Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2011 October 21

= October 21 =

Re-establishing speedy deleted article name
Hello. An article titled UTC+01:30 created by TZ master was recently speedy deleted because it duplicated the article South African Standard Time. I agree that is a violation of WP:A10. In addition, TZ master also added a link to UTC+01:30 in Template:Timezones, in italics indicating it is a historic time zone (which is accurate). The South African Standard Time article does have a history section which mentions the +01:30 offset. It is my opinion that UTC+01:30 ought to exist as a redirect to that history section (not as its own article), which would eliminate the redlink on the template. However (with all due respect to WP:BOLD), I am reluctant to add back anything that has been speedy deleted, even if it is different content or just a redirect. Could someone advise if my thinking is correct? And if not, what is the flaw in my suggestion? Thank you. — Michael J 02:32, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Uh, ... It appears TZ master has re-created the page UTC+01:30 with information again taken from South African Standard Time, and there appears to be some edit-warring going on there. I don't want to step into something like that, but can someone take a look please. — Michael J 07:52, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * ... and now UTC+01:30 is gone again! — Michael J 08:26, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I can re-create the page as a redirect and lock it (i haz magic admin powerz), but is it a plausible search term. Is South Africa unique in that GMT +01:30 timezone? It strikes me that there are probably too many variants on how it could be written to justify creating just that one redirect. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:05, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It is a half-hour offset which is relatively unusual. I have not been able to determine any other usage than South Africa. If my research comes up with something else, I will contact you and would then make it a page that references all the locations that the offset existed in. Thank you. — Michael J 13:39, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Apparently Namibia also used it for a time. The way it is set up now seems to work. — Michael J 14:50, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Hindi logo - reads "CHIKRI" instead of WIKI
Hi,

sincere appeal to scrap your hindi logo, and have it redesigned. it reads CHIKRI (first letter which should be WI, looks kike CHI because of the top stroke, and secong letter, because it is joined at the bottom with the first, converts KI into KRI as the bottom joined-stroke lends it the R sound)

Please rectify it. i have spent days trying to figure out how to contact you after seeing that hilarious logo, an have finally managed to trace a window ehere i can send you a mail from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandevian2003 (talk • contribs) 06:01, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * This is the English Wikipedia, we have no control over how the Hindi Wikipedia is set up. -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:01, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Question regarding sources/citations
Hi, I was wondering, is a biased citation allowed on wikipedia? Because on the homeschool article, it uses HSLDA (which is an extremely biased pro-homeschool group) as a citation quite a bit. So can/should I remove all biased citations? This would take some time, but I would be willing to do it. LIbertyInSpace (talk) 07:10, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Articles should remain neutral in overall tone. If there are various sides to the issue, those views should be given equal treatment.  If it were me, I wouldn't necessarily remove any content or sources but I would find reliable sources that contradict the original sources and provide both sides of the argument in a neutral way.  That said, if the source isn't reliable at all, it shouldn't be used.  See WP:RS for more on that.  Dismas |(talk) 09:43, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Take a look at the article yourself, do you think things like this needs to go?:
 * "58.9% report that they are "very happy" with life, compared with 27.6% for the general U.S. population. 73.2% find life "exciting", compared with 47.3%. "
 * That just doesn't sound neutral to me and the citation is a highly biased right-wing Christian organization. LIbertyInSpace (talk) 09:54, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you find another source that challenges the findings? If it is itself reliable, you could add information on how the survey has been challenged. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:10, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The website of a campaigning organisation isn't necessarily a reliable source, and I would seriously consider deleting references if you're not confident of their accuracy (and delete controversial claims if they have no references). You should read the source, look at how they acquired their information, and see if it is likely to be truthful; you could also look at the reputation of the organisation in general (e.g. Amnesty International reports are usually considered valid sources even on controversial topics, but a lesser-known campaigning organisation would not be).  If there are controversial claims without any references or any indication of the methodology used to obtain the information, then the information is probably not reliable.  WP:RS warns you to be particularly careful with "views that are widely acknowledged as extremist, or promotional in nature"; organisations promoting home-schooling would obviously fall under the second of those, and it sounds like HSLDA may possibly fall under the first. --Colapeninsula (talk) 12:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Having said that, I don't think it's necessarily wrong to cite the results of their survey, as long as you specify that it's only the result of a survey, and maybe give information on how it was done, when, by whom, how many were surveyed, etc. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:00, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of article Lotte Pakistan PTA
An article Lotte Pakistan PTA has been deleted. The article was written in good faith about a company which is registered on three (Karachi, Lahore and Islamabad) exchanges. The company is also included in three indices (KMI-30, KSE-30 and KSE-100) and neither any information nor any interwiki link was available to cover up information about the company on wikipedia. Can someone explain why this article was deleted? Can someone help me to retieve the article?Altafqadir (talk) 08:21, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The discussion on the deletion is at Articles for deletion/Lotte Pakistan PTA. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:00, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Altafqadir, why did you not speak up at the deletion discussion listed above??? It was open for two weeks. Now your path is much harder. There is a procedure called deletion review, but you cannot go there now -- that is only for entities that have been deleted wrongly, and this article was deleted properly, following a two-week discussion at which no one objected to deletion. What you could do is this:
 * Ask yourself, do I have, or can a get, a substantial number of good references from truly notable and reliable sources that are about Lotte Pakistan PTA. For instance, articles in the New York Times (or at any rate in major, important Pakistani newspapers like the Daily Express etc.) that are about Lotte Pakistan PTA. Not just listing it or mentioning it in passing, but articles that are substantially focused on Lotte Pakistan PTA.
 * If the answer is "no", then game over. Articles must meet the WP:GNG in order to exist. Even it it is large and famous in Pakistan but does not meet the GNG, it should not have an article.
 * If the answer is "yes" (in which case I would question, why didn't you put these references in the article in the first place, but whatever), then it is possible that the article may be re-created and re-discussed, but only by going through proper steps. If you want to do this, message me on my talk page and I will help you through this process. But only if you can come up with good references. Herostratus (talk) 15:56, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I have deleted a part of Vijay Mallya's webpage by mistake
Hi, I have deleted a part of Vijay Mallya's webpage by mistake. Can't figure how to restore the change. Please help.

Find below the link to the webpage i am referring to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vijay_Mallya — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.16.159.242 (talk) 10:02, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I've undone your edit for you. If you make such a mistake again, go to the View History tab at the top of the page, check that yours is still the top edit on the list, and click the (undo) link next to it. Cheers, Yunshui (talk) 10:04, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Richard Davisson/ bio


Here's something for you Wiki people to understand and maybe help me sort out---I don't know how to do it--- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.199.17 (talk) 10:47, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I have tried my very best to honor the role of Dick Davisson's biological family in his life, how much he loved them, how much they meant to him. I wrote all of the family and personal part of the article myself, half of the entire article---others wrote the technical and professional pieces.

I spoke first of the wonderful time that Dick had with his wife Betty while they lived on a houseboat raising their infant son Gordon, how he always spoke of that as one of the best times of his life.

I listed her first among his family members, noting her achievement as a Psychiatric Social worker.

I truthfully used the word "successful" to describe their son Gordon.

However, my own role in Dick's life is continuosly being called into question---my one line reference to myself has variously been noted: "Self Advancement" (one hardly advances oneself by being connected to a deceased man---particularly when one has one's own achievements, however humble, "apocryphal"---I assure you I exist---"dubious" and so on---if I happen to check the article now and then of a year, I find a new insult denying my role in his life and this is history after all, even if it is apparently upsetting to some---I grieve too and my being frozen out of the grieving and death and dying process while terribly painful never did cause me to vindictively deny the existence of the others.

Eleven years after Dick and Betty separated but remained on friendly terms, I began an Autumnal emotional relationship with Dick. I list myself as his "companion"---not his lover, his floozy, his girlfriend or any term other than that appropriately describing our relationship. Older men often have young companions who enrich the latter part of their years as he enriched my life as well and i was NOT paid (except a token joke of $20 a month) for my presence.

Because I was so distraught by his death, I did not act appropriately while being frozen out of the death and dying and grieving process. This is likely to happen under such circumstances---but I am nevertheless sorry i did not handle it better. I am sorry for that. Great lengths were made and are apparently still being made to deny my existence or my importance in Dick's life, while I doubt very much that it is in this culture shocking that a man separated eleven years from his wife should start breakfasting twice a week, having dinner four or five times a week, sleeping for part of the time cuddling in the same bed with and drinking frequently at a local pub with another woman for a total of fifteen years---there's nothing wrong with it, nothing was hidden from Betty about it, I would go out, she would come in and so on. There was a two year period of separation in the middle sometime after which the relationship resumed but was somewhat emotionally less intimate than it had been, but still quite intimate. During the last two years before he left to take care of his sister who had had a stroke however, his son moved out of the house and this gave us the time and space to begin to become again closer. During the relationship we had two apartments very close to one anohter so that walking between them could be an almost daily activity.

I can verify the fact that I was Dick's Companion in two ways:

1)The will released six months after Dick's death from the King County Courthouse was only one page long. I had asked him not to mention me or make me a beneficiary because I did not, as a member of his family of choice, wish to upset his legal family unnecessarily.  Regardless of this he did make me a beneficiary in his will against my will, slipping me into a subtle private joke in a sentence where his son was mentioned in hopes of letting me see he loved me while hoping also not to anger the others too much.  The one page document contained four names only: these names are listed in the article.  Three of the four names are people related to him by blood or marriage.  One was not.  A man leaves a one page will.  Three of the beneficiaries are related by blood or marriage and one is not.  Under such circumstances, how likely is it that the person so named was unimportant to the deceased? It's not possible at all. The person so named has to have been close to the deceased---or at least it is highly unlikely that any other truth exists.

Further, how can someone not close to the deceased write half of the article about his life, including details which would be difficult to find by research alone?

Finally, large numbers of witnesses observed our relationship over a fifteen year period. They, could, I suppose, be produced.

Gordon, you froze me out of a process I needed to be part of and I was told I was being intrusive when in fact I loved your father and enriched his life greatly over many years, whether you liked me or not or whether you understood the dynamics of the two year separation in the middle or not. I know that you are the person who keeps causing me indignity by putting things like "dubious"/"apocryphal"/etc. next to my name. Hell, you even knew we were thinking about trying to have a baby at one point. You were there when we were discussing it.

I have treated all references to you and your mother with tremendous respect in this article half of which I wrote---and I think you must admit that I have done a good job of overviewing Doick's personal and family life.

I'm asking you to have some compassion and at least let me be acknowledged appropriately and without question in an article I myself am co-author of. Your Mother is surely dead or very ill by now and the truth hurts no one thereby. Denying the truth is not part of Science---and your father and all of us value Science---while History is a soft Science it should still be told truthfully if told at all.

Stop hurting me. Stop freezing me out. How lonely your father would have been without me, whether you care for me or not. How much I will always miss him, whether you care about that or not. He was a Humanitarian. Please be one also. — Preceding comment added by Ginamarie Emanuel 67.40.199.17 (talk) 10:44, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * We are not "Gordon" and certainly have nothing against you. We are a bunch of random people from all over the world who can not ascertain truth by "personal knowledge" alone and must be provided with a reliable published source in order to verify the information ourselves. In biographies, a reliable source is a requirement, especially for extraordinary claims. A will, sad to say, is not accessible to the public and thus can not be considered a reliable source. Unless the information in that article can be sourced, they can be challenged and deleted by anyone. Please understand why. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. See Verifiability.--  Obsidi ♠ n   Soul   11:39, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Ok, a will is a PUBLIC document. "In the matter of the estate of Richard J. Davisson". Anyone can look it up at the King County Courthouse. If people see us on the street every day for years and years surely that's a lot of witnesses, also. Also, why is my existence in Dick's life continuously challenged in this article whereas nothing but a couple of minor citations are demanded in the rest of the facts? Further, of course I would think it was Gordon doing something like that and I was sort of free associating in expressing myself about it---being human. I don't know who you are. I but most people don't speak for "we", they speak for themselves. As to the person with the tremendous maturity and compassion to tell us we all suck, thanks---this is still pretty hard for me---your decency is appreciated. The man felt connected to two women, should he divorce one? Should the one that comes second demand that he do so? Especially if the first one needs health insurance and I don't at the time? I never thought she would freeze me out to the point where I could not say good bye when they had been separated for 26 years at the end of it all. He couldn't afford a damn divorce anyway, the rest of them all lived off him---which he did not mind: two of them were disabled and one was working hard starting a successful business. If that's why I in particular suck, the world sure is Puritanical, now isn't it? I'm gratified to learn that truth matters when it's about photography or houseboats or fun with infant children, but does not matter when it is about publicly documented, witnessed connections between human beings. Could someone from actual Wiki, who can help me in a gentle and civil way, please tell me how to resolve this problem? Maybe I shouldn't care about the truth---Dick himself would probably say screw it---I'm trying, but every time I see one of those insulting words next to my name it does hurt and I do want to be able to occasionally, once a year or so, look up the article and remember this man who meant so much to me without I myself being the ghost. It occurs to me that I am myself a witness and that affidavits are a form of documentation also: I certify under penalty of perjury that all of the above authored by me, except the spelling and grammatical errors, is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, signed, Ginamarie Emanuel.

Now let's try to work this out in a civil and caring way---the man's been dead a while, you know, it's not worth hurting each other over and it really shouldn't hurt so much that I exist at this point. I value the legal next of kin's contributions in the life of this amazing man and am only asking, as family of choice, for reciprocity in this matter. I work now for the legalization of non-traditional marriages, including for gay, lesbian, bi, transgendered and nonmonogamous marriages so that others do not have to go through this same kind of suffering. If I had demanded such rights while he was alive then this would not be happening now, but everyone makes mistakes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.199.17 (talk) 15:25, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * If you can provide a reliable PUBLISHED source that confirms what on earth ever it is that you are trying to say, then you have some prospect of having the information included in this encyclopaedia page. If not, not. It's that simple. Wikipedia is never going to just take anyone's word for it. If you want a memorial on the web - get a blog. We are an encyclopaedia. Elen of the Roads (talk) 16:12, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * By the way, if it's any consolation, the IP editor who posted the rude message has been blocked. Elen of the Roads (talk) 16:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Message at top of editing page.
I come to the help desk alot actually, and I was wondering how you get a notice at the top of your edit page. I would like one at the top of mine.

'''Please reply on my message boards!  L a r s o n a  14:32, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Reply on this page for this topic only. Thats my signature.
 * For a user or user talk page, an editnotice is created with a /Editnotice subpage (i.e. Special:MyPage/Editnotice and Special:MyTalk/Editnotice). Editnotices on other pages can only be created by administrators and account creators.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail 16:52, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Amy nuttall
Amy nuttall played Stella in a streetcar named desire at the Bolton octagon after playing the lead role of Emily in the hired man. Please could you update her page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.132.213.233 (talk) 15:32, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Only if you can provide a published reliable source for the information. Roger (talk) 15:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Also note that these are biographies, not detailed lists of every part an actor has played in their entire careers! -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  15:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

User name not recognize
Hi,

My user name FML198 is not recognized. I wonder what happen? Can you please help?

I have a page created at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bmi_bmi

so i don't know why when i try loggin in with fml198, they dont' recognize me.

thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.118.167.144 (talk) 15:54, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Usernames are case sensitive; User:FML198 is real; User:fml198 is not (nor would User:FML 198 be). -- Orange Mike &#x007C;  Talk  15:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Multiple people with same name
How do you create a "summary" page to list multiple Wiki pages for individuals with the same name? For example, a search for "James Jones" brings up a page listing all the "James Jones" individuals who have Wiki pages. Thank you.

Carmen33128 (talk) 17:06, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

They are called Disambiguation pages and there is a lot of information on them at Disambiguation. Hopefully that will have the information you need.Naraht (talk) 17:09, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

adding something to my page
Hello, I have a Wiki bio page (Dennis Ferry) that I created for myself for informational purposes. I recently got married. Would I be allowed to add this to my page - "Dennis is married to flutist Stephani Stang-Ferry."

Thanks. Dennis Ferry 17:20, 21 October 2011 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trombasolo (talk • contribs)
 * Do you have reliable sources you can use? Every statement in Wikipedia needs to be backed up with a citation to a reliable source, doubly so for articles about living people.  You need to read Verifiability before proceeding any farther to understand why.  We'll ignore for a second that you should not be creating articles about yourself (please please please read, besides the links I put above, Conflict of interest and Autobiography).  Wikipedia strives to be a good source of information, and can only be trusted as such if and only if Wikipedia articles rely on good, previously published information.  For this reason, Wikipedia doesn't take anyone's word on anything.  Verifiability is required.  -- Jayron  32  18:11, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Sorry for the misuse of Wikipedia. I thought autobiographical material was permitted. I, of course, have a certified copy of my marriage certificate. DennisTrombasolo (talk) 18:19, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * You have a copy, but has it been published? And you were told about WP:Autobiography and WP:COI, on the article talk page and on yours, . - David Biddulph (talk) 18:41, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * As a notable musician, I imagine your marriage would have been reported by a reliable source; perhaps the newspaper in your hometown, perpaps a national newspaper, perhaps a magazine; perhaps the official website of Orchestre de la Suisse Romande. Take care though: your previous edit to the article about you was quickly reverted due to your choice or wording.  ie. if you add news of your marriage, even if correctly cited, it may still be reverted if it is buried in the addition of a whole lot of PR-speak.  Astronaut (talk) 14:23, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Donation in INR
Hi, I am a final year student at Electrical Engineering, IIT Bombay. How can I make a donation via my credit/debit card in INR? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.139.97.4 (talk) 22:49, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * See Contact us/Donations. Visit the Ammado page for Wikimedia, click on "Donate Now", and the dropdown bar for the currencies will include INR (India - Indian rupee (Rp)). Thanks! Goodvac (talk) 22:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

HELP! I fear that I have done something wrong!
On 10/1, I uploaded a file to Wikicommon that was not up to code. (please delete, if not already) On 10/14, I uploaded a corrected file. On 10/16, I received a Bot report requesting more info. On 10/17, I added the requested info to My Talk page because I didn't know how to edit it?? (I had hope to receive some feedback on what I was doing wrong, but received nothing?? On 10/21, I checked My Talk page and still nothing?? Please help me Gregory L. Chester 22:50, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * This question regards Wikimedia Commons, not Wikipedia (here), so is better asked at Commons:Help desk, but I will answer your question here anyway. The bot on your talk page is just reminding you to add categories to images you upload. To add categories, use the syntax  and place it at the bottom of the image page. The bot on your talk page gives a clearer explanation with ways to find categories. Goodvac (talk) 23:03, 21 October 2011 (UTC)