Wikipedia:Editor assistance/Requests

Archives

Previous requests & responses

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30
31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60
61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70
71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90
91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100
101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120
121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130
131, 132

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by .

Plunkett Lake Press intern "rewrote our wikipedia pages"

Yesterday, I received a promotional email from the alumni association of my high school alma mater. It promoted the association's program that connects alumni with other alumni or current students who are seeking employment or internships. The alumna featured in the email is (or was) connected to Plunkett Lake Press and she describes how a then-freshman student (judging from the email, this was during the 2016–17 school year) they hired as an intern "helped us with our online presence, critiquing our website, rewriting our wikipedia pages, and helping us think about social media outreach". When I read this, I saw the possibility that Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy was violated. I see there is a conflict of interest noticeboard for reporting such things but I don't know which articles (if any) should be reported. So I figured I'd post here and perhaps someone else would have a look around the articles about authors and books published by Plunkett Lake Press. —⁠184.248.174.229 (talk) 05:51, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I just looked at the edit history of the article about Plunkett Lake Press and it's obvious which of the Wikipedia editors who created or edited the page was that intern. That editor does not have a user page, therefore she has not disclosed her connection to Plunkett Lake Press and is in violation of the conflict of interest policy. —⁠184.248.174.229 (talk) 06:12, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10 pound poms, Australia and New Zealand

You show 10 pound poms went to Australia and New Zealand. Australia was the only country with that scheme.

In which article? If you tell us what article this is in, we may be able to help. Thank you! Puddleglum ^2.0 16:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your article on 2020 primary caucus schedule by state

I've been an active registered Dem in Hawaii since 1978 & a former elected office holder. Hawaii is NOT a primary state, we have always been a CAUCUS state. Our 2020 presidential poll (which is the 2nd step in our Hawaii caucus 2020) is 04/04. Our Primary which is set by law is Aug 8. We have an open primary. We are given 1 ballot & each voter chooses which party (all on 1 ballot) they choose to vote.

Sorry, but you've not told us what article you're talking about. If you can let us know which article you believe to contain an error, and provide reliable sources that confirm what you're saying, we might be able to help. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:05, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fatal translation

Dear Sirs,

I have noticed fatal translation into Polish of a sentence about Warsaw Uprising and the Second World War in the part of the article entitled:

Mayor of Warsaw

There's a sentence: "He strongly supported the construction of the Warsaw Uprising Museum and in 2004 appointed a historical panel to estimate material losses that were inflicted upon the city by the Germans in the Second World War (an estimated 85% of the city was destroyed in the Warsaw Uprising) (...)"

which has been translated into Polish as:

"Powołał panel historyczny do oszacowania strat materialnych, które Niemcy ponieśli w czasie II wojny światowej (szacuje się, że 85% miasta zostało zniszczone podczas Powstania Warszawskiego ) (...).

"inflicted upon the city by the Germans" was falsely translated into "które Niemcy ponieśli"

which obviously falsely denotes that it is the GERMANS (AND NOT THE POLES!!!???...) WHO SUFFERED MATERIAL LOSSES in the Warsaw Uprising and the 2nd World War. And that maybe by default it is the Poles who inflicted them upon the Germans. The mistake is offensive for the Poles.

The correct translation should be:

instead of "które Niemcy PONIEŚLI", there should be "które Niemcy WYRZĄDZILI", and the phrase "upon the city" which was omitted in the translation should be added here as "w Warszawie"

I am looking forward to your applying of this correction in the translation of the article into Polish.

Yours sincerely

31.60.29.167 (talk) 13:24, 25 November 2019 (UTC)Katarzyna Seredyńska[reply]

I am sorry that Google translate is making this mistake. We at Wikipedia do not have any control over how Google translates pieces of text. We don't trust it when we are trying to translate articles here from other languages. Google translate does have feedback available. I submitted an alternate version there but my attempt may not have been grammatically correct. Click on the vertical dots at the lower right of the Polish translation and put in the correct version. I don't know if that actually has any effect. StarryGrandma (talk) 15:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Barringun, Queensland.

I find it difficult to follow all of your various instructions, so am asking that someone corrects the following information that appears on the Wikipedia Site, please.

1. Barringun is NOT in Queensland, but actually in New South Wales, and part of the Bourke Shire Council area. As with all border towns, the other side of the border had another name. On this occasion it is Wooroorooka for Queensland, which is in Paroo Shire Council area based in Cunnamulla. 2. The section under "History" needs correcting to indicate that Barringun & Wooroorooka are on the Warrego River - NOT Maranoa River which is well to the east and joins the Ba–lonne River near St George in Queensland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bneee 1 (talk • contribs) 06:37, 29 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bneee 1, it looks like the government of Queensland confirms it to be so: [1]. Do you know of any reliable sources which dispute this or say otherwise? I'm afraid we must follow what good-quality sources say, not the personal opinions of editors. If there is a dispute among such sources, that can certainly be reflected in the article. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:04, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hometown error for Miss Georgia USA 2018

Dear Wikipedia,

The hometown for Miss Georgia USA 2018, Marianny Egurrola, is incorrect. The hometown should state Buford, Georgia, but list Brookhaven, Georgia. Would you be able to assist with the correction?

Source: https://www.news-daily.com/news/new-miss-georgia-and-miss-teen-georgia-crowned-in-mcdonough/article_f65771cd-cad2-5e8d-8725-2dbdb84861b1.html

Link to Wikipedia page for correction:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miss_Georgia_USA

Sincerely, L. Leighland — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leigh Land (talk • contribs) 06:24, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Leigh Land, looks like the source confirms that, and the old entry was not referenced. I've changed it accordingly. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 06:54, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Something like this should be added to the article on Queensland history. It is alluded to in the caption to a pic of the Mater Hospital, Rockhampton

. In the 19th C, the imperial government considered dividing the colony of Queensland into three colonies, and a grand house was built in Rockhampton for the first governor of Central Queensland. The idea was rejected and the viceregal residence became Rockhampton’s Mater Hospital. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.35.210.68 (talk) 06:38, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to do that, if you have reliable sources which confirm it. If you're not comfortable doing so yourself, you could always raise the matter on the article talk page. Note your sources there so other editors can confirm it. You can put {{request edit}} above your suggestion to bring it to the attention of other editors. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:00, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Questions on my draft entry.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Trace_Borroughs

1. In regard to books I've written will you except links to a photo of the book cover as verification? Here is where I can post photos of my work on .postimg.cc

2. In regard to animations I've produced for television will you except links to a screenshot taken from the animation as verification? Here is where I can post photos of my work https://i.postimg.cc

3. I hired a writer to write my profile and my name is spelled wrong in the title. How do I fix that?. I don't see a edit function there.

Thank you.

Trace Burroughs

TraceBurroughs (talk) 14:53, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

TraceBurroughs, the title of the page can be changed by moving the page. If that should become necessary, an editor able to do it can do so. So far as the rest, what we'd generally be looking is a substantial amount of independent and reliable source material about an individual. One's own works would not be independent. I can also see several other issues straight off: External links are not permitted in article text, so those would all need to be removed, and the article is written in a very "profile" fashion, and is generally not neutral. Wikipedia does not permit promotion, including any kind of "talking up", and articles must be neutral in tone and content, sticking only to facts verified by reliable sources and avoiding puffy language like Burroughs decided to go all the way - he played nonstop for 21 days. (Just "Burroughs played for 21 days" would quite suffice there.), or He felt he needed to perform an even more outrageous act, so he tried to invest his talent in something different. ("Something different" is meaningless; we don't do teasers. In what?) What you are writing there will not be permitted as an article on Wikipedia. If you would like to write a "bio" or "profile", you are likely better served on social media or a personal website. An article here will be strictly neutral and factual. No flowery language, no puffery, no PR. And if substantial amounts of independent, reliable source material haven't been written about you, I'm afraid we can't have the article in any case. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:42, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Assistance (Beto O'Rourke article)

Hullo,

I'm requesting some kind of editorial guidance or assistance regarding disputed edits on the Beto O'Rourke article. Most specifically, on the section titled "Legal issues."

I have more than once made edits citing reliable sources and quoting from them only to have my edits reverted wholesale.

I then posted on the "Talk" page in hopes of furthering a discussion, and I also wrote directly to another editor (on his "Talk" page") about the topics in dispute. I attempted to specifically address that editor's concerns.

My comments on the article talk page have received no response, and my edits were again reverted wholesale.

My first inclination was to ask for some kind of arbitration, but I understand that addressing my concerns here is a preferable first step. Help would be appreciated, as it is frustrating to spend hours checking sources, writing text, and citing the sources, only to have the text wiped out.

NicholasNotabene (talk) 03:17, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NicholasNotabene, it appears that there's already been a fair bit of discussion over this (both currently and at Talk:Beto_O'Rourke/Archive_1#Washington_Post_fact_check_of_Beto's_denial_that_he_tried_to_flee_the_scene, with many editors raising concerns over undue weight and others arguing for inclusion. The fact that it's sourced doesn't seem particularly relevant as I don't see anyone arguing it's not; being referenced is only part of the consideration of whether something should be included, and like I said most of the concerns are over it being excessively detailed and undue. If agreement can't be reached in the discussion, you might consider a request for comment to get the opinions of previously uninvolved editors. (Arbitration doesn't decide content questions.)

Women in Wikipedia

How gender neutral are you? Woman's Hour, BBCRadio 4, this week showed how Wikipedia is much too male with requests to post a page on important women being inexplicably turned down. I have donated to Wikipedia but will not again until your posts have more important women. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.174.97 (talk) 17:21, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor, both the editing community in general and the Wikimedia Foundation (the owner of this project) are aware of the systemic gender bias in both article coverage and in the corps of regular editors. While anyone (including you) can edit pages or contribute new articles, the regular editors have tended to be overwhelming male. In fact, 59% are males age 17 to 40. The only way this will change is if more women contribute not money (although I'm certain the foundation appreciates that form of support) but time. That cliché "be the change you want to see in the world" really does apply here. There is, in fact, a project of editors within the Wikipedia community specifically devoted to increasing the coverage of notable women. Perhaps you may want to join and help out? Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:23, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Lloyd is still alive

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Lloyd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:A000:DFC0:5B:5884:43EC:A134:6E59 (talk) 10:28, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing COI and AUTO tags without adequate proof

Hello,

The article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Lauwereyns

is observed to have been created by someone with a close connection to the subject, almost certainly the subject himself, and therefore tagged with COI and AUTO tags.

An anonymous editor (no other edits) has removed these tags without giving reason, proof, or even justification for removal.

Some input/assistance from an experienced editor would be helpful in this case.

Thank you.

118.12.45.75 (talk) 02:40, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]