Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2016 September 5

= September 5 =

Thomas Fairfax
a couple of the refs listed down the bottom of this page are in red. I did not do these edits. Thanks and I hope this helpsSrbernadette (talk) 02:04, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks. They're fixed. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:07, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Henry Flitcroft
This page also has citations - number 1 - that are incorrectly done  (again, NOT by me!)  Srbernadette (talk) 02:22, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

✅ Eagleash (talk) 03:45, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

please add Martina, Croatia to list of places
please add the small

please add the small village of Martina, Croatia to your list shown under the name Martina. It is NNE of Labin a few KM from the coast and can be located with mapquest - after a few enlargements 45.24.16.128 (talk) 06:50, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

i have a picture and and a screen clip of the map but couldn't pste it in here.


 * Does this village have an article on the English Wikipedia? Eagleash (talk) 07:37, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Martina is a disambiguation page for topics with a Wikipedia article or at least some information in an article. It does not appear Martina, Croatia has that. The purpose of disambiguation pages is not to provide information by themselves but to lead readers to an article with information. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:07, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Wrong date of birth of celebrity
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amrita_Rao

She is not born in 1981 as mentioned by the wiki. She was actually born in 1986 as rightly indicated in IMDB here: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1182255/bio — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.106.18.10 (talk) 10:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * If you read the IMDB page again you'll see that it has both 1981 and 1986, within a few lines of each other. IMDB is not generally recognised as a reliable source, see Citing IMDb.  The article does have another source for the 1981 date. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Do plot summaries need inline citations?
As per MOS:PLOT: "The plot summary for a work, on a page about that work, does not need to be sourced with in-line citations, as it is generally assumed that the work itself is the primary source for the plot summary. However, editors are encouraged to add sourcing if possible. If a plot summary includes a direct quote from the work, this must be cited using inline citations per WP:QUOTE." A user is requesting inline citations for plot summary at Bodyguard (2011 Hindi film) and citing WP:QUOTE as his reason. I don't think WP:QUOTE applies here as there aren't any direct quotes from the work. Need confirmation from expert users, before I can revert again. Thanks.-   Managerarc   ™ talk  11:25, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Plot summaries don't need citations Only direct quotes (for example, a statement of an actor from the movie) need to be sourced. (I have reverted the said edit). At the same time, the moment some editor might claim that the said plot summary does not represent the true 'picture', you may need to provide reliable sources to back up challenged claims. Thanks. Lourdes  11:58, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Before you "revert again", please see WP:Edit wars, & three-revert rule, (and discuss on the talk page). 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:5CA2:EAF0:ADD:D9B (talk) 14:42, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the help. @2606:A000:4C0C:E200:5CA2:EAF0:ADD:D9B: Thanks for the suggestion. I know about the 3RR.-   Managerarc   ™ talk  14:47, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

List of deaths in rock and roll
I made a few edits to List of deaths in rock and roll today, because I noticed some of the names included were not rock musicians. Then I peeked at the talk page and noticed that the debate over inclusion criteria has been lengthy and without consensus. What is the more formal method to reach a consensus? Would it involve a proposal placed onto it's own page? I'm not exactly sure how to start this. Thanks! Magnolia677 (talk) 13:13, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Presuming that you have already read Consensus and presuming that by "more formal method", you mean something beyond just discussing with the editors on the talk page of the article, you could give a quick read to rfc (could turn out to be a cannon to sort out a simple issue) and to dr (could turn out to be a solution that seeks out a new problem). Lourdes  14:27, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

missing archives
Talk:Ibn al-Haytham has 2 search fields for the archives, neither of which work. I can see them but I don't know how to fix this. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 13:50, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The archives weren't moved when the talk page was moved, and thus they are still under the old title. Moving the archives from the old name will fix this issue. P p p er y 13:55, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Doh, what was I thinking. The move may have been ill-advised, I'll wait to see what happens about it. Thanks. Doug Weller  talk 13:57, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I have moved the 3 archive files, & the archive link on the talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:59, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Template Use Tool
Hi, I'm a regular contributor and I'm looking for a tool that will tell me the exact pages where certain templates are used. I have looked but can't find anything like this, does it exist or am I on a wild goose chase? JDWFC (talk) 15:09, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * "What links here" is an entry on the "Tools" menu at the left of the relevant template page. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:13, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thank you! Can't believe I hadn't spotted it - exactly what I was looking for. JDWFC (talk) 15:16, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * , while answer is right, the actual link is Special:WhatLinksHere. You can go to that page and back trace any page.  Lourdes  15:58, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * But the easiest way is usually to start on the page you want to back trace, and then click "What links here" in the Tools menu as David said. Then you don't have to navigate to Special:WhatLinksHere and fill out Page field. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

blocked help!!!!!!!Youshallnotpassss (talk) 17:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
I am blocked on plants vs zombies 2 wiki, so how do I talk to the people who blocked me. By the way I keep getting blocked for no reason everytime I start an account!Youshallnotpassss (talk) 17:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * If you are asking about http://plantsvszombies.wikia.com/wiki/Plants_vs._Zombies_2, we can't help here. This help desk is related only to the English Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:48, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, generally starting a new account when you are blocked will get you blocked again for evading the block. Standard procedure on many websites, including Wikipedia. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 17:55, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, he's been blocked indefinitely there for socking. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:01, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

How long for new article to appear?
I sent for review two small articles about a week ago but they haven't appeared in Wikipedia yet. I'm not the most technical so maybe I did something wrong? They were about the Film maker Michal Siewierski and the activist/writer Richard Oppenlander. Let me know if I have to resubmit them! Thanks!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pepspotbib (talk • contribs) 18:16, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, you haven't submitted your draft for review. I've submitted that for you. Next time, you can submit by adding  at the top. Fuortu (talk) 18:24, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Your draft was reviewed unusually quickly. But as it consisted of two (or maybe three, or even four) proposed articles, all shovelled together into one draft, it/they were rejected. I suggest you pick just one subject for now, work on improving the referencing, noting the need for independent sources, and submit that. Maproom (talk) 21:27, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Letters written by professionals
Is it possible to use letters written by professionals (some unpublished) as reliable reference sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kentansg (talk • contribs) 18:21, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Sources for what? Ruslik_ Zero 20:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * If they have been published by a reliable organ, probably yes (though they might be primary sources, with the limitations that that implies). If they are unpublished, or privately published (eg posted on some random website, or probably even on the writer's own website), then no: unpublished materials can never be used as sources, . --ColinFine (talk) 20:37, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * While the caveat about self-publication stands, websites count as "publication" (unless access is strictly restricted). See Published. Tigraan Click here to contact me 07:54, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Article deleted
Hello I created a norwegian article about a band, coming out with a new album soon, and the band has also had great contacts with other norwegian bands. For some reason when I was editing it, I got the news it was deleted, and that the reason was for A7, that it had no importance. Which I find not true at all. As the band is giving out their first album shortly and also for all the info and special things the band has done. Its called "Resistansen". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Theelfe (talk • contribs) 20:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello, it seems that a band that has not yet released any significant recordings may well not be sufficiently notable to warrant a Wikipedia article. Please see WP:NBAND for more information (in respect of the English Wikipedia). If you created an article at the Norwegian Wiki, standards may be different and you could ask at the help-desk there. Eagleash (talk) 21:08, 5 September 2016 (UTC)


 * The wording of A7 is "... does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject".  It is possible, therefore, that the band does justify an article, but that you did not include the justification in terms of the references to published reliable sources independent of the subject.  The guidance for notability for bands is at WP:MUSIC.  It is, of course possible that the band does not yet meet the requirements but that they will do so in the future.  You say that you created a "Norwegian article".  If the article was written in Norwegian it does not belong here in the English Wikipedia; you received advice on your user talk page. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:11, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The advice that you were given on your talk page said that your submission (which has since been deleted) was not in English. You may submit the article to the Norwegian Wikipedia, but, as mentioned above, they may have their own significance or notability requirements.  See WP:UPANDCOMING and WP:TOOSOON about bands (and other subjects) that have not yet received significant coverage.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:19, 5 September 2016 (UTC)