Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The Wikipedia help desk is a place where you can ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia. For other types of questions, use the search box or the reference desk.
  • For other types of questions, see Help:Contents and Are you in the right place? If you have comments about a specific article, use that article's talk page.
  • Do not provide your email address or any other contact information. Answers will be provided on this page only.
  • We are all volunteers, so sometimes replies can take some time. Please be patient. Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
  • If you need real-time help, you can join our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
  • If you are a new editor, you might prefer to ask your question at the Teahouse, an area specifically for new users to get help with editing, article creation and general Wikipedia use, in a friendly environment.
  • Remember to sign your post by adding 4 tildes (~~~~) at the end of your post. Alternatively, you can click on the signature icon (OOjs UI icon signature-ltr.svg) on the edit toolbar.

January 15[edit]

Why was my edit removed?[edit]

This was my first attempt at using the software to edit a page. I rewrote the page entitled A Course in Miracles -- a three day project. My revision was up for a short time and then deleted. I would appreciate knowing why.David_A_Scott (talk) 06:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

You seem to have fundamentally misunderstood the purpose of the article, and of Wikipedia. The author of A Course in Miracles may very well claim that Jesus, via 'an inner voice' is responsible for the content of her work. Wikipedia, however will do no such thing. And nor will it fill the remainder of the article with credulous waffle taking the author's word as, well, gospel, and promoting the book accordingly. Beyond that obvious issue, there are multiple problems with formatting, referencing etc, which could of course be rectified - but frankly, I'd advise you not to bother trying to learn how to do such things until you have figured out what Wikipedia is actually for. AndyTheGrump (talk) 07:17, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Also, while the current article is not necessarily exemplary, if you look at the citations you'll notice that they are independent from the book or author(s). This is on purpose: WP articles are a tertiary source and written about the topic, summarizing independent secondary sources. The book is considered a primary source and to avoid original research editors should avoid interpreting it directly themselves. The purpose of the article is not to persuade readers with the book's arguments and should instead reflect how others perceived those arguments. —PaleoNeonate – 12:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
@ David_A_Scott : I was the editor who reverted your edits. I fully support the previous comments. You should have noticed my comments when I reverted your edits. I did so because your edits contained multiple style, formatting and policy errors, far too many to expect any other edit to improve. So the appropriate action was to revert your edits completely. It is also not usually a good idea for any editor, especially a new one, to unilaterally decide to rewrite an article to any substantial degree, particularly all at once. This is more than likely to create problems. It is much better to start with a few small edits and then see if other editors accept them or not. If they don't then the most appropriate place to discuss things is on the article's talk page. I hope these comments are helpful. Best wishes, Afterwriting (talk) 21:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation hatnote consistency between all entries for people with the same or a close name[edit]

As I'm writing this, all people named Margaret Hamilton with Wikipedia entries (and one named Maggie Hamilton also listed in the disambiguation page) have hatnotes linking back to the disambiguation page, except Margaret Hamilton (software_engineer). (Not all did initially, but Margaret Hamilton (publisher) did, and I added them to all others for consistency. My addition to Margaret Hamilton (software engineer) was first reverted with an edit summary that led me to think the wording of my hatnote was the reason, so I changed all hatnotes (including putting in a revised version of the reverted one) to what I thought was the better wording. That was reverted as well, and my question about the reasons for the inconsistency still has no answer after 2.5 weeks, so I decided to ask here: what difference do people see between this Margaret Hamilton and the others I changed in the same way (none of which were reverted), that justifies the exception ywp other editors seem to be insisting on? If my impression that all such pages should be consistently hatnoted (all or none) which is it, and does it need to be discussed on Talk:Margaret Hamilton (publisher) since that page had one before I started this?

Subsidiary question: do I (or someone) need to link to here from my initial question? The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 07:47, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@PauAmma: The reversions were correct and linked WP:NAMB to explain them. You should have removed the hatnote on Margaret Hamilton (publisher) to get consistency, not add hatnotes to a bunch of other articles. Activity on different articles vary greatly and it's just a coincidence that your oher hatnotes haven't been removed yet. You quoted WP:NAMB: "There are cases where some editors strongly believe that such hatnotes should be included, such as the various articles about treaties called Treaty of Paris." Margaret Hamilton (software engineer) is not such a case since the other people at Margaret Hamilton are in completely different fields. Treaty of Paris has dozens of treaties which are only disambiguated by the year. Lots of readers will not know the exact year of a treaty they are looking for so they easily end up on the wrong page. Maggie is a common nickname for Margaret so I would keep a hatnote on Maggie Hamilton but remove the rest. Hatnotes are generally for cases where readers may see an article name and incorrectly think that's the article they want. There will probably be a few readers who have no idea of the occupation of the Margaret Hamilton they are searching for but it's rare compared to not knowing whether a treaty is from 1810, 1812, 1814 or 1815. Hatnotes are a distraction to readers who are already on the right page so we rarely use them when the article name is not easily confused. It would be appropriate to link this discussion from Talk:Margaret Hamilton (software engineer)#Why no disambiguation link for just this Margaret Hamilton? PrimeHunter (talk) 15:32, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
The revert included WP:NAMB in the edit summary. That is a link to the guideline that says It is usually preferable not to have a hatnote when the name of the article is not ambiguous. It explains why it is unnecessary. It goes on to explain that this is only a guideline, not a policy that has to be followed in all cases - which explains the inconsistency you noticed. MB 15:23, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Combined answer to both: you both say, if I understand you right, that the removal from Margaret Hamilton (software engineer) is how it should be. One then goes on to address consistency by saying other hatnotes should be removed as well, the other doesn't address consistency. My conclusion is twofold: 1- I have invested all the time and energy on this that I could afford to and justify to myself, so whoever straightens this out, it won't be me; 2- removing that hatnote made Wikipedia a tiny bit less useful to me as a mostly reader (if you check my contributions, you'll see they're overwhelmingly correcting typos, grammar, and red links) and removing the other hatnotes would take it further in that direction; I'm starting to think that editors, or some of them, are treating policies as an end in itself and not a mean to the end of usefulness to readers. I believe that whichever Margaret Hamilton a search engine takes me to, being able to tell this isn't the one I want is only part of the problem hatnotes solve, and a small one at that. The more important part is letting readers know there are other homonymous entries and provide an easy way to navigate to them. But as I said, whether that hatnote is restored and whatever becomes of the other hatnotes is no longer a worry of mine. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 22:30, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
@PauAmma: Based on [1] you made the external search https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Margaret+Hamilton to find a nurse and clicked on a link saying "Margaret Hamilton (software engineer) - Wikipedia", knowing it was the wrong person but hoping to find easy navigation to a Wikipedia article about the nurse. I don't know how common that scenario is. I assume you wouldn't have clicked the NASA link to look for a NASA article about the nurse. If people want to find a Wikipedia article and not another website then why not search Wikipedia itself? A search here goes straight to Margaret Hamilton where the nurse is listed first. Has Wikipedia become so ubiquitous that people commonly choose a Wikipedia article in external search results even though they know it's the wrong topic? I would have guessed that if people use an external search engine and don't get the wanted topic in the hits then they refine the search. https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Margaret+Hamilton+nurse has Margaret Hamilton (nurse) as the top result. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:59, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
I can't remember at this point whether I noticed the (software engineer) bit and still clicked hoping for a hatnote that would lead me to the right article or a disambiguation page (because a lot of entries, of those I've visited, have such a hatnote), or didn't notice it, so to answer your question, maybe. Also, consider the following scenario, variants of which have happened to me: news item: "Margaret Hamilton has a new book coming." someone: *thinks* "Who's Margaret Hamilton"? *uses DDG to find out*, and note that the Margaret Hamilton this is about may just as well be the book publisher, the software engineer, or someone with that name but no Wikipedia entry, so it's not at all obvious which entry would be the correct one, or even that there is a single correct entry. Being led to the software engineer's Wikipedia entry and not finding either mentions of a new book coming or a path to entries for the homonymous people could very easily lead to thinking Wikipedia has no information about that book. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 01:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I agree with the OP that the hatnote would improve the usability for the reader. @PauAmma: it's not only external searches that are used this way. I have looked over a reader's shoulder as they typed "Epping" into the WP search bar. This pops up a list of hits to choose from. They were looking for the Epping in New South Wales, Australia, and that is clearly marked a few entries down - but they ignored it and picked the first one. When I asked why, they were confused by the question, and said something like "this is the first article about Epping so it's the best one." I'm sure some users are very sophisticated in their use of search engines etc. And some are not. We should cater for both.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
A hatnote is a significant help for readers who are looking for an article it leads to, while it's only a small annoyance to skip for readers who aren't. But there are probably far more readers of the latter type when the page name cannot be mistaken for the other subjects. The first Google hit on "Donald" is Donald Trump. Should it have a hatnote to Donald for readers who were looking for other Donald's (not called Trump)? Probably not. Should American Idol (season 8) use a hatnote for easier navigation to other seasons? Probably not. Other seasons are already fairly easy to find by clicking links in the article. The question is where to draw the line. We usually (not always) omit hatnotes on people if a disambiguation in parentheses doesn't apply to other subjects with Wikipedia articles. I think it varies more whether place names like Liverpool, Texas have a hatnote for subjects which aren't in Texas. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Your argument, to me, seems to boil down to: even though the perceived inconvenience of it being present to an individual reader not using or needing it is very minor and the real help to one needing or using it is major, the combined annoyance to the large majority not needing it trumps the combined benefit to the minority needing it, so whether to do it at all should be decided case by case. Did I understand it right? The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 12:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I wouldn't say case by case. We have guidelines and practices which cover many cases. The prevailing practice for biographies is no hatnote if the full page name has clear disambiguation. Some pages don't follow the practice, sometimes because an editor didn't know the practice. Readers can enter "Margaret Hamilton" in our search box (or alter the url) so it's not that hard to find the other articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I submit that even then, reader convenience, which includes not having to type text, edit URLs or know how and when to do that, or navigate to the Wikipedia search box or the URL bar in the browser, all of which can be and often are impossible hoops to jump through for people with motor disabilities, should always trump overconcision. Those policies, as they seem to be applied, look ablist to me and should be revised with that in mind. How do I go about suggesting that? This is similar to why access ramps for wheelchair users are mandated by law in most places, even though many people don't need them or find them useful and some deem them eyesores. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 01:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
The main guideline is WP:NAMB (which was changed after this discussion began). Suggestions can be posted on the talk page but there is already Wikipedia talk:Hatnote#Hatnotes in articles with unambiguous titles so don't start a new section. An archive search of NAMB [2] finds other discussions. I actually made a script User:PrimeHunter/Base title.js but haven't promoted it. It could be mentioned in some places but few users would probably install it. I think your access ramp analogy is exaggerated. Wikipedia is one of the most interlinked websites. Margaret Hamilton (software engineer) has around 150 links to other articles (300 if you include the navigation boxes at the bottom). You can always add more links but we also have a guideline MOS:OVERLINK about that. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Michael Fidler[edit]

I refer to your comments below.

Hello, I'm Serols. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Michael Fidler, but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Serols (talk) 16:33, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Michael Fidler. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Serols (talk) 19:21, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Please note that I have registered as an Editor and regarding the article on Michael Fidler – my late Father-in-Law - all the information was taken from the book ‘Michael Fidler – A Study in Leadership’ which was written by the historian Bill Williams. This source was provided at the end of the article. It is therefore unclear to me why my updated version is being rejected by Wikipedia.

I look forward to finding out how I can rectify the situation.

Yigal Levine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yigeolev (talkcontribs) 11:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

@Yigeolev: if the source is a book, you need to use {{cite book}} to reference it. Mjroots (talk) 15:00, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
@Yigeolev, welcome to Wikipedia! After a brief look, I can see several problems. Some, in no particular order:
This version [3] has no inline references whatsoever. Neither did the previous version [4] but note what you removed from that version, that is not improvement. A WP-bio is meant to be a summary of WP:RS independent of the topic, so several references is wanted. If you want to make significant edits to WP. you need to learn how to add inline citations here, see WP:TUTORIAL, and include pagenumbers etc.
Don't refer to the subject by first name in a WP-bio.
Language like "Michael was a good and quick learner", "A forceful and eloquent speaker, he..." and "He had lived a full and meaningful life, on the local, national and international stage in both the Jewish Community and the political world. He was a lifelong Zionist, he would have been pleased to know that his 2 children now both live in Israel, as do 5 of his 6 grandchildren and 17 of his 19 great grandchildren." does not fit on WP, see WP:NEUTRAL and WP:FLOWERY.
Your source [5] may have been selfpublished, see WP:SPS, and may be problematic because of that. If you have WP:COPYPASTEd text from the book, don't do that.
Also, see WP:BRD and WP:Conflict of interest. Pinging @Serols. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Without sources, the change is not acceptable. Only to write Source: Michael Fidler – A Study in Leadership by Bill Williams is not a source. Regards --Serols (talk) 16:16, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Clarification on self-published sources in BLPs[edit]

I have a question about the interpretation of WP:BLPSPS, which says not to use self-published sources as sources of material about a living person. If a person is on the board of an organization (whether it be a company or a charity), often the only record of that will be on the organization's web site or in their Annual Report - both of which are self-published by the organization. Nevertheless, it seems to me they are reliable sources about that particular information. So does this guideline forbid the use of those sources, and hence most board roles in articles?--Gronk Oz (talk) 14:47, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

IMO, yes, the org website (at least if it's a notable org) can be an RS for the fact, BUT. It doesn't help the argument for WP:N, and, if the org is the only source that bothered to notice, it can be argued that inclusion fails WP:PROPORTION. If the board-ship matters, shouldn't an independent source have noticed? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång:Sorry if I wasn't clear - I'm not talking about using this to contribute to notability. I'm just trying to give a complete picture of the main aspects of the person, and it seems to me that a board membership should be included. I don't know that I have ever seen media sources which listed who sits on a board, so if that is required then board service would be left out of Wikipedia articles, to their detriment.--Gronk Oz (talk) 16:43, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Yeah, but the board of what? Government Office for Science or a local charity? "Organization" covers a lot, and I would not be ok with a primary source in all cases. As an example, I thought this [6] was a reasonable edit. To me a "board of an organization" in a bio seems similar to an award or selfpublished book, secondary sources is preferable, existing is not enough. But if the award is a pulitzer or the board is The Trump Organization, primary source will probably do. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Smile.gif Thanks! --Gronk Oz (talk) 17:35, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Lfstevens deleted 25% of Applications of artificial intelligence[edit]

User:Lfstevens deleted 25% of Applications of artificial intelligence this needs a review... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 17:37, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done Looks like Lfstevens improved the flow of the writing, removed a lot of promotional guff, and generally improved the article. I'm going to go and give them a barnstar. Girth Summit (blether) 17:50, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
But, more generally, 0mtwb9gd5wx, if you disagree with edits that an editor has made to an article, the proper course of action is to open a discussion with that editor, preferably on the article's talk page: see WP:BRD. Reviewing changes is not the function of the Help Desk (though Girth Summit has chosen to do so), and talking about an editor without discussing it with them first is certainly bad manners. --ColinFine (talk) 17:55, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
I am justly (if very mildly) rebuked. Yes, I realise that reviewing changes is not the function of this noticeboard; I suppose I was just trying to make the point that sometimes articles need some aggressive pruning to get them into decent shape. This particular one was bloated with citespam, promotional editorialising and the like - I'm genuinely grateful to Lfstevens for tackling it. Girth Summit (blether) 18:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Archiving noticeboard topics[edit]

This sounds like a bit of a newbie question, but what is the custom/convention for archiving noticeboard topics? Sometimes I will see a noticeboard discussion that has been resolved (for example, I know of one at WP:COIN). Are non-admins permitted to do this? Does it differ between noticeboards? Just curious... thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:20, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

WP:COIN is automatically archived by a bot that runs daily, and the same applies to most other busy noticeboards. You can find the archiving parameters at the top of the page's wikitext. --David Biddulph (talk) 21:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Editing mistake[edit]

Hi I think I've made a mistake in trying to correct something which didn't look right, for which I do apologise and please could you fix the problem it said in the squad tab that christian eriksens name appeared I tried just removing the name. Apologies again — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.25.173.132 (talk) 22:56, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done Maproom (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

I cant publish a translated article[edit]

Hi, I have translated this article User:SimonLuzuriaga/Golden sun from La Tolita but i can not publish it. I guess its because I do not have enough edits on english wikipedia. But I have heard that it is possible for someone else to publish it for me. It that right? and if that is the case, could someone do it please? — Preceding undated comment added 23:49, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, SimonLuzuriaga. You are correct that your account needs to be at least four days old and have made at least ten edits in order to publish an article. Please see WP:AUTOCONFIRMED. It is unlikely that any other editor will move your draft to main space unless they are reasonably fluent in Spanish and have an interest and competence in the topic area. So, I suggest that you spend the next three days improving your draft and improving other articles here on the English Wikipedia, and then move the draft to the main space of the encyclopedia when you are eligible to do so. Cullen328 (talk) 02:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

January 16[edit]

Article: Suit[edit]

Hi!, this is a question for User:Andethyst

Thank you for having informed me that you reverted my change. But I insist :-) that the man's tie on that photo is not long enough - the ending is above his belt so that there is a gap, showing the shirt. A tie's ending should go down to the trousers rather than showing that gap. I think it is appropriate to say "notice that the tie is not long enough", given the fact that folks need help how to dress properly. Thanks for listening, Aristobulus — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.0.115.169 (talk) 03:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

If you want to talk to the specific user, the place to do so is User talk:Andethyst. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
...or, per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, you could post on Talk:Suit, and {{ping}} Andethyst to join the conversation. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
When you try to persuade Andethyst, or anyone else, of such an assertion as "A tie's ending should go down to the trousers rather than showing that gap", you'll need to cite a reliable source for it. -- Hoary (talk) 08:44, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
77.0.115.169, you are apparently posting from Germany; the photo in question is of a man in Australia – do you seriously think that minor points of male fashion worldwide are all exactly the same as they are in Germany, or that everyone in a particular place has to conform to the same "rules" exactly, with no room for personal preferences? In any case, the article is about Suits, not Ties, and barely mentions let alone discusses the latter, so it is not appropriate to insert (unsupported) advice about them in a photo caption. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.195.175.103 (talk) 21:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
There are no exceptions to the proper length of a tie: The tip must be in the middle of the waistband. Those rules shall be rigorously enforced on Wikipedia. No photos of ties that are worn incorrectly! Vexations (talk) 22:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I propose deleting all images on Commons that display improperly worn ties.[Humor]NJD-DE (talk) 22:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
While you're at it, delete all the other photos of fashion mistakes.[Humor] --Gronk Oz (talk) 23:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Oh, BROTHER! Don't you just love people who haven't got a clue what Wikipedia is, who have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to contribute, and want to contribute it anyway? Uporządnicki (talk) 23:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Category help[edit]

Hi Folks!! I've forgotten howto categories. It's been a while. I created Alina Anisimova and I've created Category:Kyrgyzstan women engineers but it is not showing up in Category:Women engineers by nationality I added the base categories into Category:Kyrgyzstan women engineers, but nothig is showing. I've missed something? scope_creepTalk 10:28, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

I've tweaked your question to show the links to the categories. It will then make it easier to answer your question--David Biddulph (talk) 10:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
You should have put Category:Kyrgyzstan women engineers into Category:Women engineers by nationality, and not put Alina Anisimova into the latter as she is in the former. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
You might usefully look at a few of the other nationality entries in Category:Women engineers by nationality to see what are appropriate parent categories for Category:Kyrgyzstan women engineers. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
@David Biddulph: I really did. I'll do it. scope_creepTalk 11:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
@David Biddulph: That worked. scope_creepTalk 11:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Help needed in a dispute[edit]

I need help in finding the appropriate place for reporting problems I am encountering in a disagreement with another editor. The issue is the validity of a source for verifying a significant claim in a fairly prominent article (1 million annual views). I had posted an accuracy dispute template to the section where the source was being used and explained my concerns on the article's talk page. I then had a short exchange with the editor in question who without providing what I thought was a satisfactory response removed the template. I was reluctant to reapply it, but after a lengthier discussion, it appeared my original questions were valid or at least needed a closer look. So I informed the editor I was going to post the template again and respectfully asked that he allow it to stand until other editors could provide input. He ignored that request and removed the template. It is highly unlikely that any further discussions will resolve the matter. This is the first time I have experienced a situation like this, and I'm not able to find exactly where I should post a request for assistance. Thank you. Allreet (talk) 12:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Alfreet. Dispute resolution lays out the appropriate steps. --ColinFine (talk) 14:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, Allreet, mispinged. --ColinFine (talk) 15:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Titanic sinking[edit]

Is this footage real or fake?

https :// youtu. be/ v2p9A2bVCBw

--37.116.102.74 (talk) 17:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi there! The Wikipedia Help desk is only for questions about using Wikipedia. You could try submitting the URL to Snopes or Captain Disillusion for them to investigate. GoingBatty (talk) 17:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
You could try Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. youtu. be is somehing of a bad sign. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:33, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

GrowthExperiments log[edit]

An item popped up on my Watchlist for this log. Why?--Bbb23 (talk) 21:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

@Bbb23: The full log is at Special:Log/growthexperiments – earlier some folks were playing around with the mentor/mentee features which are part of the Growth Team project. If you've watchlisted the talk page of any of the "claimed" users, it would show up as a log event. DanCherek (talk) 23:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
@DanCherek: Perfect. Thanks! --Bbb23 (talk) 23:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Editors on the spectrum[edit]

I've recently encountered issues that might have not happened if other editors knew the editor in question was on the spectrum. Do we have an essay to inform editors that it's worth considering, and how to inoffensively ask? valereee (talk) 22:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

There is theoretically an essay. It's horrifically offensive and I would have it MfDed in seconds if I thought that'd be productive. Such is the tricky part -- individual views of "what autism means in the context of Wikipedia" are so wildly disparate that I'm not sure what consensus could be sought here. (One particular issue I've noticed coming up is that the people who publicly disclose autism, such as on their userpages, are a very unrepresentative sample of all editors the term can be applied to, in ways that can perpetuate misconceptions.) Vaticidalprophet 23:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Yes, that's the rub. It's horrifically offensive to ask. But in the case I'm looking at, if folks had realized...maybe there would have been a better outcome. valereee (talk) 23:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Well, it's not necessarily offensive to ask. What can be offensive is what people come in with -- including what people who [identify with the term/consider the term relevant to their own Wikipedia editing] come in with. The tricky thing, as it is, is that a lot of Wikipedia disputes that are outside identified as "someone is being misunderstood for being autistic" are really "someone is being misunderstood because the way they are autistic is not the way their interlocutor is autistic". Very often the response to "hey, that guy's doing that because he's autistic" is "yeah, so am I and I'm not doing that" -- that is, the fact someone happens to think in a way divergent from the mainstream cultural context is of fairly complicated relevance to an environment itself divergent from the mainstream cultural context. (And in many cases where one or both participants wouldn't self-identify with the term, it could still be reasonably applicable.) Tamzin's solution is the best I've found. Vaticidalprophet 00:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry, that seems to be simply a link to Tamzin's user? valereee (talk) 01:03, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
It's a ping so she can explain it if she wants -- I don't trust myself not to butcher the explanation :) Vaticidalprophet 01:10, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
@Valereee: I assume Vati is referring to this, from User:Tamzin § Four rules I try to follow:

I contend that every person who edits Wikipedia without compensation and in good faith has a mind that works a bit differently from the rest of the society. As a practical matter this means that I try to treat everyone like they're somewhere on the autism spectrum... since most of them either are or have subclinical symptoms thereof. Even if someone isn't on or near the spectrum, there's still no harm done by treating them with a little extra AGF and putting a bit more thought into how I phrase things.

There's a pinned conversation on my talkpage about exactly what I mean by that, which can be summarized as: We edit Wikipedia because we see things that need to be a certain way but aren't. For some of us, that's an autistic trait. For others, it's a neurodivergent-but-not-autistic trait. (It comes up in ADHD and anxiety disorders, for instance.) And for others, it's neither of the above... but still by definition a sentiment that sets them apart from the general population. I say "by definition" because if most people cared as much about fixing things that aren't right as Wikipedians do, most people would be Wikipedians. And so most conflict we see on Wikipedia comes from, as Vati alludes to, one person needing things to be right in one way, and another person needing things to be right in another way. Hence the tendency that some of our bitterest disputes are about the most trivial things. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

January 17[edit]

Article for deletion[edit]

I'm new to wikipedia, and I wanted to know if this article should be deleted, and if so, how can I propose it for deletion: TidalCycles, in my opinion the article reads like an obvious advertisement, its been mostly written by kindohm (a member of the tidalcycles community) and Yaxu (its author). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uwsi (talkcontribs) 01:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Uwsi, welcome to Wikipedia! Not at all my subject, but at least one of the sources, CDM Create Digital Music, seems like a WP:BLOG. I have seen worse articles, but that doesn't mean this is a good one.
If you want to start a deletion discussion, my advice is this: First do WP:BEFORE. Still want to go ahead? Then enable WP:TWINKLE, and start the afd with that, it's so much easier than doing it "by hand." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Request Help for proper way to reference Entry through Gale.[edit]

I'm using Gale through the Wikipedia Library and have found a biographical entry that I would like to reference, but I can't figure out how to. I'm pretty sure the URL isn't stable (someone else doing a search will probably get a different one, and I *think* it would be better as cite book or cite journal, but I can't tell. If someone has a better place to ask, please let me go.

https://go-gale-com.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/ps/retrieve.do?tabID=Biographies&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchResultsType=MultiTab&hitCount=1&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&currentPosition=1&docId=GALE%7CK1645532244&docType=Brief+biography&sort=Relevance&contentSegment=ZXAM-MOD1&prodId=BIC&pageNum=1&contentSet=GALE%7CK1645532244&searchId=R2&userGroupName=wikipedia&inPS=true

Ideas?Naraht (talk) 02:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

The URL sends me to an Esther B. Jones. I can maybe help if that's the correct one. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 16:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Skarmory That is the correct one.Naraht (talk) 22:17, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
@Naraht: <ref>{{Cite book|url=https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/K1645532244/BIC?u=wikipedia&sid=bookmark-BIC&xid=eb617438|title=Who's Who Among African Americans|publisher=[[Gale (publisher)|Gale]]|year=2003|chapter=Esther B. Jones|access-date=January 18, 2022}}</ref>
That should work. Took a while, but works as a cite book. Should display as
"Esther B. Jones". Who's Who Among African Americans. Gale. 2003. Retrieved January 18, 2022.
Hope that helped! Skarmory (talk • contribs) 13:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Skarmory Thank you very much. I think the sid= can be dropped, but if wikipedia is dropped it asks for a user first. I'm going to use it now. :)Naraht (talk) 14:58, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
There's a copy link button in the top right I believe which is where I got that from. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 15:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Steamcenter[edit]

HELLO EVERYONE

THANKS

I AM UNBLOCKED

it was a shock for me too see i am blocked.

I use twitter and facebook as social #media where blocking etc. Is quick

But i saw wikipedia as a knowledge cobtribution thing not a place for blocking someone

Later was told i was never blocked on English. Some other language. Really hope Wikipedia can sonehow eliminate that.

I am interrupting developing my new article on floral tea still in draft form for a few days .

I love wikipedia. It is best available source of information but perhaps it can be improved. For that just launched a page on facebook called

Wikipedia users groyp Steamcenter (talk) 09:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)steamcenter.blogspot

Left in that typo for groyp for a reason explained there.

One immediate imprv. Is possible. Editing a page on

Kalu Singh Mahara noticed that info was great but English poor. Looks like a poor translation job. Did some to fix it. Perhaps there might be a way to check that. By sending it to drafts with a heading. This page needs language improvement. Otherwise students from my hometown uttarakhand copy it for school essay — Preceding unsigned comment added by talk:Steamcenter#top|talk]] • contribs) 09:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

 – Added section header and moved to bottom of page. GoingBatty (talk) 04:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi there i am a retired professor with a Phd and got onto wikipedia enthuiastically. I have been on it off and on many years ago and recall some of processes only. But it was great going until suddenly i find i am blocked for a month.

The reason could be a political one. Please can some one help.

This is just a hunch but i had made a change to one Hindutva activist listed as a notable in malhotra suname caste by name of Rajiv Malhotra . He rechanged it perhaps for political reasons using a group of similar minded persons maybe. If this be the case it is unjust and unfair. Wikipedia will then go down the road as others including twitter. google. Facebook etc being investigate for unfair practices in many countries

However, whatever be the cause please tell me the reason or do not say you are blocked because there are multiple blocks against you. Just say get out. We are in here to peagad and 1984 the world abd then i shall continue my social work in gray years elsewhere or perhaps committ suicide if life becomes impossible.

Please help!

If anyone is listening.

Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steamcenter (talkcontribs) 04:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Steamcenter

I have used the nane steamcenter for over a decade on the internet on various forums. My real name is Ashok — Preceding unsigned comment added by GoingBatty (talkcontribs) 04:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Steamcenter (talkcontribs) 04:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Steamcenter: Looking at the Block log, I don't see that the "Steamcenter" user has ever been blocked on the English Wikipedia. Could you please clarify? (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~.) GoingBatty (talk) 05:03, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Delete my Accounts[edit]

Due to bullying and not hearing me out, I ask that my account GADGET0000 be deleted from this site as this site will not let me create a page. I am not self promoting myself as I have no one who can make a page for me and my works in the Entertainment industry;and my books as an Author. I will be talking about this on my social media pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GADGET0000 (talkcontribs) 05:18, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@GADGET0000: Accounts cannot be deleted, as edits must be attributed to an account. If you wish to stop using Wikipedia, just stop using your account. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @GADGET0000: Hi there, and sorry you didn't have a good experience on Wikipedia. Per Wikipedia:Username_policy#Deleting_and_merging_accounts, "It is not possible to delete user accounts, as all contributions must be assigned to some identifier; either a username or an IP address." Please note that the encyclopedia articles on Wikipedia must be based on "multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject", per Wikipedia:Notability (people). GoingBatty (talk) 05:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

copyright permission[edit]

How do i submit evidence regarding a copyright issue?

--Timone13 (talk) 11:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)1/17/2022

You will find useful links at User talk:Timone13#Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Ade Bajomo. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Why was the page CHIDI CADET NWANYANWU DELETED?[edit]

Why was the page CHIDI CADET NWANYANWU DELETED? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chidinlub (talkcontribs) 11:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

There has never been a page with that title (even without all the unnecessary capitals). Your draft User:Chidinlub/Chidi Nwanyanwu is still there, but the history shows very little content, and certainly not any reliable sources to demonstrate the notability of the subject. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
There used to be Chidi Nwanyanwu which was moved to draftspace and later on deleted as an abandoned draft. Exact reasons can be found on the user talk page. – NJD-DE (talk) 11:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

MLK’s Dream speech[edit]

I was going to make an edit on the I have a dream speech page but it is protected. If you scroll to the bottom it ends in a note with who possesses the original transcript. There is an update from this past August at the following link if somebody does have access to make the edit and notate the source. https://www1.villanova.edu/villanova/president/speeches/message-08272021.html 2601:189:4300:72F0:7941:A46B:5E7C:5490 (talk) 15:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Stevie

Good catch and thanks for pointing it out, I added it. You could have asked at Talk:I Have a Dream, but OTOH that page hasn't been edited since 2019. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Where should I put a draft article - in the sandbox?[edit]

Hi! I am brand new to Wikipedia and wanted to do a draft article in the sandbox. I think this may be the wrong place for a draft article. How do I move it to the correct location? Also, how long does a draft article stay in the sandbox? Thank you! Leanne LeoKirk (talk) 20:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, LeoKirk, and welcome to Wikipedia. The common sandbox Sandbox is not a good place to start an article, because it gets cleared regularly. Your own sandbox User:LeoKirk/Sandbox is a good place to start one - if you are on a browser, there will be a link at the top of the screen to your sandbox. Another place (and in my view a preferable one) is in draft space, such as Draft:My article name (these link are red because they don't currently exist). There is no limit on how long a draft may remain in your sandbox or draft space, but if a draft is not edited for six months it may get deleted. your first article has a lot of useful information about creating an article.
However, I would caution: creating an article from scratch is much more difficult than it looks, and editors who try it before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works often have a frustrating and disappointing time. I would advise you to put this idea aside for a few months while you learn how things work by making improvements to some of our existing six million articles (many of which badly need it!). If you have further questions, you are welcome to come here, but the WP:Teahouse is another similar place which is specifically intended to be a friendly place for new editors to ask questions. --ColinFine (talk) 17:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Colin! I hope this gets to you because I did not know how to reply. Thank you very much for your help! Leanne LeoKirk (talk) 20:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict):@LeoKirk: Hi there! Creating a draft at User:LeoKirk/sandbox is perfectly fine. You may move it to Draft:Ruth Eiko Oda by going to the top right of the sandbox and clicking "More" > "Move", entering the new name, and clicking the "Move page" button. When you're ready to submit it for review, you can add {{subst:submit}} to the top. Drafts in your sandbox could stay forever, while drafts starting with "Draft:" are deleted after 6 months of inactivity. Before submitting your draft, I suggest you change each reference from "Clipped From Hawaii Tribune-Herald" to the actual newspaper article title. Also, articles should not have external links, except as references and the "External links" section, so you can convert them or remove them. To notify another editor about your reply, you can use the {{ping}} template, as I've done on this reply to you. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 18:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
@LeoKirk: Oops! You've already created Draft:Ruth Eiko Oda, but User:LeoKirk/sandbox has a lot more information. You can copy the text from your sandbox to your draft, continue updating it, and then click the "Submit draft for review!" button when you're ready. GoingBatty (talk) 18:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi, GoingBatty! I wasn't sure how to use the ping template, so I am typing this in. I hope you receive it. Thank you very much for all of your answers! They are a huge help to me! How do I see where my draft is? How were you able to see what I have created? I am having trouble finding my draft. Thank you! LeoKirk (talk) 20:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@LeoKirk: I use the {{ping}} template by typing {{ping|LeoKirk}} at the beginning of this line - see Template:Ping for more info. I see what you have created by going to Special:Contributions/LeoKirk. Your draft is at User:LeoKirk/sandbox, and it appears you started Draft:Ruth Eiko Oda as well. GoingBatty (talk) 20:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
@GoingBatty: Thank you very much, GoingBatty!  You have been very helpful!LeoKirk (talk) 20:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

how to add an article about a person[edit]

I simply wish to know how to submit an article into Wikipedia about a person who isn't included in the Wikipedia, yet. It seems that there are instructions available about how to edit an existing article, but I'm unclear about how to submit an altogether new article. What is the format it is to be written in? How is it to be submitted, and how is it decided whether to include it on the site? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uncle Bumps (talkcontribs) 18:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Try reading the guidance at WP:Your first article, but ensure that you understand Wikipedia's definition of notability, and particularly WP:NBIO. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Uncle Bumps Successfully creating a new article is the hardest thing to do on Wikipedia. It is usually recommended that you first gain experience by editing existing articles, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. Using the new user tutorial helps too.
If you still want to create a new article now, please read Your First Article and then go to Articles for creation to create and submit a draft(new users cannot create new articles directly). You should also review the notability guidelines for people. 331dot (talk) 18:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Synching Reading List across various devices[edit]

I have created a profile and pressed the synching button on the mobile app. It appears to confirm that it synched. I open Wikipedia on another mobile device, I sign in and synch, but no folders are displayed in the Reading List. Does anyone have this issue as well? What can be done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikrod23 (talkcontribs) 18:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mikrod23. According to MW:Wikimedia Apps/Synced Reading Lists, These articles are saved in a flat list (no folders or user metadata), and stored only locally to the device. --ColinFine (talk) 22:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Which base map was used for several IE culture maps by Krakkos?[edit]

On the file pages, it doesn't say where the map base image itself was sourced, so I'm thinking it's somewhere on wikicommons but I haven't been able to locate it yet. Examples:

98.14.187.118 (talk) 19:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

How to create my own page[edit]

Do you know how to create my own page? 2601:18C:8B81:B4B0:748D:5881:39E7:8416 (talk) 20:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

You're going to want to read Help:Your first article very carefully; articles should be of encyclopedic value and not promotional/slanderous/what have you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

William Redd[edit]

I was reading the information about Mr. William "Si" Redd. You have him attending East Mississippi Junior College. The correct college is East Central Junior College, located in Decatur Mississippi. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.231.160.236 (talk) 20:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

You can suggest improvements to an article on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 21:22, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi there! The LA Times reference states "While attending East Mississippi Junior College in Decatur..." It's possible that the LA Times made a mistake, but you'll need a reliable source when you post on Talk:William Redd. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Given that East Mississippi Junior (now Community) College is in Scooba, Mississippi, and that (as the OP says) East Central Junior (aka Community) College is in Decatur, Mississipi, it does appear that the LA Times has concatenated the two. Which of them William Redd attended evidently needs a different source. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.195.175.103 (talk) 00:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)


January 18[edit]

Question about uploading an image[edit]

Hi Everyone,

About a week ago, i recieved some guidance on uploading an image with an email template, but i realize that the user I am recieving the image from may not be using wikipedia, therefore they wont be able to upload the image themselves.

I wanted to add an image of Vladimir Torchilin to his Wikipedia page, but could not find an image that allowed for free use on the internet. I went on to email him, and he sent me an image of himself to use. How would i go about using this? Do i need anything further from him to allow me to use the image? Thanks, --RealPharmer3 (talk) 01:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

See WP:Donating copyrighted materials. --David Biddulph (talk) 06:05, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
How could we use the image of him, without having him create a wikipedia account and uploading himself? Is there a way he can give me permission to upload it on his behalf? @David Biddulph: --RealPharmer3 (talk) 16:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
See WP:Donating copyrighted materials. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Request for someone to review Tiancheng Lou[edit]

Hi. Can someone please review and mark this article? It has managed to be featured as did you know on the front page. Not sure how it is able to be approved for front page viewing but not still not marked down as reviewed.

-Imcdc (talk) 01:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Imcdc now done. Did you know and Wikipedia:New pages patrol are separate processes, so either can be done first. TSventon (talk) 14:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha (India)[edit]

Discussion that should be taking place on Talk:Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha, not here

This user Venkat TL is adding Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury as the Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha but he is not Leader of Opposition, he is the leader of INC in lok sabha. The post is vacant since 2014 has no party has 10% (55 seats) seats in Lok Sabha expect BJP. No official government website mention him as Leader of opposition in Lok Sabha. [[7]] [[8]] [[9]]

Nitesh003(TALK) 09:27, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

You are using a site that says it was last updated in 2015. Check the recent secondary sources I have added into the article. [P.S.: You should have started this thread on Talk:Leader of the Opposition in Lok Sabha. --Venkat TL (talk) 09:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Why they should update when there is no leader of opposition. Nitesh003(TALK) 09:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Go and ask Modi why he is not updating. Venkat TL (talk) 10:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Comment with facts.
[[10]] Nitesh003(TALK) 10:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
at least 55 seats are needed to become official opposition party but congress has only 55 seats. Nitesh003(TALK) 10:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Why are you posting old articles. I am not wasting my time in responding here anymore. Go and talk to The Pioneer (India) and fight with them Venkat TL (talk) 10:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Is The Pioneer more reliable than Government sources. Nitesh003(TALK) 10:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
In comparison to old government site that was not updated since 2015, of course. It is high time that you read and understand the difference between Primary, secondary and tertiary sources. Venkat TL (talk) 10:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
"Adhir Ranjan Chowdhury will
remain the Leader of Congress in Lok Sabha" from the above source you provided. Nitesh003(TALK) 10:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge[edit]

Ref number 118 and 125 - (the exact same refs, please do the "double-up" thing if you can) - are from a pdf; is that reasonable? They don't look correct to me , please help. Thank you very much 49.198.41.28 (talk) 10:15, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

They seem to have been added in your edits. The process to deal with it is at WP:NAMEDREFS. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

How to create my own Wikipedia page?[edit]

I have already logged in and provided all the relevant information about myself in the sandbox of Wikipedia now I want to publish the same in wiki page. Kindly provide me the process to publish the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pushpa Bajaj (talkcontribs) 10:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Pushpa Bajaj Please read Wikipedia:Autobiography. Venkat TL (talk) 10:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Also, your draft is not in English, so doesn't belong in the English Wikipedia, and you have no references to demonstrate the subject's notability. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Name Shivaji should be revised to Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj[edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shivaji

Please revise the name Shivaji to Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj.

Regards, Jeevan Chogale — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.48.216.226 (talk) 11:04, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

No. Please read WP:COMMONNAME Venkat TL (talk) 11:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
From a quick look at the references, there could be an argument that "Shivaji Maharaj" is the WP:COMMONNAME - although I suspect "Maharaj" is a honorific suffix in which case MOS:HON applies and it should not be included. (Any editor with any sort of knowledge about Indian honorifics is welcome to correct my guesses.) TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 11:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Navbar question[edit]

could you please tell me how to figure out the template:Navbar? Maybe if possible, could you please provide an example of its usage, or else simply explain what it is used for, and how it is used? I just went to view that template, and clicked "what links here." that took me to alkali metals, but I didn't see any link or transclusion to that template.

I've been here quite a while, so I should probably already know this, but I seem to be having some trouble. I appreciate any help. thanks. Please ping me when you reply. ---Sm8900 (talk) 🌍 12:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

oh wait, I think I get it now. {{navbar}} is simply the three tiny links in the upper-left corner of a template, that provide the links labeled as "V T E," to edit the navbox? So I guess that the only actual template that I would use for this is {{navbox}}? thanks. ---Sm8900 (talk) 🌍 13:05, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
@Sm8900: {{Navbar}} only makes "V T E" or similar links. What to use depends on what you want to do. Most editors never use {{Navbar}} directly but may use {{Navbox}} and other navigation templates which call {{Navbar}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:15, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

New editors[edit]

Hello, can you tell me is there a place for new editors, in a sense that you can go trough some process that follow you all the way? Like, semi automatic editing. I was talking with friend of mine who knows little bit, but he cannot tell me that much. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nox Lumen (talkcontribs) 15:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC) --Nox Lumen (talk) 15:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello Nox Lumen. I left a generic welcome message on your talk page, which has some helpful links. In addition to the links in that message, you may be looking for something like The Wikipedia Adventure, which is a sort of gamified tutorial. Let me know if you have questions or are looking for something different. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
There's also a place for newcomers to ask questions like here at the Help desk located at WP:TEA. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 15:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Information on band's own website is wrong?[edit]

I came across Draft:GAUPA which states that "gaupa" means "lynx" in Swedish. I speak Swedish quite well and had never heard of that word, Swedish for "lynx" is "lodjur". According to Wiktionary, "gaupa" means "lynx" in Icelandic, not Swedish. However, even the band's own website claims "gaupa" means "lynx" in Swedish, which is odd considering they seem to be Swedish themselves and don't understand their own language. Should Wikipedia perpetuate this erroneous information because it's based directly on the source, or mention that it is erroneous? JIP | Talk 15:18, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@JIP, I'd never heard it either, but lo and behold, according to sv-WP they have a point. I rather like "Kattegöba." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:38, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
See also "göpa" in Svenska Akademiens ordbok. —Wasell(T) 15:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Can't argue with S. Lagerlöf. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
@JIP: In general, it's possible that two reliable sources disagree with each other. In that case, the article can state something like "While X states this fact,[1] Y states this other fact.[2]" Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
  • The Swedish Wikipedia article, cited above, states "Folkligt kallades lodjur förr för göpa" which google translate leads me to believe says "People used to call lynx "göpa". Seems cromulent. --Jayron32 16:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Reference X
  2. ^ Reference Y

Using images I created from pictures taken of a mural in Mexico[edit]

I have been given 7 days to address issues related to images I used in an article about a mural in Oaxaca City, Mexico. Here is a link to the article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oaxaca_en_la_historia_y_en_el_mito. First question. Can I discuss this here or do I need to connect to folks at Wiki Commons? If I do, I would be grateful if you could provide a link to where I have to go.

If this is the right spot to raise my question, you will see on every image is a 7 day deletion warning. I added some text today to explain my right to use the images. Is that sufficient. The artist died a few years ago and I am in touch with his daughter. If I need to get some sort of permission from her, please tell me what it is.

Thanks for your consideration ArbyBB (talk) 15:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

You should probably go to the Commons Help Desk. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 15:37, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Nonsense[edit]

Our article The source
... a historical shaman priestess who became one of the most important Fujian goddesses and chief deity of the Lüshan Sect ... one of the most important goddesses in Southeast China (the chief deity of the Lushan sect).... A historical shaman priestess who became ...

can be copyright violation? "blah blad is a actor and one of the successful actors in Indian Cinema or chair of the Hindi Film Org" also copyrighted ? For further information User talk:VocalIndia#Speedy deletion of Chen Jinggu VocalIndia (talk) 16:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

VocalIndia, referring an argument to a different page can be helpful, though I think Copyright problems would be a better place than the Help desk. Copying just one side of an argument to a different page is FORUMSHOPPING, and is unhelpful and disruptive. Either take it to Copyright problems (being careful not to present it in a one-sided manner), or else follow the procedures in WP:dispute resolution. --ColinFine (talk) 18:16, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

please remove my photo![edit]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Smiths Please can you remove my photograph of the Smiths as I'm finding people think they can use it free! I shot the Smiths at the Salford Lads club in 1985 see my website www.smithsphotos.com

many thanks Stephen Wright

S — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.17.30 (talk) 16:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

It looks like that image is tagged as fair use. Please go here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SmithsPromoPhoto_TQID_1985.jpg and review the fair use info. If you still think it is not fair use you can email copyright@wikimedia.org. Naleksuh (talk) 16:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia "fair use" is not well understood by a lot of people, many of whom seem to take a very relaxed attitude toward obeying copyright law in any case. As with any other image on the Internet, a person should not copy the image unless first determining its copyright status. Wikipedia's "fair use" criteria are very stringent, and when we use such an image in Wikipedia, we try very hard to make sure we are complying with the law. We do not assert that our fair use somehow applies to other users of the material, in fact, quite the opposite: we assert that it does not provide a fair use rationale for any use outside of Wikipedia. I am not a lawyer. I suggest you contact a lawyer about using the provisions of the DMCA, specifically the use of "takedown notices", to force non-Wikipedia sites to take down those images. -Arch dude (talk) 21:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

reporting a person/company trying to charge for help[edit]

I got this today (i've already created my page which is live)

Anna Harrison <anna@wikipedialegendsllc.com> 10:23 AM (1 hour ago) to me

Hi Christine, I hope this email finds you well.

We have received an online inquiry that you are looking to create a Wikipedia page, below is the process we follow for the creation of a Wikipedia page:

Once you're done signing up with us, we would send you a brief form to fill in which there will be certain questions asked based on your personal or company profile.

Once we take on the subject, we assign a research team who conducts full in-depth research into your online presence, of course, you're also welcome to send us articles, information, or general guidance if you like. Once all research is conducted we then move on to inputting that information into a draft with Wikipedia's guidelines and the writing style guide, then we send you a draft for your comments and approval before moving forward with publishing the entry on Wikipedia.

The standard timeline is between 60-90 days.

We'll provide you with the 100% ownership rights of the page so that you can, later on, add more as per your needs and requirements.

Our package ranges from $699-$1999 depending on what your requirements are.

Please find the details of the packages below:

Wikipedia Legend Standard Plan: Cost: $699.00 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikkipoy (talkcontribs) 17:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Nikkipoy: Per WP:SCAM, "If someone contacts you with such an offer, please send a copy of the email, including headers, to paid-en-wp@wikimedia.org." Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Also, help is free here on Wikipedia. No one can make you pay for help. Also, you can't pay to make an article. If the subject of your article is not notable then no amount of money will make it into an article. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:08, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Luckily it appears your article has been accepted so the email wouldn't be of much use to you anyways. Also, per WP:OWN, no one owns any page/article on Wikipedia. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 18:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
The claim "We'll provide you with the 100% ownership rights of the page so that you can, later on, add more as per your needs and requirements." is an outright lie. The company can't provide "100% ownership rights" to any page as the concept of "ownership rights" does not exist on Wikipedia. On Wikipedia, no one "owns" any page or is in any sort of authority position over it. The company cannot stop other Wikipedia editors from editing the page they have created. In short, the message the company sent is a lie. JIP | Talk 18:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Ssentongo Haruna[edit]

Formerly Protect page

How do I protect my user page my account has been blocked and edited by Ndj-de and other users they abuse and delete my information I believe Wikipedia is not for pay they want me to pay them they keep hacking my account and abuse people and late they say it's me abusing How ever much am a new user please be considerate of this they even blocked my friends account Ssentongo Haruna And they removed him from the ugandans net worth list Ssentongo haruna has a net worth of 420usd he has a right to be on that list {{cite|web https://www.watchdoguganda.com/business/20210312/110284/entreprising-sentongo-haruna-builds-empire-worth-usd420m-brick-by-brick.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kareninaq mine (talkcontribs) 18:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Kareninaq mine: Your Wikipedia account has never been blocked, and only your user talk page has been edited by one person. I assume you have questions about List of Ugandans by net worth, which has been semiprotected, preventing unregistered and new accounts from directly editing the page.
Unless your user page has been the subject of vandalism or something similar, requests for protection are unlikely to be granted.
Taking a further look at the article's history this appears to be sockpuppetry at work, and may involve the blocked user Sentongo Haruna. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:32, 18 January 2022 (UTC)


Halo am requesting unblock of Ssentongo Haruna account was blocked globally He did not abuse any Njd-de , Drm310 and pahunkat keep distributing his account please protect it and allow him login into again Add him to the list of ugandans with net worth again thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kareninaq mine (talkcontribs) 18:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Izaaqnewton refers. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Image-use question[edit]

Would I be able to use this image under the "Public domain" copyright information option? It was uploaded by http://www.e-nebraskahistory.org/, an "Official Nebraska Government Website". Seasider53 (talk) 18:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

@Seasider53: I believe no. First off all, its better to ask These questions at WP:MCQ, since that is where the experts are. However, I currently don't see a reason why this should be PD. {{PD-US-Gov}} only applies to works created by federal government employees in their duties as such(I see no evidence of this being the case here), it's a file from 1986 (so far from being public domain due to age) and last but not least the film's right usage terms seem to have non-commercial and no-derivate restrictions. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 21:27, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Rules of Doxxing[edit]

Hi guys

Could anyone let me know how wikipedia deals with doxxing? Content on a wikipedia article is abetting in doxxing, which has been escalated to newsworthy stories in my country.

I have made my case for offending content to be removed but some very passionate users are insisting that the content is both relevant for some reason and not a breach of privacy.

Thank you. Declanhx (talk) 19:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

The rules about doxxing are at WP:DOXXING. However, if your issue is with who owns Killichassie, I think the source for the claims are two published biographies of its owner - this information is in the public domain, it's not private information that we need to keep secret. An exceedingly notable person owning and living in a reasonably notable building seems worth mentioning in the article about the building, no? Girth Summit (blether) 19:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Holy crap. The people you are edit warring with about this are two site Administrators, whom of whom is an oversighter. You will struggle to find anyone who knows more about our rules on doxxing - listen to what they are telling you on the article talk page. Girth Summit (blether) 19:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
User has been full blocked for editwarrring. (Changed from a partial block) ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 19:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)