Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 February 8

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.

February 8

Referencing errors on Memphis, Tennessee

Resolved

Reference help requested. How does deleting a citation and extra text cause a reference error in this case? Thanks, Kdpofori (talk) 01:59, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

@Kdpofori: Because the article was using named references, and you removed the definition, leaving a "widow"/"orphan" reference. Pppery 02:07, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) It has been fixed by a 'bot' with this edit. Eagleash (talk) 02:14, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input I do not know how to operate your site Little Goose Dam is 35 or 36 miles downstream from the upstream dam,, and 28 miles above the next dam. It is not ,as stated 200 miles up and 120 down.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:40f:500:7a50:b400:5346:f798:6bf7 (talk) 04:08, 8 February 2017‎ (UTC)

I have removed the empty ref, & reverted the distance to the value prior to a typo in this edit. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:48, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

S7000A

• copied from Talk:S7000A

I'd like to ask whether a Wiki page on the law S700A (passed December 3rd 1981) that dominates New York State Property Tax law for the past 36 years would be a useful addition. Here's an New York City Independent Business Office report that would be a good source for the article: http://www.ibo.nyc.ny.us/iboreports/propertytax120506.pdf

Plus it would complement the articles such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_13_(1978) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryozzo (talk • contribs) 03:03, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

US Navy Ships Transferred to a Foreign Navy

I was helping a new editor out with edits to ARA Suboficial Castillo (A-6), a tug that was built and operated with the US Navy for 50 years before being sold to the Argentine Navy in 1993 where it is still in active service. The article exists under the Argentine name with a redirect (USS Takelma (ATF-113)) for the US name.

In chatting back and forth with the editor, he or she expressed disappointment that the article was under the Argentine name instead of the US name (the editor's father served on the ship under that name). I understand it was for purely sentimental reasons, but when looking for a way to break it to them that "that's just the way it's done" I found the opposite, at least for the subset of ships I looked at. Specifically, a search of "Ships transferred from the United States Navy to the Argentine Navy" yields more ships with the US name on the first page of results. The final tally was 13 ships US, 2 Argentine, and 1 UK name (HMS Caicos (K505)) (because it was transferred about so much).

So, here's my question: Are there rules regarding how an article like this should be named, specifically about what the main article should be and what should be redirects? My gut feeling is that the article should be titled first for the most commonly known name of a ship if it's particularly notable (which in the Castillo/Takelma case doesn't seem to apply), then second for the longest term of service (here, 50 years US vs. 24 year Argentine), and then perhaps third for the originating navy (US) and some weight for a ship still in active service (Argentina). However, that is pure conjecture on my part.

Can you perhaps offer guidance on this? Or direct me to some other forum that can?

Thanks, KNHaw ^(talk) 06:18, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi KNHaw, you can read more about this topic at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships)#Ships that changed name or nationality. I hope this answers your question. If you need any specific help the talk page of Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships might be the best place to find experts. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 06:39, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Creating a new page

How can we create a new page on wikipedia??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbhan91 (talk • contribs) 08:37, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello there. This page, Wikipedia:Your first article, will teach all you need to know about creating new articles. Please also remember to sign all of your posts with four tildes (~). Happy editing! Boomer Vial^{Holla! We gonna ball} 08:41, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

To create an article, follow these steps:

1. Read Your first article carefully.
2. If you don't have an account, consider creating one (it's not essential, but it makes some things easier, especially communicating with other editors) and logging in.
3. Learn the basics of editing with the Wikipedia:Tutorial
4. Make sure the subject is notable enough to warrant a stand-alone article
5. Gather reliable sources to cite in the article
6. Make sure no article on the subject exists under a different title by typing the subject into the search box and clicking 'Search'
7. Use the Article Wizard to create a draft.
8. Create the article, including all your references, making sure you adhere to the Manual of Style and our article layout guidelines. Base the article on what the references say, rather than on what you know.
9. Once you believe that your draft meets Wikipedia's requirements, submit it for review by picking the "Submit your draft for review" button in the draft.
10. Be aware that many drafts are not accepted the first time, or even the second time they are submitted for review, for failing to adhere to our policies and guidelines. New articles by new users are particularly likely not to be accepted, due to new users' unfamiliarity with our rules. Consider gaining experience by editing existing articles before attempting to create new ones. Pppery 18:19, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

(Reverted good faith edits by RuthHarrisonGinetta

Hello,

I am the PR Executive for Ginetta Cars and spent yesterday afternoon making a start on bringing all our Wikipedia pages up to date. I've arrived in the office this morning to see all my work has been undone / unapproved. Can someone please allow me to make changes on this page and reinstate my changes from yesterday. I look after this brand and the page currently is years out of date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RuthHarrisonGinetta (talk • contribs) 09:10, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Please note there is no such thing like 'your Wikipedia pages'. See explanation at Wikipedia:Ownership of content.

Please see also Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

CiaPan (talk) 09:22, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

RuthHarrisonGinetta The material you added was removed because it was a copyright violation, having been copied from a page published elsewhere. The "paid contribution disclosure" linked above is mandatory, you must comply with it. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:33, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks - how do I declare "paid contribution disclosure" - when I make a change to the page and what do I need to do? Yes, I know the content was coped from Ginetta.com, but I wrote that content too. It's all my own work. Please, can someone help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RuthHarrisonGinetta (talk • contribs) 09:43, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Please click on the blue links above for more information. The information you copied is published elsewhere on the web and the copyright would be owned by Ginetta not by you even though you wrote it. Please sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~). Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 09:59, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

• @RuthHarrisonGinetta: About the copyright violation: you (or whoever is in charge of intellectual property at Ginetta) could "donate" the content to Wikipedia using WP:DCM to allow for its reuse here, but read that link carefully - the key provision is that you are donating it to everyone, not just Wikipedia. Tigraan^{Click here to contact me} 10:44, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Copyright Issue

User:RuthHarrisonGinetta - There is a widespread good-faith misunderstanding among new editors with an affiliation that they may copy information from their corporate or organizational web site to Wikipedia because the corporation or organization has the copyright. That isn't true. There are two problems with that. First, as Tigraan has said, Wikipedia cannot simply accept the copyrighted material for its own use. The copyright must be released to all in the world under a CC-BY-SA or equivalent copyleft. Most copyright holders don't want to do that, to allow the reuse of the copyrighted material by everyone. Second, Wikipedia has a neutral point of view policy. Most copyrighted material is anywhere from mildly promotional to heavily promotional. So, for two reasons, you can't just copy copyrighted material to a Wikipedia page. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:37, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

From what I can see Ginetta is indeed notable, it is just that Ruth has gone about it the wrong way. Have added a template to the top of her talk page to make clear her COI. Never-the-less, as a PR she should be able and have the ability (if she is worth her salary) to conform to WP policy without us having to hold her hand all the way. She is the paid editor here– we are not.--Aspro (talk) 19:28, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

In my opinion, paid editors don't know how to edit neutrally about their employer. Sometimes the better neutral editing is done by us volunteers. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:17, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Article creating request to admin

Please mAKE MY ARTICLE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tarunrajvishwakarma (talk • contribs) 12:24, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Tarunrajvishwakarma Hello

You can't make your own article .

Making article is not easy enough

See wikipedia:policies and guidelines

And don't forget to sign after writing

Sawongam (talk) 15:32, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

More specifically, you need to read the useful wikilinks in the advice given to you at User talk:Tarunrajvishwakarma and previously at User talk:Tarunhacker. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:39, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Pentatonix Christmas album-2016

Hello,

In your article you state that the Pentatonix 2016 Christmas album eventually reached number 2 but it actually reach number 1 after there t.v. Christmas showed aired is when it peaked. I would check Billboard.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.12.232.228 (talk) 15:23, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Discuss on the article talk page. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:38, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

My page is inaccurate (and outdated)

Hi there. There is apparently a Wikipedia page about me! I'm hoping I can get some help making a couple small modifications that will help it be up-to-date and accurate.

Page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharon_Profis

I am not 41-42. I was born in 1989. ha

That photo is more than a decade old. Here's a more current one: http://imgur.com/a/myoGR

Please help! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:110:5001:1080:3C6E:42B9:615A:D54A (talk) 19:13, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Request the correction on the article talk page, Talk:Sharon Profis, with a reliable source as to your date of birth, and to anything else that needs correcting. Robert McClenon (talk) 19:19, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Is this person really 'notable'? No meaningful RS. Should it be put up for AfD? Or are we allowing anybody that’s been on TV and written an e-book or two - a Wikipedia article? This one looks ripe for a speedy delete.--Aspro (talk) 19:49, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

@Aspro: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sharon Profis – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:36, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

There is no license info on the imgur page, so we have to assume the photo is not licensed for use on WP. If you can clear up the license, let me know on the article talk page and I'll add it. Kendall-K1 (talk) 23:44, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Map question

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:Tibet,World_War_2.svg&action=edit&redlink=1

If a map (see URL) may be inaccurate, what is the process to question it's accuracy? A ri gi bod (talk) 19:39, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Hey A ri gi bod. The first step would be to make sure you have a reliable source for why and how the map is incorrect. Second, I would probably try reaching out to the editor who created the image, who in this case is User:Elevatorrailfan. TimothyJosephWood 19:51, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Re: You said I could have a live link for an attribution

Center Park is the Wikipedia page [[1]]

Hi, I created, then edited, then added to and rewrote the entire (brief) page on Center Park. It's in Seattle, WA and it is not Central Park in NYC. I'm a freelance writer with a BA in English. Your site said I could have a live link to my website, which does happen to be a business website. You have hundreds of articles on Wikipedia regarding people's businesses, you have a page on Mike Bullock which reads like his business resume, with links to his projects and ways to reach him coming out of that. Is there a reason I can't have a live link at the bottom of the Center Park article? I'm not asking for a page for Ghost Writer, Inc. I just want the attribution link your website promised me that I can have. I need it to be a live link to http://rainbowriting.com/ghostwriting-services . I entered it, but it wouldn't come up in my edits. I would like the base for the link, the phrase to be Books and Other Services for it to remain tastefully not so much an ad for my services. Instead, I want it for people who want to know more about Center Park and who MAYBE might want to hire my ghostwriting services.

I also recently made several edits to the page. They are all good, grammatically correct, and ALL of them pertain to Center Park and related information about Center Park. Please give me my backlink to my webpage as promised by your site, Wikipedia. Please also run all of my edits, unless you really think there is something wrong, like a typo or wrong information that genuinely needs to be corrected. I've had bad experiences with Wikipedia before where you edited out pertinent, normal, correct info. Please, please follow the rules and don't do it wrong this time!

K. S. Cole I am a logged in user of Wikipedia. Please provide me an answer on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karencole37 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Hey Karencole37. In the case that your business itself ever meets our notability standards for companies, then it would probably be appropriate to include a link to your official site. But the article you are referring to is not about your business, it is about a public place. Although you may have substantially contributed to the article, you do not own the article, and contributions to Wikipedia are released legally under a Creative Commons license, which allows others to reuse, edit, and share the content with very few restrictions.

Finally, including a link to your website on an unrelated article, and in fact, the act of contributing to Wikipedia for the purpose of trying to include links to your website, is against our policy on promotionalism, and is not allowed. If you would like to contribute to Wikipedia in order to help improve the project, you are more than welcome, but if your only motivation for contributing is to promote yourself, and try to advertise your writing, then you are probably not. If this is the case, you are, of course welcome back if you ever change your mind. TimothyJosephWood 20:22, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

Karen S. Cole: Okay, what is wrong with running my edits for Center Park, which have nothing whatsoever to do in any way, shape or form with my ghostwriting business, without the attributional link I mentioned? You could explain to me why you didn't run the edits without the link back to my business? I'm at a loss as to why you were unable to do that. Also, you clearly run all kinds of businesses and business links on Wikipedia. By now, I'm sure someone terribly unimportant (and lots like me) has already run their business links, pages and whatever else on Wikipedia. I know you have high standards, but making me jump through millions of hoops is not a good idea. At all. Karencole37 (talk) 18:12, 11 February 2017 (UTC)