On a wiki page about a person, there are some info in the upper right box that needs to be changed. But when I choose to edit the box, I’m presented a template with blank fields. I don’t want to recreate the box, only delete a couple of words. How do I do that?
If you’re using the visual editor, click Edit, click on the box, and it should have all the existing info there for you to change.
If you’re using the source code editor, click Edit, scroll down just a few lines and the infobox should be near the top, something like:
{{Infobox officeholder
|name = whoever
Change that
Select the EDIT tab to edit the page as a whole. Near the top of the edit page you’ll see something like this which you can change as you like.
{{Infobox person
| name = Tom Baker
| image = Tom Baker.jpg
| image_size = 220px
| caption = Baker in 2010
| birth_name = Thomas Stewart Baker
| birth_date = {{Birth date and age|1934|1|20|df=true}}
| birth_place = [[Liverpool]], [[Lancashire]], England <!-- Please note: in 1934 Liverpool was part of Lancashire. Things change over the years -->
| occupation = Actor, writer
| years_active = 1968–present
| spouse = Anna Wheatcroft<br>(1961–1966; divorced)<br>[[Lalla Ward]]<br>(1980–1982; divorced)<br>Sue Jerrard<br>(1986–present)
| children = 2
| website = {{url|https://www.tombakerofficial.com/}}
}}
Than you both. But it doesn’t seem to work. One is redirected to what seems to be a “database” with the data, where I can’t edit the fields. Meanwhile, looking at the HTML of the article, all the fields are empty, so I can’t just change a value.
I notice now that this wiki page’s “biography box” has the link (translated to English): “Edit Wiki Data.” Many pages does not have this link and work as you two describe it.
Okay, so I’m sitting here browsing wiki page after page, person after person, but am unable to find a single one that has this link, except the one I wanted to edit. Typical really. 
Please link to the specific page you’re having trouble with.
You say it’s translated. Does this mean it’s on a foreign-language Wikipedia?
It may be that specific page has been page-protected because of persistent vandalism (not suggesting you, OP, but by wiki-vandals), so you need to have auto-confirmed privileges to be able to edit.
WHOA …
First you need to go to the TALK PAGE … post there the change you want to make … then WAIT two weeks, see if any other editors agree with you or not … then make the changes to the article … just changing the article is going to get tagged as vandalism and the change reverted … follow Wikipedia’s procedures, any change to the article has to be discussed and you’re going to have pony up your reference right away …
As Peter Morris suggests, it might be helpful to post a link to the specific page.
Nope.
Do it anyways, and then only discuss it if you get reverted.
What’s the link to the page you want to edit?
The reality is that any major page is policed by long-timers who don’t like newcomers. If you’re going to edit something, provide good cites right away or expect it to get reverted just because.
If you’re an anonymous editor editing without a cite, it’s just a waste of your time… “Be bold” is feel-good bullshit that doesn’t reflect the reality of Wikipedia’s editor hierarchy and entrenched culture
Yeah, the reality is that you’ll get reverted no matter what … there’s an entrenched elite there and newcomers are NOT welcome … one can spend a hell of a lot of time trying to fix a spelting mistake and in the end fail …
The problem there as I see it is there’s WAY too many people running around acting like they’re administrators when they’re not … and the actual administrators are doing nothing about it … compare that to here and tell me what I can or cannot post, you’re going to get modded right quick … that doesn’t happen on Wikipedia anymore …
Just point out the torque vector is pointed the wrong way and everyone there yells … to this very day the damn torque vector is pointed the wrong way and no ones seems to care … or even notice … sheesh …
None of that matches my experience at all on Wiki.
It’s been enough of a problem that several news stories and studies (at least) have been written on it:
It’s also 90% male and hostile towards women contributors:
And Wikipedia itself decided to come up with a behavioral “guideline” to help the issue:
As far as I know, these aren’t really working and over time it’s becoming more and more autocratic, a victim of its own success. What started as an egalitarian pet project turned into the world’s single most authoritative encyclopedia, and with it came the ego of old bored men wanting to dictate reality…
Moderator Note
I’m not sure how this is relevant to informing someone how to edit a fact box. Let’s stick to technical aspects here, and take the discussion of Wiki policies to a more appropriate forum such as Great Debates or the Pit.
This goes for everyone.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
huh. I see what you mean - that is weird. It’s as if the text in the info-box is hidden; displays in the article, but not in the box. I understand your frustration, but I’m afraid I don’t know the answer.
At a guess, since it’s about Jung, I think there may be some sort of extra protection on it. I wouldn’t be surprised if his article doesn’t attract a lot of vandals.
You could try asking at the Teahouse on English wiki; I don’t know if they have an equivalent on this one (forgive my guess: Swedish wiki?) The Teahouse is meant to be a place where you can go with issues like formatting.
Yes, it is Swedish wiki page on Jung. It is ill written, uninformed and without quotes and so forth. Pretty much like it was some teenagers doing some school work on the article without reading any books on the subject. Nothing wrong with that, I guess, but I thought I fix a few things and perhaps add some of my knowledge (with quotes, mind you).
But while I started out on a biography (I’ve read about 5-10 biographies on the guy), I wanted to change some of the data on the ”fact box” – but I could not.
So I thought like you did – is it becuase this highly uniformed bio on Jung is ”protected” as if he was controversial 2018? So I looked around and found out that I can do whatever I want on Hitler, Einstein and Clinton, or who ever my brain’s randomizer suggests. So that surely cannot be the reason (I sincerely hope not :-)).
So, well, hence the Straight Dope.