|Editor Assistance: Requests|
- 1 White pride
- 2 I Have Not Recieved A Notice After My Edits
- 3 Otto von Bismarch -
- 4 Naming convention for US political parties in election results?
- 5 Mangesh Ghogre
- 6 FXCM
- 7 If Russia banned Pyeongchang Olympics, how to deal with this entry?
- 8 Article Removed - Help
- 9 Promotional article
- 10 Protected pages
Why does a search for black pride read: Black pride is a movement in response to dominant white cultures and ideologies that encourages black people to celebrate black culture and embrace their African heritage Gay pride :Gay pride or LGBT pride is the positive stance against discrimination and violence toward lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people to promote their self-affirmation etc But white pride reads: White pride is a motto primarily used by white separatist, white nationalist, neo-Nazi and white supremacist organizations
Why can't white pride be changed in favour for people who are proud of their white heritage and culture, because I'm pretty sure white people have contributed quite a bit to the development of the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit and anyone includes you. This noticeboard is not for the purpose of requesting changes to articles. If you believe a change is needed, and you can include a reliable source as defined by Wikipedia then make the change yourself. If you do not care to do so, then request the change on the article talk page. If you cannot make the edit yourself (because the page is locked) or should not make the edit yourself (because you have a conflict of interest), use the procedure here, but that process should not be used except in those two cases. Realize that, however made, edit requests may draw no response for days to weeks or, in some cases, ever, especially if no one else thinks the edit should be made. If you do make your edit and it is reverted, follow bold, revert, discuss. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 13:32, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
I Have Not Recieved A Notice After My Edits
I posted edits to Byron De La Beckwith's Wikipedia page that have yet to be indicated as to whether or not my edits will be kept. I believe the edits reflect a more accurate account of the subject matter. I have included my accredited references, added a new section, and revised many portions of the page. When you can, please get back to me about this inquiry.
- @NMeyers:, the Byron De La Beckwith article is not under "Pending Changes" protection so the edits you made were not required to be reviewed and accepted. There is no notice for pages not under some form of protection. That means that the changes you made were available to readers as soon as you saved the page. Two other editors have made changes to the article since then, including a slight tweak to the text you added, but there is no way of knowing if the changes you made will be kept beyond that. I hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:42, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Otto von Bismarch -
User talk:Joraejean At one time, under otto von Bismarch,...sub catergory "Socialism", there was dates attached to his new policies of ...what we call now 'workers comp', 'social Security'and 'socialized medicine". I think it was 1848...but all that info is now gone.
I have no idea how to 'reverse' this back...since I don't know when it was changed. I can't immage why it was removed.
- The edit history of Otto von Bismarck can be found here. If that information was previously in the article it will be in the history somewhere. It may be tedious, but you can find it there. You might note, however, that there are now separate sections in the article about that kind of policy, under Otto von Bismarck#Social legislation, including a subsection on a law of 1884 which seems to be what you're talking about. Perhaps you're looking in the wrong place or perhaps it has been moved since you first saw it. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 19:04, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Naming convention for US political parties in election results?
I've spent some time looking for an answer to this question, and also looking for the best place to post it. I didn't post on any article talk page as there are so many articles involved. Hopefully this is a good place to begin. If it's not and I should be posting this elsewhere, please let me know. I'm a fairly low-volume editor (a few dozen edits) and don't have an account, so I'm trying my best.
Getting back to the point, I'm wondering: Is there a policy/template/convention for referring to US political parties in election results tables in articles? I first noticed this while reading articles relating to Appalachia. I found several variations with just a cursory search. For example:
Lincoln_County,_Kentucky uses "Republican" and "Democrat"
Manhattan uses "Democrats" and "Republicans"
Middlesex_County,_Massachusetts uses "Democratic" and "Republican"
Onondaga_County,_New_York uses "Republican" and "Democratic"
Santa_Barbara_County,_California uses "GOP" and "DEM"
It appears that most of the "Democrat" uses are found in Republican-leaning geographic area articles. Many appear to have been made by the same editor. This usage is often seen as an epithet these days, as Democrat_Party_(epithet) notes. I would think that information like this, set off in a separate table and used in a large number of articles, should have a common convention/template, and certainly not one that uses epithets.
Also, if this is something that needs standardizing, is there a way to do so short of manually editing hundreds of articles? Again, I'm fairly new here, I don't know how major changes are implemented.
Can someone advice if following entry on Mangesh ghogre is notable for a article
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requested_articles/Biography/By_nationality&oldid=599137289#India Mangeshghogre (talk) 09:52, 18 June 2017 (UTC)mangeshghogre
- That will be one of the things evaluated when your request for an article is considered. In that regard see the recent response to the similar request you made on your user talk page. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 20:46, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Hoping that someone can give a more definitive answer regarding the information found within the first two sentences of FXCM's page. There has been a long standing discussion regarding their ongoing regulatory investigation. The article's Talk:FXCM page might shed some light on that.
One argument states that the first two sentences, and therefore Google's knowledge graph, should contain information about ongoing regulatory issues and the sentence: "fraudulent misrepresentation" to its customers. The other argument suggests including that information in the first two sentences of the piece is excessive and not befitting of other Wikipedia pages relating to businesses undergoing regulatory or PR issues (see here.
- This is a content dispute, so first discuss it extensively on the article talk page - one edit each isn't sufficient and discussion about one another rather than about the content doesn't count - and if that doesn't work utilize dispute resolution. BTW, every article stands on its own here except for the effect of our policies and guidelines, so raising differences between this article and others will not prove to be effective unless required by policy. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 13:05, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
If Russia banned Pyeongchang Olympics, how to deal with this entry?
- There's three possibilities: The first is that Russia is banned, in which case the article can be moved to something like: Russian ban from the 2018 Winter Olympics. The second is that they are allowed to compete normally, in which case the article will remain where it is. The third is that the there will be some form of a partial ban, such as occurred in the Rio Olympics, and we will still have the article in the same place, but it will look like Russia at the 2016 Summer Olympics. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 13:58, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Article Removed - Help
Hi there -
I would like more information about the following article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Colle%2BMcVoy&action=edit&redlink=1
It was removed for unambiguous advertising or promotion but the page was setup in good faith. The article is in fact for an advertising agency, but it is meant to be educational and for references purposes, not for promotion. We believe it is important to be represented in Wikipedia due to its overwhelming popularity and use as a quick-answer tool.
There are many other advertising agencies that have operating Wikipedia pages, so I am curious what we may have to do to meet the requirements for this type of article. Do we need to link more within our article and be linked in other articles?
Thanks so much for your time and response. We appreciate you getting back to us when you have the chance. Best, Tyler Colle+McVoy
- It is a violation of Wikipedia policy to edit Wikipedia on behalf of an organization, see WP:ROLE. I have reported the violation and it is very likely that your account will be blocked. If you wish to take up the cause of publishing an article about your firm, you may set up an individual account and do so, but know that Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy strongly recommends that you not do so and, moreover, if you are doing it as part of your job duties — that is, that if you are being paid to edit Wikipedia — that you must follow the requirements set out at WP:PAY. As for the previous article which was deleted, it is the tone and promotional nature of the article which results in a G11 deletion (click that link for details on how G11 works). If your firm is notable (see WP:ORG for the standards for organizations) it may well be that an article about it might be written which would pass G11. However, you should not write it. If your firm is important enough, someone unaffiliated with the firm will eventually write the article and you can perhaps jumpstart that process by making a request at Requested articles, though it may not help much since there are several thousand requests which are ahead of yours. However, you should be aware your firm has no right to be represented in Wikipedia, and Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and does not exist to promote organizations, individuals, or anything else. If your firm is not notable, no article can be written about it. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 22:37, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Hi, this article is a big self-promote ad, very few and poor sources, self published books except one, I don't know what to do and have poor English skills, maybe it should be deleted like on French Wikipedia. Ziloyz (talk) 10:44, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yeah, there's a lot of stuff in there that's not really supported. Was it in fact deleted at :fr? JohnInDC (talk) 12:23, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
] If a page is "protected to prevent vandalism" but has statements of fact with no citations, how do you suggest that a citation be added? Sorry if link format is wrong. Is my first time asking a question and wasn't clear on instructions for posting link. Barkway (talk) 03:39, 26 June 2017 (UTC)barkway[