Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2016 September 2

= September 2 =

Not able to post the content on Wikipedia
I have submitted the content 3-4 times, but every time my account has been blocked. Wikipedia gives the message that the content is promotional. This is to inform you that my content is not promotional. Can i please ask you to help me into this?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.173.133.19 (talk) 07:20, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * It would be useful if you could provide a link to the page or content you refer to. The only edit from the IP shown here was back in 2010. (Please do not post the content here). Eagleash (talk) 11:40, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The instability of IP addresses is a reason why it would be helpful to create a registered account. Also, just stating that your content is not promotional does not mean that it is not promotional.  Wikipedia has strict standards for what we consider to be promotional content.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:15, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

leave facebook
Please advise how I can delete all my posts and remove my profile permanently from here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.197.31.235 (talk) 09:53, 2 September 2016 (UTC) Have you tried the section of Wikipedia's Reference Desk? They specialize in answering knowledge questions there; this help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. For your convenience, here is the link to post a question there: [ click here]. I hope this helps. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:05, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Changes to entry on Occupational Safety and Health Administration
I work in the Office of Communications for the U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration. On 8/15/16 I made edits to Wikipedia’s OSHA entry at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_Safety_and_Health_Administration. As explained in the edit summary, the changes I made included “Updates to incomplete information. Deletion of duplicative text. Reorganization of existing paragraphs.”

It seems that all my edits were removed on 8/19/16 by user GermanJoe. This has had the effect of rendering much of the information about OSHA on this page incomplete and/or inaccurate.

I reported this in an email to info-en-q@wikimedia.org on 8/24/16 but have received no reply.

I am also posting this message on the Talk page for the OSHA entry.

Please advise as to how my edits can be restored.

Thank you.

OSHAUpdates (talk) 14:53, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * First, since you have a conflict of interest, you should do what you have now done, which is to request on the article talk page that the updates be made. You should not be inserting links.  That is spam.  Second, your account name implies a corporate or group account rather than an individual account; please change it.  Robert McClenon (talk) 15:10, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I left some commments on the article's talkpage as the best place to discuss such questions. A deeper check of the situation and any additional advice from uninvolved editors at the talkpage would be appreciated. GermanJoe (talk) 15:34, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * The bit you're missing,, is that it is absolutely not your responsibility to update that article: you and your department have no control whatever over its contents. You are welcome to suggest changes, preferably with citations to reliable independent sources, but that should be the extent of your involvement in the article. --ColinFine (talk) 15:38, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Watchlist changes
Ok, I was just messing around with my preferences, so I may have clicked something that caused this to happen, but I don't think anything I changed should have caused this. At any rate, after I got done fiddling with my preferences, all of a sudden a bunch of things on my watchlist are highlighted in orange. It seems to be all edits by IPs or new users. This edit, for example, appears orange in my watchlist and in the user's contribution list. They also have little red "r"s by them, which when I hover say, "this edit needs review", but there's no option to mark the edits as reviewed. They also appear like that in the recent changes feed.

Is this a new thing? Or did I do something in my preferences to cause it? ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 15:01, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * , you changed your prefs. You could restore it back to default (the button at the bottom) and then test it again. Lourdes  17:35, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * , this is "ORES" at Special:Preferences. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:16, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Help me!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I asked for help because my candidate's page is mostly character assassination. I removed it, but don't know how to make the changes stick, or how to change the info in the parens at his title. I got an answer, but can't figure where on the helper's page to ask for more information, and don't know why my being a volunteer for the candidate means I can't correct the hideously slanted, damaging material that someone who wants him to lose has put in his entry. This is horrible. It's 10 days till the Primary. 2Liddy2 (talk) 17:03, 2 September 2016 (UTC)2Liddy2
 * It would help our analysis if you provided a link to the article of concern. Is it Robert Jackson (politician)? DonIago (talk) 17:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * @2Liddy2: Because you work for his campaign, you have a conflict of interest. The Wikipedia guidelines for editors with conflicts of interest are clear: they should not edit the articles they have the conflict with. They may request edits to the article via its talk page. If the material is not supported by a reliable source, you may also escalate the situation to WP:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. —C.Fred (talk) 17:13, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * (ec)2Liddy2, political campaigning is not allowed on Wikipedia, period. We don't care about anybody's primary. In addition the fact that you refer to the article subject as "my candidate" by definition means you have a conflict of interest which means you are actually not allowed to edit the article at all. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:14, 2 September 2016 (UTC)




 * does have a point about this article. It feels like there is a definite skew against the subject, especially in some of the word choice. It's not blatant, but there are a lot of subtle smears. I'm adding it to my watchlist to keep an eye on it, especially over the next ten days. It could use as many neutral eyes as possible. —C.Fred (talk) 17:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

First, how do I respond to people who offer advice? I don't see any place at the bottom of their pages where I can write a return message. Second, everyone tells me there is no campaigning on Wikipedia and that as a volunteer, I have a conflict of interest. No one asked the people who put many negative entries into my candidate's page to refrain from doing so because THEY were biased. If I were working against another candidate, I would certainly have a conflict of interest; but by trying to neutralize the slanted entries that obviously are intended to malign, I don't feel that I am the one doing the harm. Wikipedia is spreading misleading and incomplete "information," and should want to correct it. 2Liddy2 (talk) 17:32, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * To respond to a topic, including one you previously created, simply click the [edit] link next to the topic heading. We do appreciate bringing to our attention the possible non-neutral tone of the article in question; especially since this relates to a biography of a living person.  2606:A000:4C0C:E200:F853:9A57:8459:1F05 (talk) 18:28, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * To leave a message for a user on their talk-page, where a relevant 'thread' has not previously been started, click on 'new section' at the top of the page, create a section heading and place your text in the edit window. Eagleash (talk) 18:37, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * While I would strengthen the conflict of interest guideline, give it actual teeth, and especially with respect to paid editing, broadly construed, it is plainly incorrect, Roger (Dodger67), that those with a COI are "not allowed to edit the article at all". I wish that was policy (with some nuance added to allow anyone to remove copyright violations and unsourced statements that could reasonably be construed as defamatory, especially as to any living person). It is not. Meanwhile, the fangless conflict of interest guideline, that only "strongly discourages" COI editing, explicitly notes that "An exception to editing an article about yourself or someone you know is made if the article contains defamation or a serious error that needs to be corrected quickly." WP:BLP is an overriding policy and says nothing about restrictions on COI removals and also contains WP:BLPEDIT (I'm wondering if WP:BLPREMOVE should mention something about COI editing). I have not spent the time necessary to study the large removal of content by 2Liddy2 to see if defamatory content was involved (and certainly some of the additions in that edit were inappropriately promotional), but with the claim of character assassination, I also disagree with the untempered advice to only edit the talk page, given the tenor of the OP.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:28, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Deleted Article Question Comment
Hi. I saw an article (Elliot Wuu) be recreated after deletion and flagged it again. It was later deleted because of copyright problems. It appears that the article has been created again and still have copyright problems. I put a note on the talk page but am not sure what else I should do. No particle interest in the article other than seeing it when looking at recent changes. Any advice would be great! Zchrykng (talk) 20:40, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I had edited the page for WP:LASTNAME violations, and was checking the sources, when I spotted the copyvio - so I have already tagged it for deletion. It has already been deleted twice today, so I have also requested salting - Arjayay (talk) 20:59, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, wasn't aware of salting - Zchrykng (talk) 21:08, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Has now been deleted and salted - Arjayay (talk) 21:20, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

RS for historical currency caluclation
Is there an established RS for differences in the value of the US dollar? Specifically from the 1870s to present? Timothy Joseph Wood 21:48, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * In what context, for what article? It's a bit awkward just because inflation can behave very differently for different goods and services over a century or so&mdash;trying to make comparisons with 'present value' dollars can be unintentionally misleading.  TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:08, 2 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Baltimore railroad strike of 1877, regarding destruction of property and cost of military and police. Timothy Joseph Wood  22:11, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

HS188 EP Article Creation Question for Hallet Davis Pianos
Hi! I am HS188EP and I think I deleted my pending review for the article entitled "Hallet Davis Pianos" - I do not know if it is still in review. How might someone let me know it is still in review? Can someone add the block noted "Pending Review with xxxx numbers still in review" that appeared in the past? I think I deleted the material at the top of the article creation and now there is no connection. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HS188EP (talk • contribs)

Thank you for the restore! — Preceding unsigned comment added by HS188EP (talk • contribs) 22:49, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi . I have added back the review template, along with the prior reviews which should remain in the draft. Learning about page histories, should help you understand how to fix something like this in the future. By the way, on talk pages and forums like this (but never in articles), you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~ ) at the end, which will automatically convert to your signature and a date and time stamp when you save. You could also click on the signature button that looks like this: Insert-signature.png located above the edit window, which inserts the tildes for you. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:53, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! HS188EP (talk) 23:39, 2 September 2016 (UTC)