Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2019 July 19

= July 19 =

Change of tense in sentence
I changed the following sentence from:

"Among the papers of Leonardo da Vinci dating to the late 15th century is the design for a steam-powered cannon called the Architonnerre which works by the sudden influx of hot water into a sealed red hot cannon."

to:

"Among the papers of Leonardo da Vinci dating to the late 15th century is the design for a steam-powered cannon called the Architonnerre, which worked by the sudden influx of hot water into a sealed red hot cannon."

Could anyone please tell me if the change of tense from "works" to "worked" was appropriate? (I also added a comma, which I don't think was controversial, but please let me know if you differ.)--Thylacine24 (talk) 04:08, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * "Works" is correct, as the thing was never built. The comma is fine. Also, the proper place to ask questions like this is the language reference desk. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Sorry, and thanks. (Edit: Sorry that I didn't specify the article at first, which is "History of the steam engine".)--Thylacine24 (talk) 11:56, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Is this OR?
I couldn't think of a better place for this - it's too vague for a noticeboard. Something I have come across multiple times is a pattern of statements and citations kinda like this (simplified):

''X is true. [1] This is supported by Y. [2] This is also supported by Z and A. [3][4]''

Refs 2-4 only talk about Y, Z, and A and don't mention idea X. Ref 1, within itself, cites refs 2-4. Without ref 1, this would obviously be OR, but does adding a ref for the central idea fix it?

In other words, an article will make a verifiable statement, then proceed to argue in favor of that statement in the same manner as its supporting reference. Is this original research/synthesis? I had been concluding that it was. Crossroads1 (talk) 05:55, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there any chance that you might point us to an example?--Quisqualis (talk) 06:11, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * One seems to be here. The 'central source' appears to be Thornhill and Palmer 2001, but it cites other sources in support of T & P 2001's idea, some of which sources are ones that T & P use. Note too that it also cites other sources that came later in support which seem to be more clear cut examples of OR. I have come across other examples of this type however; they are somewhere in my watchlist but I am unsure where at the moment. Anyway it seems like an easy trap for an inexperienced editor to fall into (they kind of think they are writing a paper and have to support the idea they are writing about). Crossroads1 (talk) 14:13, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes, that sounds like synthesis. – Anne drew  14:43, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Elon Musk / Errol Musk (father)
I have been asked by friends to read your article on Elon Musk.

There are some substantial errors in this article.

The article seems to suggest that Elon 'swam' from South Africa to North America when he was 17 (a few days before his 18th birthday). Without listing the errors, which you can read, Elon spent his entire youth with me, not "mostly". His mother was entirely absent.

Elon's ability to program came from me acceding to his pleas and buying him in 1982 the first IBM XTA personal computer in South Africa. The computer cost as much as a Mercedes motor car. I did this willingly and because I saw his aptitude for computing. I hold both FOTRAN and COBOL diplomas.

He was never "bullied" at school. Had this occurred I would have seen to it immediately. The fact is, he called one of his classmates, a smaller boy, a "monkey" and followed that up by calling the boy's mother (a single parent) a "monkey". Blacks and colored people are very sensitive on such an issue. When this boy saw his chance he pushed Elon down a long flight of concrete stairs. At the bottom, Elon being severely stunned, the boy proceeded to pommel Elon's face. On learning the facts I could take no action against the boy that pushed Elon. When Elon recovered I removed him from that school and enrolled him in a better school in another city, Pretoria. This required that I buy a house in Pretoria, in the best suburb, which I did. When he matriculated I offered Elon any university in South Africa. He chose Pretoria University, my alma mater. It is a good university and a leader in many fields, particularly tropical diseases and veterinary science.

When I saw he was very unhappy there, I was the one who suggested he go to North America, and the only one capable of doing this for him. Elon, and his brother and sister, had been to virtually all the countries in the world with me by that time, and several times to the USA and Canada. I was confident that he had learned enough from me, so I sent him to the US Consulate to get information on universities in the USA from my friend the US Ambassador. He left South Africa ten days later on a flexible return ticket and with sufficient funds from me for several months.

Elon subsequently enrolled at Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, on a government loan. In the meantime I sent him and his brother and sister, who had also moved to Canada, all the funds I would have used to send them to university in South Africa.

Elon applied to the Canadian Government for me to immigrate to Canada, using his own funds, which still brings me to tears. I received permission as a Landed Immigrant, sponsored by E. R Musk (son). The Landed Immigrant document is available for perusal, signed by Elon. I did not go there as I found Canada to be a somewhat dull place compared to Africa, much to Elon's disappointment, and I am sorry for this.

I don't mind being called "a terrible person". It better than fake accolades from one's children. My task as a father was not to be a 'pal', but a father. I feel I succeeded at that.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.77.201.82 (talk) 10:10, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * The place to discuss the article on Elon Musk is on the article's talk page: Talk:Elon Musk. Suggested changes need to be supported by references to published independent reliable sources. David Biddulph (talk) 10:43, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I have copied the above post to the talk page in case anyone there sees anything actionable in it. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 13:31, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Tense of dead person's action
In the article "Panchaia", the following sentence occurs (footnote removed):

"The island is also mentioned by Lygdamus (Tib. 3.2.23), one of the Tibullan elegists, as a rich place from which he will hope for gifts to his grave."

Could anyone please tell me if "will" should be "would"? (Edit: Added quotation marks to article name "Panchaia". Further edit: Piped link to go to article in question.)--Thylacine24 (talk) 19:15, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * No, because (i) when he was doing the hoping, it was for an event in the future, so 'would' would suggest either an anachronistic past or a conditional which does/did not appear in the contextual text (as translated – I cannot speak to the original Greek), and (ii) because 'would' would set up a conflict with "is . . . mentioned."
 * That at least is my pragmatic analysis based on past experience as a professional editor: bona fide grammarians might have different views. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230} 90.211.129.83 (talk) 20:46, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Thanks. So, to be absolutely clear, could you please tell me if I should leave the tense unedited?--Thylacine24 (talk) 21:47, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I would leave it if it were me, but if you don't agree with my reasoning you're free to change it and then wait to see if anyone else disagrees and changes it back, after which the two of you (and others) can discuss the matter on the article's Talk page. This is called Bold, Revert, Discuss and is standard procedure here. The point to remember is that we're (nearly) all just trying to improve the Encyclopaedia, so your being reverted on a change is not a signal of you having done something wrong, and nobody should get annoyed by any part of the procedure. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.211.129.83 (talk) 01:07, 20 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I'd say "he hoped". InedibleHulk (talk) 09:40, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Agree. Dead people should do things in the past tense. "He hoped for gifts to his grave" or "he expressed hope for gifts to his grave". —BarrelProof (talk) 08:27, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I think this a legitimate use of the historical present as Tib. 3.2.23 refers to a passage in a book of poems (by Tibullus and possibly Lygdamus), so I would leave it. The section of the Historical present article on describing fiction says "Summaries of the narratives (plots) of works of fiction are conventionally presented using the present tense rather than the past tense." TSventon (talk) 14:59, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Notable person or Autobiography
I am a newly Trademarked model, musician, and radio personality. Should I submit a notable article for fans to search my Biography? Or autobiography? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tia Tropicana (talk • contribs) 19:49, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Neither. If (in Wikipedia's terms) you become notable, then someone else may write a article about you.  Autobiographies are strongly discouraged and usually will be deleted for falling foul of one of the following policies: WP:COI, WP:Paid, WP:NOTABLE, WP:POV. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 20:12, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment: Asked and answered at the teahouse. Please do not post in multiple locations:  Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 20:16, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * You might also want to look at An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. -Arch dude (talk) 22:44, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Help updates to our school page keep being deleted
We have attempted on several occasions to update the page regarding our school to correct factual areas and include history and current information. It seems that a user "John from Idegon" is the source of our updates being deleted.

This is very frustrating and of course not helping the reliability of the information on your site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcobbases (talk • contribs) 22:48, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Your edits were deleted as they were not encyclopedic, being promotional in the opinion of other editors. I note that you attempted to start a discussion at 's talk page but your post was deleted, partly because it was not signed. A discussion would normally be the way forward here. Please clarify what you mean by 'we'; an account cannot be used by more than one person or by an organisation. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 23:11, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Also, please see WP:COI and WP:PAID the necessary disclosures must be made where applicable. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 23:17, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Hey! Who are "we"—is this account used by multiple users? If so, please note that you are not allowed to share accounts with multiple users. The reason your contributions are reverted is that they are promotional. Please stop using your account for the purpose of promoting the school. Thanks, MrClog (talk) 23:19, 19 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Please stop personal attack, as you did in the summary of THIS edit. Please also sign your comments at Talk pages by adding the magic four tildes  at the end. --CiaPan (talk) 09:22, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

I think this is about All Saints Episcopal School (Tyler, Texas). It would have been helpful if someone mentioned that. As far as I can tell, no one has proposed deleting the article. WP:Notability (high schools) indicates that this would be unlikely if it happens. Puffery should certainly be removed, and the actions by John from Idegon and Cullen328 seem fully justified. —BarrelProof (talk) 09:39, 21 July 2019 (UTC)