Help desk
< August 6	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 8 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

August 7[edit]

Swear words in porn star bio's[edit]

What are the guidelines regarding the inclusion of swearing in biography's about porn stars?

The case in point is the Jason Crew article where the 'Filmography' section describes his participation in these works in such terms as; Jason Crew solo, jack-off and self-fuck scene & Flesh (2004), sucks and fucks Erik Rhodes in and out of a pool, which to me doesn't seem like a very encyclopedic way of putting it, however I suspect such terminology may be fairly standard within the industry and is widely understood outside of it.

The only pages I can find vaguely relevant to a guideline on this are WP:PORNSTAR & WP:SHIT, neither of which really help at all. wintonian ^talk 05:12, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a point of clear terminology, that's obscenity, not swearing. --Thnidu (talk) 06:47, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's not really the description of sexual activity I am querying just the profanity used to describe it, which I feel could be a little more grown-up. --wintonian ^talk 07:02, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED but according to WP:OM, material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available. Supdiop (Talk🔹Contribs) 07:01, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So it should be fine (if I read correctly) to use more mature descriptions, e.g. Flesh (2004), oral and anal intercourse with Erik Rhodes in and out of a pool? wintonian ^talk 07:09, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that would be fine. Supdiop (Talk🔹Contribs) 07:16, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem using those types of coarse words when listing film titles, for example. But I think that the "oral and anal intercourse" style of language is more encyclopedic. In general, I see little need to summarize the range of sex acts in a specific porn film, unless reliable, independent sources have devoted significant coverage to it beyond a "check list". No need for original research.Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:25, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I Must admit it did cross my mind whether it would be better to just remove the description of the actors role in the films as being unnecessary. Perhaps I should have a look round and see what the usual practice is here. - As for film (or other publications) titles, if that's what it's called then that's what it's called. wintonian ^talk 07:49, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That kind of detail, however colorfully or discretely described, is non-encyclopedic. It has nothing to do with WP:NOTCENSORED, but everything to do with WP:NOT#CATALOG. We do not exist to catalog the artists' repertoire, so to speak. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:51, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly right. That's what iafd.com is for, or so I am told...--ukexpat (talk) 15:48, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My two cents: —Yes, Wikipedia is not censored. But Wikipedians should auto-censor the free speech and free information if it may become offensive, vulgar or harassing. This is the same what you do for other people in a face-to-face communication when in your home or in the street or a shop: use the cultural, polite language whenever possible, not whenever forced to. Remember the Wikipedia contents is available to everyone and make it acceptable to everyone. That does not necessarily mean removing information which might be uncomfortable to others, but at least expressing it in a polite, cultural way. --CiaPan (talk) 15:33, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well I've tided it up now just keeping it as a list of films appeared in (with date where provided) and sorted by studio. I think even Mary Whitehouse might approve of the article now, and all without censoring anything. wintonian ^talk 18:22, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitable help on the list of NFL quarterbacks who have passed for 400 or more yards in a game[edit]

Hello, I'm just wondering if there is an automated way to flip Att. (attempt) and Comp. (completion) in this table here? The standard way to list QB stats is Comp./Att., which would read as 25/30 instead of the 30/25 this table is using. I would do it manually, but it's a large list, which is why I ask. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 06:13, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If I really wanted to do that, I would save the whole table on my PC as a text file, run a regular expression on it to do the swap, and upload it again. Maybe there's someone at Wikipedia:WikiProject_American_football who could help? Maproom (talk) 06:36, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We have regex in the edit window. Click "Advanced" above the edit box, click the Search and replace icon to the right and check "Treat search string as a regular expression". @Dissident93: I have made the change with regex.[1] I replaced (\| ?[WLT] .*\n)(\|.*\n)(\|.*\n) with $1$3$2. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:03, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thanks. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 18:22, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gap between templates[edit]

Hello! I'm slowly but surely getting angry due to this problem: While editing Nazi Germany paramilitary ranks, I saw that there is an ugly gap betwenn the two templates below. And I just can't figure out where it comes from and how to get rid of it. Could someone help me please? I'd be very glad about any support.--Uldra (talk) 09:04, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. There were two blank lines at the bottom of Template:Nazi Germany paramilitary ranks - X201 (talk) 09:12, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may need to bypass your browser cache to see the fix take effect. - X201 (talk) 09:15, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much!!! ;-) One more question: What is the "fix take effect"? Simple usage please - I'm a foreigner...--Uldra (talk) 09:36, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's just a way to say "...to see that the correction has worked": Noyster (talk), 09:54, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, gotcha! Sorry, I'm a bit worn out from that night... But it's all fine - the fix took effect! ;-) Thanks again.--Uldra (talk) 10:52, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MUSIKANIMAL[edit]

I WANT TO SPEAK WITH SOMEONE ABOUT THIS PERSON I AM HAVING PROBLEMS WITH - DO YOU HAVE A POSTAL ADDRESS AS I SEEM TO BE EXPERIENCING PROBLEMS WITH THE SYSTEM HERE AND THE TECHNOLOGY? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.52.98 (talk) 20:31, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please make it very simple as although English is my first language I am having significant problems with this; even to the extent I will be able to access this 'portal' or whatever again; which is why I requested to do it via email? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.52.98 (talk) 20:34, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm not sure what this is about, but if you wish to speak with me directly via email you can do so at Special:EmailUser/MusikAnimal — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:40, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia page: Michael Lawrence (writer)[edit]

Hello. While making a small edit to my page’s intro, I deleted a piece of background information that I considered a mis-credit, but on saving the page I found the following words substituted in red and black: Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing <ref>. Obviously I should not have deleted that line, but I can’t remember the precise wording and don’t know how to put it back. Can anyone advise me on this please? Thank you! Michael Lawrence — Preceding unsigned comment added by Withern (talk • contribs) 20:57, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The problem has been fixed by Wintonian. Maproom (talk) 21:07, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) What the error message says is "Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page)." (Note the slash in the closing </ref> tag.) The words "help desk" are in blue to tell you that they are a wikilink to a page with more guidance for you. If you do want to see an earlier version you can do so via the "history" tab, and if need be you can undo to go back. - David Biddulph (talk) 21:10, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Now fixed. You forgot to add the closure </ref> tag at the end. e.g.; "<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.orchardbooks.co.uk/AuthorDetails.aspx?id=2530&name=Michael+Lawrence|title=Michael Lawrence</ref>".

It wasn't just the closing </ref> tag that was missing; as the OP had noted he had accidentally deleted a whole line (including, inter alia, the closing }} of the cite web usage. I reinserted the missing line in this edit. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:58, 8 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You say "my page" could you elabrate? If you mean you are the subject of the article then Wikipedia does strongly discourage editing articles about yourself, see WP:COISELF. Also don't forget to sign you post with ~~~~ at the end.

wintonian ^talk 21:16, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I observe that the first reference in Michael Lawrence (writer) is to his publisher's web site (which anyway does not mention him), and the second is to his own web site. I guess both should be removed. Maproom (talk) 21:28, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]