBot reverted my second revert. We now have an article that has a bastardized quote and there is nothing I can do about it because if I try to change it again Materialscientist will probably report me for edit warring. Can someone please intervene here and restore the original quote? 32.218.47.22 (talk) 10:11, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

"Need help with overcoming anti-IP bias". Simple, create an account and log-in. Call yourself "dawnslayer2525", nobody will know if you're a high-school kid, retired plumber, a US Senator or someone who thinks indefinite blocks are for other people. That said, your edit was right, and Materialscientist has reverted ClueBot, so all is well. You could try and ask for an apology from him, but in general I find fishing for forced apologies doesn't really work and creates resentment. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 10:31, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

32.218.47.22 has done excellent working editing articles at WikiProject Wisconsin and I have help 32.218.47.22 with some of the edits; I do agree with User: Ritchie333 that 32.218.47.22 should create an account. This would make editing easier and with dealing with fellow users-thank youRFD (talk) 11:25, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

"Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit". 32.218.37.93 (talk) 14:36, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Indeed. That means anyone else is also free and able to dismiss your contributions and revert them, if they sincerely believe they improve the encyclopedia. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:46, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

• Alright people, let's calm down. This ain't ANI or VP. The bad revert was undone. I reported a false positive to the bot maintainers. This is over. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 15:30, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, yes, but I'd like to point out to 32.218.47.22 that peoples' attitudes towards people editing from IPs is the result of experience, not bias, and that he/she/other would do himself/herself/zeself a favor by simply adopting a username rather than fight for the "rights" of IPs. - Nunh-huh 20:45, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Predatory behavior towards IP users

Resolved

Would someone please take at look at the edit history of this user? [1] I thought I was being singled out for abuse by this user, but apparently not. Apparently this user is systematically reverting edits by IP users like myself, usually with rather abusive commentary. This is exactly the kind of behavior that makes me want to stop contributing.

Apologize if this is the wrong place to post this. It's pretty hard to tell without a great deal of effort. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.247.167.67 (talk) 11:25, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

This is the wrong place to make that request. Complaints about user's conduct should be made at ANI. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 19:17, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Mandela Effect

Why are there no Wikipedia posts about The Mandela Effect? Why is there a redirect to confabulation? There are literally hundreds of videos on YouTube and thousands of Internet posts on the subject. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.186.175.215 (talk) 22:52, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Because it's a non-notable fringe theory, with neither scientific support nor an underlying history as a famous fringe idea (examples of the latter would include flat earthers and The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion). --Orange Mike | Talk 23:11, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Capitalisation of a company page

Hi Team

Can you please advise how to update the page title "Orix" to "ORIX"? There is no edit button on this area.

I am Sales & Marketing Coordinator for ORIX New Zealand and have updated the content to read "ORIX" as these are the standards set by our global corporation.

Many thanks.

Best regards Madeleine — Preceding unsigned comment added by MadeleineMc (talk • contribs) 00:22, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

I put in a request to get the page moved here (For technical reasons (the page ORIX already exists as a redirect page to Orix) it requires someone with administrator rights to make the move) OsFish (talk) 05:04, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, but no: according to our Manual of Style, we don't put brand names in all-caps. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

The Internet Cover Up On Communism

Wikipedia,

I've noticed on Frank Marshall Davis page there's no mention whatsoever of his Communist friends, Communist activities, Communist organizations inwhich he was a member. Yes. And not only Frank Marshall Davis but many others.

Respectfully, John A. Kociuba — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:6096:C18A:CE87:34:4BF2:25FB (talk) 12:06, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

That's because Wikipedia relies on professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources instead of conspiracy theories. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:21, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Dispute about necessity to prevent discloser of facts about Michel Temer's cabinet

Basically, the Chicago Tribune, Washington Post, The Guardian, NY Times, BBC, Reuters, Forbes, London Independent,etc - regarding Michel Temer's cabinet - published that he "...unveiled an all-male, conspicuously white cabinet to run one of the world’s most ethnically diverse nations". They reported that Temer called for a government of "national salvation" and asked for the trust of the Brazilian people. He created his cabinet "in order to restore confidence in Brazil and demonstrate his commitment to fighting corruption." Finally, they published that "Ms Rousseff attacked the cabinet for being all-male and all-white.".

All the information above said has been removed, except the part that tells the reader that "Temer called for a government of "national salvation" and asked for the trust of the Brazilian people." by Xuxo. I failed the task to explain what is a Biographies of living persons, the importance of Neutral point of view and show that the sources that were used are Verifiability Reliable sources. I don't think that Xuxo knows What Wikipedia is not. Please, be so kind as to help us resolve the dispute. I don't want to be forced to ask the administrators to block the user, if we can avoid it. Thanks. Dr. Loo^{Talk to me} 00:18, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

First, we should move this to the dispute resolution noticeboard as this is not the correct place for this. Now, what you added on the article which is solely supposed to focus on Michel Temer is that he appointed people that are "all-male, conspicuously white". Ok, so this quote comes from The Guardian, who's staff loved Hugo Chávez and South America's left. They also POV push Rousseff so much in this article about how "Dilma Rousseff, the country’s first female president ... was stripped of her powers" and that Temer "was accused of treachery by his former running mate Rousseff, who claimed she was forced out of office by 'sabotage', 'open conspiracy' and a 'coup'", while Temer's cabinet is described like this: "Temer and his cabinet are also tainted by corruption allegations. The interim president himself faces an impeachment challenge and has been barred from standing for office for eight years due to election violations." So, this quote about the white cabinet is what bothers me, it does not matter what color their skin is. But, what I think is more suitable, is placing the corruption allegations. Those are pretty interesting. I may add them myself soon enough, let's just stay away from the color of people's skin.--ZiaLater (talk) 01:30, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Good idea! Why not "just stay away from the color of people's skin" starting with the article "Apartheid"? Or the word "Jews" out of Nazi Germany? Dr. Loo^{Talk to me} 01:56, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

By the way, You are wrong! It wasn't ONLY the Guardian, several agencies published this FACT, this REALITY. For example, The NY Times said: "Temer has faced daily protests in Brazil's main cities since he took office. Artists, intellectuals and politicians both left-leaning and moderate have also rejected him acting as president, not only for their opposition to Rousseff's impeachment but also for Temer's naming of an all white-male Cabinet that is trying implement more conservative policies.. Your attempt to hide reality will not work! This is the Wikipedia. Sorry! Dr. Loo^{Talk to me} 02:08, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Oh ok sorry. I didn't see that because I only used the quote you provided above. But anyways, let's just focus on the people and their actions, not their skin color. I'm more interested in why his cabinet is "tainted by corruption allegations".--ZiaLater (talk) 03:57, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

• CONVERSATION TRANSFERRED: "HERE". Dr. Loo^{Talk to me} 16:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Calgary external links

Resolved

2014 Calgary stabbing (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

June 2016[edit source]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to 2014 Calgary stabbing. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 117Avenue (talk) 02:15, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

I just received the above notice after working hours on editing the article on 2014 Calgary stabbing. This user is bullying me, the links the editor is referencing as being commercial, were not commercial in anyway.

The victims external links are in place for their non-profit scholarships and trust funds. They were established to honor the victims. I created an external link section and placed a non-profit link to the band two of the victims belonged to prior to their deaths. The band retained one of the victims name in it title and they only play under the band naming for non-profit fund raising

corrective action - please revert all my hard work and advise editor 117Avenue to use the TALK page before BULLYING an editor's efforts. I did not place those external links for advertising or promotion, I posted them out of respect for their families that have lost a loved one - I posted them as a thought of humanity, not greed.

Vwanweb (talk) 03:06, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

This forum is not for requesting the kind of assistance you are seeking. For a list of methods by which to resolve conduct or content disputes with other editors, see the dispute resolution policy. Once you have chosen a type, be sure to carefully read the instructions for that type (on it's own respective page) before going forward. If you've not done so already, you might want to read the external links policy to judge whether or not the other editor is right on the external links. Discussion at the article talk page is always the first step to working out such problems; either party can start it. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 21:12, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Date sorting not working for a sortable wikitable

I'm having a problem with the date sorting function on some wikitables but not others, and after a few weeks I'm out of ideas as to what to do. I checked Help:Sorting#Date_sorting_problems and found nothing of value since the relevant section opens with: "Sorting works correctly in all the tables below." Well, it isn't working correctly for a table along that format, and after trying to search the Reference and Help Desks, I haven't found anything specific to this case.
I created a wikitable for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Indonesia. It's good, it's great, it works. So I copied the same format for Deputy Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Indonesia, Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court of Indonesia and Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court of Indonesia, and found a problem with the "term length" column that I copied from the first article. The term length is being calculated as way too high for the latter three articles, yet I literally copied the wikitable from the first article; nothing that I can see is different. I don't understand why one is working and the others aren't, and I'm all out of ideas. MezzoMezzo (talk) 07:31, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

@MezzoMezzo: Your issue is not about date sorting but about calculating a number of days. This is completely unrelated to sorting. The articles use Template:Age in days. See that page for documentation. You must supply the start and end dates as parameters. They cannot be read automatically from other cells in a table. I have fixed two cases in [2]. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:20, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: thank you so much for pointing me in the right direction...it seems that I had entirely misunderstood what I was doing. I'll keep this in mind and take it slow as I try to clean this up. You rock. MezzoMezzo (talk) 07:18, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Brush Pen should redirect to Fudepen?

Right now, brush pen redirect to ink brush. However, at least in terms of English, Brush Pen typically denote to fudepen. While in Chinese Brush pen is the literal transliteration of 毛筆, The Japanese companies (platinum Art and Pentel at least) seems to use "brush pen" for their Fudepen. So should it be redirect to ink brush or Fudepen? George Leung (talk) 18:46, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

wiki page Ireland

Good afternoon, your wiki page on Ireland has some false and misleading information, first of Ireland is not part in anyway a British Isle, the wiki page states that the island of Ireland is the 2nd largest island in the British Isles. This is very wrong and misleading as Ireland is in no way British. If you could please edit the page to reflect the interest and views of the majority of the people who live on the island of Ireland who dont reconise the term. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.114.169.253 (talk) 12:39, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

The use of the term British Isles has been discussed extensively at Wikipedia:British Isles Terminology task force/Manual of Style and many other places, also outside Wikipedia (British Isles naming dispute). The term is very common and there is no consensus to remove it from Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:07, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Kenosha Kickers

Kenosha Kickers redirects to Home Alone. There doesn't seem to be any connection between the two. Is this vandalism? Can someone look into this? 32.218.41.207 (talk) 01:39, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

No, it's legitimate. It might be RfDable but "Kenosha Kickers" refers to the band Kevin's mom has to hitch a ride with on the last leg of her odyssey home, towards the end of the film. See this old revision. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 01:45, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Article on"Baptists"

I tried to edit this article as it is incorrect, however, a box came up sarong it was protected to prevent vandalism. How then do I edit it? Robert Emerson — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.11.192 (talk) 13:04, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

You can click the "View source" tab and follow the instructions to submit an edit request. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:16, 10 June 2016 (UTC)