Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2017 January 29

= January 29 =

Page heading spelling mistake
Both pages have been deleted. Eagleash (talk) 21:27, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

I created a page and made a spelling mistake in the search word heading. How do I edit it? The editor just lets me into the content — Preceding unsigned comment added by ERollo (talk • contribs) 23:01, 28 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Does this refer to Holosophy? If so what is the correct spelling? Page names can only be changed by 'moving' a page to a new location (title). This facility (obtained via the 'more' tab at the top of the page) will not be available to you until your account is at least four days old with a minimum of 10 valid edits. Please sign your posts on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ). Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes thank you. The title should read Holosopholy. I have tried to create a new article with title Holosopholy but it is now saying that that article already exists. Now I am really confused. I thought I had made a spelling mistake but I couldn't have because Holosopholy points to the incorrect Holosophy. I seem to be trapped. ERollo (talk) 23:40, 28 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Googling 'Holosopholy' reveals no hits, whereas 'Holosophy' does so there may be a problem in establishing which is correct and additionally whether a Wiki article is justified. Further at 04.42 (UTC) on 28 January moved page Holosopholy to Holosophy. In theory that should solve the spelling problem but is in the wrong direction per your spelling. However if you enter Holosopholy in the search box it redirects you to Holosophy and says it is redirected from Holosopholy. There is a redirect here in the wrong direction if your spelling is correct and an article with 'incorrect' spelling here. It looks as if notability issues not withstanding the redirect has been wrongly created. This has confused me somewhat, so hoping an editor who can follow the histories can at least get that part sorted. Eagleash (talk) 00:12, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) The page history [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Holosophy&action=history] shows you did create it with the name Holosopholy but User:HapHaxion moved it to Holosophy, maybe because there are no Google hits on "Holosopholy". This automatically creates a redirect from the old name. Did you invent the word? There are a few Google hits on "Holosophy" but apparently no common meaning of that word. It sounds like many occurrences were made up by the authors with different intended meanings. Note WP:NOTNEO. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:14, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying that I did not make a spelling mistake. That puts my mind at rest. The word 'Holosophy' has been registered as a trade mark by an organisation who seem to be promoting 'well being' in a manner that deviates from the root words Holo and Soph points to Whole Wisdom/Knowledge. I have been asked by Change Managers to put the word Holosopholy on Wiki as it is meaningful to them and would like it described more fully so that the concept may be shared. Holosophy sounds like a branch of Philosophy but in contrast Holosopholy is concerned  not only  with thinking internally but also thinking with the hand. I would also add that a Holosopholist is not a Polymath ie a person who has a wide range of deep knowledge. A Holosopholist is someone who has the knowledge and know-how to connect knowledgable people. Indeed if Wiki was a person he/she would be described as a type of Holosopholist. I do hope I am allowed to continue with this project. 88.210.179.54 (talk) 09:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Could I enquire please: who are "Change Managers"? Personally, I would regard the words holosophy, holosophology and holosopholist as neologisms undeserving of a place in Wikipedia, but I'd be happy to be proved wrong if you can find WP:Reliable sources for some or all of the terms.    D b f i r s   10:03, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. Change Managers are professionals who are employed by governments, corporations or businesses to identify routes through the complexity that modern globalisation has delivered. There is a general consensus that connecting people has merit and that learning to bridge the gap between those of opposing views is advantageous to global stability. In the old paradigm, the word Diplomat was used to describe part of this function, but it has become archaic in the sense that it has become highly stereotyped and closed. There needs to be a new way to express "the whole work of those who strive to connect" because a holosopholist is not necessarily always diplomatic. I quote: "Neologisms represent the evolving nature of the English language. Holosopholy is indeed a neologism as is Google and Crowdsourcing.  Holosopholy represents the embodiment of an evolving "Diplomacy", a word which is no longer able to contribute in concept to the whole needs of globalisation.  I can understand why you have to protect the integrity of the encyclopedia and that  Neologisms must be tried, tested and in common use. My question is- Does it make sense to you? Do you know intuitively that this word has merit and should be shared universally now, or do I share it with a small group of reliable sources who may take 10 years to release its value publicly.  I leave that up to you.  Sorry forgot to sign. ERollo (talk) 12:06, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * On the contrary, both Google and crowdsourcing have had entries in dictionaries for years and so are new words but no longer neologisms. I'm afraid you must ask your mysterious Change Managers to publish their original research elsewhere.  Wikipedia is not the place to publish new concepts.  They must have been written about in WP:Reliable sources first.   D b f i r s   13:21, 29 January 2017 (UTC)  Sorry to disappoint you.    D b f i r s   13:21, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. I am not in the slightest bit disappointed. In fact I am highly amused that Wiki considers that an attempt to connect the world is a new concept. Please ensure that you delete all reference to Holosophy as well as this is a trade mark and the organisation may sue you. Cheers ERollo (talk) 15:57, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * The attempt isn't new, but the word is. I agree that both articles should be deleted.  I'm still puzzled about who these "Change Managers" are.    D b f i r s   16:10, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

As I said before, change managers are professionals who are employed to advise organisations on how to implement changes when these changes are very complex. The world has become too complicated for most organisations to use the old tried and tested management techniques successfully. In many ways our language will need to evolve quickly to accommodate the changes that are going on in the world with the new capacity for communication. I expect many more new words will come your way as the world adapts to the effects that the internet has brought upon us. It is people like mysel,f who think out of the box, who are in a position to assist with this process of adaption. I hope this answers your question. 88.210.179.54 (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I still wonder which London organisation you work for, but please note that neither Wikipedia nor Wiktionary is the place to publicise newly-invented words.  You need to think even further out of the box.    D b f i r s   08:36, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Look Wiki, I got the message very early on in this conversation that Neologisms aren't allowed. I am sorry, I accept your reasoning and I apologise. I am somewhat concerned about your joint continued facetious questioning about my connections? In light of my rejection, that is absolutely none of your business and why should you care anyway? If you had really wanted to know about these "London Organisations" then you should have let the article run. But Rules are Rules. This conversation has ended and my public flogging, for being a bad person, is complete. Let it go. ERollo (talk) 10:36, 30 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry to upset you. No public flogging or facetiousness was intended.  It was your statement the "I have been asked by Change Managers to put the word Holosopholy on Wiki" that flagged "promotional" in my mind. I'm always curious about behind-the-scenes influences anywhere in life, not just in Wikipedia.  I'll drop the subject now that both entries have been deleted as you requested.  Best wishes, and I look forward to the word appearing in dictionaries in the future.    D b f i r s   11:23, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Vile attack on President Trump at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Trump (under list of children)
You have allow a vile and despicable attack on President Trump to be posted and not allow an edit from his father's page under list of his children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Trump

I am contacting the Secret Service to complain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:30A:2C51:D930:F8C7:68EF:C386:173A (talk) 23:25, 28 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I doubt the Secret Service will do much, though you are of course within your rights to contact them. People are keeping an eye on the current vandalism to the article, and if the perpetrator(s) do not stop soon, they are liable to be reported to the admins which may result in them being prevented from editing. Regards, --Money money tickle parsnip (talk) 23:29, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Good luck. I tend to think the focus of the Secret Service is on keeping President Trump alive, rather than on preventing people from saying mean things about him.  General Ization  Talk   23:47, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The page history [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fred_Trump&action=history] shows the recent vandalism was reverted within minutes and before your post was saved. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:56, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Edward Marjoribanks, 2nd Baron Tweedmouth
Reference number 1 looks wrong. I did not do this reference. Thanks 101.182.188.199 (talk) 08:44, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

✅ Eagleash (talk) 12:35, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Ishbel Hamilton-Gordon, Marchioness of Aberdeen and Temair
section - "see also" on this page looks really bad. I did not do this mess. Please fix if able. Thanks and I hope I am being helpful! 101.182.188.199 (talk) 08:47, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

✅ Eagleash (talk) 12:35, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Twinkle
Hello, I am fighting against vandalism, and I activated the Twinkle, but the undo button doesn't appear. What is happening? Thanks! --Gambler1478 (talk) 10:37, 29 January 2017 (UT
 * I'm not sure! I see you've managed to set your Twinkle preferences, so at least that part of it must be working for you. Do any of the issues at Twinkle/doc apply to you? What are you looking at when the undo button doesn't appear? Could you post a full URL? -- John of Reading (talk) 12:27, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Only the undo button isn't working. I am looking the diffs, and the history, while the tab twinkle, next to view history tab is working; undo button isn't working. --Gambler1478 (talk) 15:54, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Since you haven't posted a full URL, try this one: JoR sandbox diff. When I view that, I see four links added by Twinkle - "Restore this version" at the left, and "Rollback (AGF)", "Rollback" and "Rollback (Vandal}" at the right. Do you see those? In addition there is an "(Undo)" link at the right, which is from the core software, not from Twinkle. Feel free to experiment with my sandbox, if you like. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:30, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * No, those button doesn't appear, I am using other script, but the button just appear on the history page. --Gambler1478 (talk) 16:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * In the Twinkle preferences, look for "Show rollback links on these pages". I don't think you've ticked anything there. -- John of Reading (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * All of them are ticked and nothing else happens yet... --Gambler1478 (talk) 17:05, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I see you've ticked them now. I'm stuck, sorry. I suggest you ask at Wikipedia talk:Twinkle, giving the full URL of a diff page where you are failing to see the Twinkle rollback links. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:17, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for help me! Twinkle wasn't working due to a other script which I had installed, but now it is working. Gambler1478 (talk) 21:08, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Edward Marjoribanks
Please helpme with malformations. I have been reprimanded by an editor david bidfulph whom I respect enormously. I am too embarked to state that I don't know how to formatting in the way he wants. Please see my request above. Thanks so much. 101.182.188.199 (talk) 11:31, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Please see above, and User talk:101.182.188.199. This editor's misuse of the publisher parameter was pointed out by DES at User talk:Srbernadette on 23 September 2015, and on countless occasions in numerous places since then. Can someone with more patience than I have please explain it in words of one syllable that this editor will understand? If some thinks that the description at Template:Cite web can be made clearer, please do so. Regulars here at the help desk will know this editor's propensity for expecting other users to sort out errors in referencing, instead of learning to do it for himself with the help of the endless advice which he has been given; see numerous comments at User talk:Srbernadette. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:46, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * In the short-term, I suppose, one piece of advice might be "If you don't understand what ought to go into the publisher parameter, then don't use it". We may have said so before, but there's no harm in saying so again. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:56, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello, You are obviously willing to learn, and that is what we value here, so stick with it - references are notoriously difficult for newcomers to get to grips with. I can offer a couple of suggestions.  Firstly, as David Biddulph suggests, only use the "|publisher=" field for the actual name of the publisher, or leave it blank.  Nothing else goes there.  Secondly, it helps to use the "Preview" tool when making edits, to ensure they are just right before you save them.  Or try them out on your Sandbox until you are happy with them.  Thirdly, you could try the Wikipedia Adventure to build your skills and confidence.  I hope this helps. --Gronk Oz (talk) 13:02, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Mahira Khan
Hi! There's an edit war going on the article, what should be done? Also I have got a warning message, and I think there's no my mistake. Hope for kind response, Thanks! M. Billoo 13:13, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * M.Billoo2000 My advice would be to avoid any further edits to the article and instead put your case objectively on the article talk page, notifying the other editor as you do so. Hopefully the issues can be resolved there: if not, there is a dispute resolution procedure laid down (this Help Desk isn't really part of that). The other thing is to try not to seem combative in edit summaries: being extended-confirmed or an admin doesn't give you an advantage in editing disputes, which are assessed purely on the merits of the case Noyster (talk),  14:38, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Radio Tatras International
Re https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AArticles_for_deletion%2FRadio_Tatras_International

Would someone care to comment as to WHY Radio Tatras Interenational has been deleted. It is a fully functional UK license radio station. Do I detect some sour grapes?

RTI is on air 24/7 which will soon be joined by RTI Gold. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.253.186.10 (talk) 14:47, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Deleted for lack of reliable sources, see WP:Articles for deletion/Radio Tatras International (2nd nomination). --David Biddulph (talk) 15:08, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

stamp cancellation date
Am looking for anyone else who has an envelop with cancellation date of Oct. 32, 1964, Kwajalien Islands. This is a very rare cancellation date authenticated by the U.S. Postal Dept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.104.50.46 (talk) 16:55, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry, this is the 'help desk' for assistance in editing Wikipedia. Suggest you try any of the on-line philately forums or the Wikipedia reference desk may be able to suggest something. Eagleash (talk) 19:02, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Your search may be easier if you spell "Kwajalein" correctly. Maproom (talk) 07:40, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Article: Lahore; Education
Please add a Public institution, "Pakistan Institute Of Fashion and Design" in the "Fashion" part of the article "Lahore". This is a very renowned University of fashion and creative studies in Pakistan and has produced many Pakistan's famous Fashion Designers: Maria B., Hassan Sheheryar Yasin, Kamiar Rokni, Maheen Kardar, Mehdi, Sehr Atif, Nomi Ansari and Saman Arif. PIFD is affiliated with the world famous Art Schools: Ecole de la Chambre Syndicale de la Couture Parisienn, Mod' Spe' Paris, Swedish College of Textile & Sciences in Borås, Sweden since 2007 for student exchange and curriculum development; and Asian Institute of Gemological Sciences, Thailand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FaadiFashion (talk • contribs) 17:56, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Why can't you add it yourself? — MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 18:46, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

a word with "crunchyroll" in it?
yeah? so? uh, I was looking at a few articles? and a number of them had 'crunchyroll' in it, at the 'license by?' but in some pages or just call it articles? use to have that, and as the link part mostly came here ? to most of the same title err page(s) upon here? then a few articles was saved back to the studio place or company that licenses it? which, awhile after, the word crunchyroll doesn't have a link to it? and if some other articles that still has it?

then, is it still kept there or not? is what I'm a bit confused on? Tainted-wingsz (talk) 18:33, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
 * It's not clear what your question is. Is link getting added inappropraitely to some articles?  RudolfRed (talk) 20:28, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

yes, like to this part ,, and someone correctly fixed it on this,  then the article is just o.k. and I would point at every part of different articles that would have this? before someone kept adding it? when it was earlier? or so? Tainted-wingsz (talk) 21:15, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

My book is mentioned but not cited
In an article "Layoff" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Layoff My Book, Healing the Wounds: Overcoming the Trauma of Layoffs and Revitalizing Downsized Organizatins is mentioned in the article but is not cited. The correct citation is David M. Noer, Overcoming the Trauma of Layoffs and Revitalizing Downsized Organizations, Jossey-Bass: San Francisco 2009 (Revised Edition).

I tried to point this out in the "talk" section but was baffled by the content and inability to find a space to enter my comments.

Thanks for the help,

David Noer [redacted email] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:837D:8EF0:55FB:64D2:BD7B:AD45 (talk) 18:50, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Link to the section where the book is mentioned Layoff in 2nd paragraph 'Effects of layoffs in the workplace'. Eagleash (talk) 20:58, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * ✅ - has added the citation. --Gronk Oz (talk) 21:45, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I added the citation. David, please check it for errors and post any corrections needed here. Also, do you have a preferred URL where it can be accessed? (We prefer free but pay sites are OK).


 * Related question for the other help desk regulars; should I create a page for David M. Noer? Should our Center for Creative Leadership page list him? (See). --Guy Macon (talk) 21:47, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Article only using self-hosted references
The article Goodiepal seems to be only using references hosted by the subject himself, and seems to be very comercial. I can't place a speedy deletion template on it due to the captcha, which I can't read. What can I do? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.132.78.134 (talk) 21:32, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Several reference links are non-functioning, but the subject of the article appears to meet the notability standard for Wikipedia. The article does not meet criteria for speedy deletion (see the policy), but its referencing needs attention and cleanup. DonFB (talk) 22:43, 29 January 2017 (UTC)