Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Logging in problems
Line 177: Line 177:


The Article failed Afd on 20th June 2007. The Afd has been blanked subsequent to that and a similar ''billet-doux'' to the one above sits in place of Afd discussion because Ms Chitra sent sent a ticket to m:OTRS (contemptuous disrespectful language). The article is protected from recreation. Interested parties should raise the matter at [[Wikipedia:Deletion_review]] explaining why the Afd was wrong. [[User:Mike33|Mike33]] 04:43, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
The Article failed Afd on 20th June 2007. The Afd has been blanked subsequent to that and a similar ''billet-doux'' to the one above sits in place of Afd discussion because Ms Chitra sent sent a ticket to m:OTRS (contemptuous disrespectful language). The article is protected from recreation. Interested parties should raise the matter at [[Wikipedia:Deletion_review]] explaining why the Afd was wrong. [[User:Mike33|Mike33]] 04:43, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

== Logging in problems ==

Hi,

I logged in twice to edit articles on the 83rd infantry division and Buchenwald concentration camp. After both revisions I was informed that I was NOT logged in and that information would be made public that might expose me to spam et al.


No giant problem in this . . . but . . . thought you should know.


Note . . . after entering my user name and password I was informed that I was "logged in" . . . but got the "not logged in" message when trying to submit the edits.


Dan Morrow
dan@mbecc.com

Revision as of 03:12, 9 July 2007

To make a general request for assistance, please place your name and a brief (a few sentences) description of the issue you need help with at the bottom. Resolved, stale and other old discussions are archived.

Assistants: Please tag each settled request as {{resolved}}; all other requests should be marked as {{stale}} after ten days of inactivity. A thread can be archived after being tagged for two days.

Overused image/self-promotion?

Hi, I've noticed that this image has been popping up on several pages. I admit I'm not familiar with the gentleman in the photo, but his article leads me to believe that he is relatively unknown (non-notable?), other than for playing an unusually-designed guitar. Granted, he does appear to be a talented musician, but could this be an issue of self-promotion? This editor's nickname name implies that he is writing about himself. And even if the article is valid, is this image being used appropriately? I feel it is not, but I don't want to just start deleting things. Maybe someone could look into this for me. Thanks. --buck 19:56, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take it to AFD if you want to. Adrian M. H. 20:03, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • (double ec) Your suspicion per WP:COI seems legit to me; my suggestion would be to consult other editors at WT:IFD for additional insight on this matter. --Aarktica 20:04, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Islam article is not NPOV

The article Islam was today's featured article. Given the distortion and misrepresentation of Islam in the Western media (I am not a Muslim myself but a student of comparative religion) it is of concern that the concensus edit was biased towards misrepresentation and according to more than one editor somewhat Islamophobic. The lead was particularly noticeable. It defines Islam as meaning surrender or submission to God but this is only half of the story. The word Islam is derived from the same root as the Hebrew shalom (Arabic: Salaam) which means peace. It means to enter into a condition of peace with God through allegiance with him. At the moment the lead remains misrepresentative. In order to attempt to correct this I made an adjustment citing an authoritative reference (The Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, edited by Professor John Bowker, 1997) but a certain administrator by the name Moreschi reverted the edit twice and has not answered my request for a valid explanation. Therefore a front page featured article remains without a NPOV lead. Can anyone advise me? Thankyou. Langdell 20:35, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let me say that I haven't spoken to Moreschi. I'm Jewish but have always understood S(h) L M to be a submissive term and I understand SLM works in the same way in lots of other Semitic languages. I can't really comment here until I can find Moreschi to comment. Mike33 21:12, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You've got me right now. There's some discussion of this on Talk:Islam and some on my talk page. Basically, I'm quite willing to thrash this out, but yet another edit war while Islam is TFA I cannot stomach. Moreschi Talk 21:15, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dunno, it seems pretty NPOV to me. Isn't this kind of forum-shopping? — Demong talk 21:19, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I want to have better AfD dialgoues

I seem to have a problem trying to reasonably discuss AfDs in order to persuade fellow editors. In this and this and this AfD discussion I have struggled with communicating with fellow editors. Any advice or wisdom would be very appreciated. – Freechild (BoomCha) 19:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

mmmmm Xfd should only be used as a last resort. I really have no sympathy for any editor who moves an Xfd and the consensus is against them. The particular list you raised List o Standardized tests seems a work in progress, I dont like lists but this particular one gives much more information than others. The Template I can't comment on without seeing the template.
Xfd is a difficult place, at the moment it is running at 80 new listings a day. Emotions get high and editors will often resort to petty arguments to try and gain consensus. Influencing other editors is about stating reasons and responding to their difficulties in understanding your reasoning. Filling an Xfd with reasons that are bigger than the page being discussed will not help consensus. Mike33 20:24, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Request for long-term IP vandal blocks, protection of target articles

Resolved
 – With requestor's permission. --Aarktica 00:28, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I posted the following request at WP:AIV on 25 June. I don't know whether any action was taken, but the vandalism seemed to quiet down for a few days. However, yesterday and today the same nonsense vandalisms began to be reposted to some of the same articles, namely (so far) 690, Outsider art, and Greaser (subculture). I spend a lot of time chasing anonymous vandals; I don't seek them out but when I see them I revert, warn, and try to track down their other vandalisms. I can't speak for the other editors who have run across this small band of vandals, but I am personally dismayed and disappointed that these very few users and very few articles are not yet under control. As a non-admin, I've done all I can. Thanks for any help. --CliffC 20:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a collection of characters (or maybe only two or three) who repeatedly deface certain articles with the same cut-and-paste nonsense - usually about greasers, squares, honey-roasted peanuts, or the advantages of smoking dope. Most of these edits are made with deceptive, or confrontational, edit summaries. Most IPs have received last warnings but not all; that seemed pointless since they operate as a collective and just pop up somewhere else. A week or so ago I requested a range block at WP:AIV but as best I can tell the block was granted for only part of the range, and only for a few hours. Other editors have IP-protected some of the usual victim pages for a day or two, but as soon as the protection was lifted the vandals were back at it. I have kept track, with commentary, on my talk page here (a section named and started by one of the vandals), but for readability the IPs and the pages victimized are listed here. Thank you for looking into this. I know I'm not the only editor these guys are wearing down. --CliffC 20:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal IPs
Regularly vandalized pages
I think CliffC does speak for a number of other users, including yours truly. Some forceful adminstrative action is overdue in this case. BTfromLA 22:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would press the point over at WT:AIV. The automated processes for reverting vandalism (i.e. bots) has come a long way, but there is still a need for involvement from editors. The last thing we need is one more wikipedian resigning in frustration. --Aarktica 22:54, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I'll do that. Several vandalisms last night in the usual style to the usual targets show that nothing's happened yet. --CliffC 14:51, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like someone over at WT:AIV is beginning to address this request, so please feel free to close it here. --CliffC 00:27, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what happened?

Resolved
 – editor to source items before contributing to long standing articles.

I posted an explanation of "callsign." It was up and running fora short while, but now is gone. What happened? unsigned by 70.181.202.64

Your edit to Aviator call sign was good intentioned, but the regular editors there didn't think that lengthy paragraphs about Top Gun really helped the article. If you can find other sources apart from an unamed book it would be great, but please until then don't edit the article without firm sources. Mike33 23:43, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Permutation prank.

Resolved
 – How to guide

I came across A.n.prahlada rao, and decided to move the page to A. N. Prahlada Rao, when I discovered that the target was once home to the article in question.

The article contains little in the way of substance; however it occured to me that there is nothing stopping the article creator from re-creating the article at A.N.prahlada rao, A.n.p. rao, A. P. Rao, etc.

Is there a way to keep from playing whack-a-mole here? --Aarktica 00:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, but most articles that play games will get redirects, you can watch articles that haven't been created in the same way as you can with articles that have been created. Think of as many possibilities as you can and instead of creating articles just add to the watch list. Mike33 01:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I was very vague there for example click on those red links above - wiki will tell you that it doesn't exist. Find the tab watch and if it is created it will appear on your watch list - redirect or Spd it. Its probably used more for "current" articles where lots of editors want to be first with a breaking story, but it works in the same way with recently SPds and Afds. Sandbox any likely renames click on the redlinks and watch. Mike33 01:46, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

request - wikipedia entry for Dean Barker

I am a sailing journalist and have known Dean Barker for many years. Since the outcome of the America's Cup on Tuesday someone has been editing his wikipedia entry to his detriment with their own opinion, rather than fact. Dean Barker is one of the world's top sailors. Most recently this was shown by his helming and skippering the team that defeated all others (5-0 in the final) to take on the present America's Cup holders to challenge for the world's oldest sporting trophy this year. The America's Cup match itself was extremely close - as is reflected in the win by the Defender by one second only in the final race. It will go down in the record books as one of the closest fought and best sailing series of all time. I appreciate that some people like to hammer those who lose in sport, but feel that the level of personal attack, and inappropriate and inaccurate remarks concerning Barker's extremely successful sailing history and personality (he has superb team leadership ability), is unwarranted and highly inappropriate for any encyclopedia. Somehow I cannot imagine that the person who wrote the comments has ever represented their country internationally in sailing (I have done so), let alone been an Olympic representative after a campaign of only a few months, or been part of winning America's Cup and Louis Vuitton Cup teams, which are points included, amongst many others, in Dean Barker's extremely successful sailing career.

You will see my edit removal of yesterday (anneh1), which appears to have been auto-replaced, with the addition of a sentence, which is now duplicated, in the first section of the article on Dean Barker.

Could you please bar the IP address/user ID that is creating this auto-replacement of personal attack material from edit access to Dean Barker's wikipedia entry? Could you also ensure that the text that I removed yesterday is deleted once and for all?

Thank you,

Anne Hinton anneh1 (annehint@gmail.com) 131.111.151.217 08:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to take into account the criteria for blocks before requesting that an anon IP be blocked for something that does not warrant a block. This is just a content dispute and since there are only two parties involved, you have 3O as your first option. I would not advise that you continue to edit against the other party, partly because edit wars help no one, but also because you may get close to COI and ownership issues. Keep it civil and start by pointing out the need for all BLP material to meet Verifiability and NPOV. The latter is a policy, and one of the five pillars. Adrian M. H. 16:07, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please Restore Summary for Chitra_Ramanathan

Resolved
 – Interested Parties should take the matter to Wikipedia:Deletion_review

UNDELETE_ITEMIZED NOTABILITY AND MORE IMPORTANTLY VERIFIABILITY POINTS PROVIDED BY ARTIST HERSELF Due to confusion caused by some previous user entries, the Biography page and links for Chitra Ramanathan has been affected. I, the artist request that the page to be please be restored for contributions by future qualified users. Please refer to the following just a sample few links that indicate notability/verifiability regarding my art career. These links laready have Summary pages in wikipedia for verifiability purposes. I will be happy to provide more links. My apologies for the incorrect usage by random users. I have no intention to contest your deletion policies. However, because of recent happenings at wikipedia I am compelled to jump in. Please refer to the following selected links that indicate notability/verifiability regarding my art career and which have Summary pages in Wikipedia:

Beginning with the most recent:

  • 2007 I am a current committee member for the Committee on Cultural Diversity Practices of the College Art Association, New York (CAA News | College Art Association (http://www.collegeart.org/news/newcommitteemembers.html...Cultural Diversity Committee | Committees | College Art Association, Chitra Ramanathan, Indianapolis Art Center (2007-2010) .... Studies in Art Education: A Journal of Issues and Research. (1992): Vol. 34, No. 1. (Charland) ... (http://www.collegeart.org/committees/diversity.html). A contributing member of College Art Association (http://www.collegeart.org) since 1997, I have also served CAA's Services to Artists Committee from 2003-2006. Earlier this year (2007), I was selected as a candidate for CAA's Board of Directors for 2008-2011, which I declined.
  • 2004 the MGM Mirage commissioned me to create two 4 ft X 6 ft paintings bearing my signature, a rare privilege for an artist from the organization. The paintings were based on two of my 1999 and 2000 pieces, and are on permanent display in their Cafe Bellagio, Las Vegas since October 2004. (mirage las vegas The Artist Chitra Ramanathan Has Recently Completed a Major Commission ... mirage las vegas the mirage wikipedia the free encyclopedia ... http://www.bouldercitynev.com/mirage-las-vegas/archive_02_2007.php)

2007

Recent publications that have featured a cover story on my art include:

  • The Indianapolis Business Journal, "Women in Art" April 9-15, 2007 (http://www.ibj.com/html/indianapolis_business_journal.html-"Creative Pursuit of Happiness" 2007-04-09 With permission from Pacheco, Della, Marketing Editor: Copyright IBJ Corporation Apr 09, 2007 (c) 2007 Indianapolis Business Journal. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning.

I would very much appreciate your assistance in restoring the Summary page.

Thanks,

Sincerely,

Chitra Ramanathan

UserChitra 04:00, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article History Chitra_Ramanathan[Logs] Talk Page Afd

The Article failed Afd on 20th June 2007. The Afd has been blanked subsequent to that and a similar billet-doux to the one above sits in place of Afd discussion because Ms Chitra sent sent a ticket to m:OTRS (contemptuous disrespectful language). The article is protected from recreation. Interested parties should raise the matter at Wikipedia:Deletion_review explaining why the Afd was wrong. Mike33 04:43, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Logging in problems

Hi,

I logged in twice to edit articles on the 83rd infantry division and Buchenwald concentration camp. After both revisions I was informed that I was NOT logged in and that information would be made public that might expose me to spam et al.


No giant problem in this . . . but . . . thought you should know.


Note . . . after entering my user name and password I was informed that I was "logged in" . . . but got the "not logged in" message when trying to submit the edits.


Dan Morrow dan@mbecc.com