- 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 four tildes (
~~~~
) at the end of your post. Alternatively, you can click on the signature icon () on the edit toolbar.
June 10
How do you hide/collapse a table?
Let's say that you have a very long table ... like this one, for example: List of cancelled nuclear reactors in the United States#Cancelled nuclear reactors. And I want to use the hide/show/collapse option tag ... so that the reader can opt to hide or to show the long table. Specifically, I want the long table hidden by default ... but with the option to "show" the table. What is the exact "code" or "syntax" that I would type into the table, to make it do what I want? I looked at all of the help pages, etc., but I can't make heads or tails of them. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:06, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- You should probably read MOS:HIDE as to why this isn't desirable (by default). There's instructions on making something collapsible there anyway if you want to give the option to do it. WhoAteMyButter (📨talk│📝contribs) 02:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. Yeah, I can never quite understand the "instructions" given on Wikipedia for computer language/code/syntax. They always make it so complicated. Hence, I came here. So, in that example chart that I cited above ... what would be the exact "command" to type ... and where to type it? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Read Help:Table#Collapsible tables, it details what you should do to make a table collapse. WhoAteMyButter (📨talk│📝contribs) 23:56, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. Yeah, I can never quite understand the "instructions" given on Wikipedia for computer language/code/syntax. They always make it so complicated. Hence, I came here. So, in that example chart that I cited above ... what would be the exact "command" to type ... and where to type it? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Wrong information in wikipedia about VEER DURGADAS JI
Wrong information in wikipedia
1. जून 1681 में दुर्गादास ने अकबर की सहायता की, क्योंकि विद्रोह के कारण खलबली मच गई, 2.अकबर, जिसे 1704 में निर्वासन में मरना था,[8] अपने असफल विद्रोह के बाद अपने बच्चों को राठौरों की हिरासत में छोड़ दिया था
AKBAR BORN AND DIED ON Below dates and how it is possible in the era of Veer Durga Das 13 अगस्त 1638 – 22 नवम्बर 1718) को 17वीं
akbar Born: 15 October 1542, Umarkot, Pakistan Died: 27 October 1605, Fatehpur Sikri
and Duradas period form 1638 to 1718
दुर्गा दास राठौड़ (13 अगस्त 1638 – 22 नवम्बर 1718) को 17वीं स — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.98.238.227 (talk) 06:52, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your concern. I read your concern and the hindi version of the article on Durgadas Rathore. It appears that the problematic information is on Hindi Wikipedia, not on English Wikipedia. Therefore, this is not the correct place to register your concern as this is English Wikipedia's help desk. The correct place to register this concern would be hi:विकिपीडिया:चौपाल. If you need any help you can message me on my talk page, as I'm proficient in Hindi too and may be able to help you. Thank you! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:46, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Reuse of named reference for inline citations of different text – possible?
Hi, the question stems from my failed and semi-fixed attempt to reuse a named reference containing a lengthy citation of a source. The problem is that said citation was appropriate for one section of an article, but completely inappropriate for another, leaving me with a bad choice between either polluting ref list with a duplicated source containing another lengthy citation, or make an article reader scratch his head.
It would be also very useful when it's needed to refer to many different pages of the same book, esp. when many books are used as sources: imo, it's much better and more convenient to mention each book in the ref list only once, but place multiple refs in article body, e.g.
<ref name=book1>p. 33, "Quick brown fox..."</ref> ... <ref name=book1>p. 44, "... jumped over the lazy dog."</ref>
so that it's possible to quote text and not litter ref list with duplicates at the same time.
So, possible or not? If yes, then help is much appreciated, if not, I think some means to make such refs should better be created, preferably with simple and straightforward syntax along the lines of my above examples. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.66.33.217 (talk) 09:26, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- On same source/different pages, my preference is using in-text Template:Rp, but there are other ways, see for example Shakespeare_authorship_question#Citations.
- On your first question, if I understand you correctly, you include a long quote in your cite/ref. I know of no method to "change quotes", but I rarely include quotes in my cites, is it necessary in this case? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick and useful help! Although I've been on WP for years, somehow I never came across neither Rp, nor excellent reflists like that before.
- Regarding the last part, quotation of a source is the best approach there, because the source is very long (quotation was used by someone before me, and I appreciated it when reading the article recently).188.66.33.217 (talk) 10:22, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- One solution could be to add quotes as a separate "footnote", see Shakespeare_authorship_question#Notes. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:35, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I recently used Template:Rp at Jesse Lawson. It doesn't look great, but it gets the job done. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:36, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- The SAQ article use Template:Harvard citation no brackets, btw. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:39, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I was trying that at first, but then you "litter [the] ref list" as the IP put it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:51, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I agree, ctrl-f "Shapiro 2010" in the SAQ-article and see what you get. And I'm used to my trusty old reftoolbar. Otoh, with the other citevar you'd get a row of tiny letters a mile long, so it's subjective. I think the Harvard version is seen as more academic-looking. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:03, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Gråbergs Gråa Sång, thanks for your help, it was probably a bit unfair for me to not provide links, but in trade here's complete story behind the question: a few days ago I thought I'd finally read about the history of WP, and got quite fascinated by the subject. Unfortunately, the History of WP article lacked important references, and I added a few back on June 4: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:History/History_of_Wikipedia Today I decided to add an important quotation from Sanger's memoir, at first breaking a reference https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1092434552 and for now simply adding a ref with quotation (as someone did before). I'm not happy with this fix, but I'm not used to Rp yet (and can only use a mobile device, which makes editing a pain), so will play with various options in a sandbox first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.66.33.217 (talk) 11:27, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Good luck! I assume you don't register an account because you don't want to. You may find this discussion interesting: Talk:Ideological_bias_on_Wikipedia#RfC_on_Larry_Sanger's_criticism_of_Wikipedia. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:30, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- And a big "thank you!" once again! If I could ask for anything else, it would be this: what style of adding refs is, from your pov, best for the History of WP article? It seems there are no regular contributors there now (my unrelated question on talk page was unanswered). Just keep adding refs with quotations from long sources as before and keep existing style? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.66.33.217 (talk) 12:01, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Per WP:CITEVAR, follow the established one, don't try to introduce Harvard citation as well. If you start an article, pick your favorite. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:36, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- And a big "thank you!" once again! If I could ask for anything else, it would be this: what style of adding refs is, from your pov, best for the History of WP article? It seems there are no regular contributors there now (my unrelated question on talk page was unanswered). Just keep adding refs with quotations from long sources as before and keep existing style? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.66.33.217 (talk) 12:01, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Good luck! I assume you don't register an account because you don't want to. You may find this discussion interesting: Talk:Ideological_bias_on_Wikipedia#RfC_on_Larry_Sanger's_criticism_of_Wikipedia. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:30, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Gråbergs Gråa Sång, thanks for your help, it was probably a bit unfair for me to not provide links, but in trade here's complete story behind the question: a few days ago I thought I'd finally read about the history of WP, and got quite fascinated by the subject. Unfortunately, the History of WP article lacked important references, and I added a few back on June 4: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:History/History_of_Wikipedia Today I decided to add an important quotation from Sanger's memoir, at first breaking a reference https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1092434552 and for now simply adding a ref with quotation (as someone did before). I'm not happy with this fix, but I'm not used to Rp yet (and can only use a mobile device, which makes editing a pain), so will play with various options in a sandbox first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.66.33.217 (talk) 11:27, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I agree, ctrl-f "Shapiro 2010" in the SAQ-article and see what you get. And I'm used to my trusty old reftoolbar. Otoh, with the other citevar you'd get a row of tiny letters a mile long, so it's subjective. I think the Harvard version is seen as more academic-looking. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:03, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I was trying that at first, but then you "litter [the] ref list" as the IP put it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:51, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
ANONYMOUS DONATIONS
I want to send a little donation, but I don´t feel confortable registering some informations about me. How can we skip that request? Could I only donate registering my very first email ((Redacted))? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.95.114.193 (talk) 11:28, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi IP user. I think you need to read this page on Wikimedia to see the donor privacy policy and the options you have. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:49, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Before you donate any money you might want to familiarize yourself with Wikipedia finances.--Shantavira|feed me 08:33, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Remove an article
I would like to remove the article about Helena Hedman Skoglund. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bberggren (talk • contribs) 13:07, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Helena Hedman Skoglund does not appear to have ever existed on the english Wikipedia. If this is about a different language edition of Wikipedia, you will need to use whatever process they have there. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 13:19, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Bberggren, if you mean sv:Helena Hedman Skoglund, try the sv page sv:Wikipedia:Wikipediafrågor. TSventon (talk) 13:27, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Bberggren: Please follow instructions for Swedish language Wikipedia given at sv:Wikipedia:Sidor föreslagna för radering. --CiaPan (talk) 13:36, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Blanking it was not the best idea, but whatever. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:54, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- The dramatic twist is that they created the article! It's like M. Night Shyamalan up in here. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:01, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Blanking it was not the best idea, but whatever. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:54, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
How do I set up 2FA?
I asked before, but the comment was removed for some reason. How do I set up 2FA? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madmeech (talk • contribs) 17:03, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- See here, but ordinary users don't have the option of 2FA. Maybe they should, but that's the way it is.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 17:10, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Madmeech: Questions are archived every few days. See the answers to your previous question Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2022_June_3 RudolfRed (talk) 18:08, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
DOI citation
I've had this problem before and every time I have asked anyone I have been told there is no solution. The issue is that there seems to be no way to differentiate between a DOI for a work and the DOI for a chapter. We have url and chapter-url, but as far as I can tell, no similar way to mark the different locations if the book chapters have different identifying links. I decided to post the query here to see if more eyes could find a solution. The case I am working on right now is book and chapter and the url links cannot be used because they are proxied. Thanks! (By the way, I am extremely challenged by wikitechnology, so any solution needs to be spelled out step by step.) SusunW (talk) 19:38, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I haven't got a solution, SusunW, but I'll point out that a link is not required for a citation. The important bit is the bibli9ographic information: title, author, publisher, date. A link, if provided, is a convenience. ColinFine (talk) 21:39, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I too don't have a solution, SusunW, but I suggest that you ask at Template talk:Citation. It's where you're likeliest to be read by those who know, and indeed also by those who might add to the templates attributes that don't already exist. -- Hoary (talk) 12:29, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks y'all, I appreciate you looking at it. I'll ask there. I know you don't have to include the links, but if you are writing an article with GA or FA in mind, it's better to have the links in for the review. SusunW (talk) 13:02, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not sure of the context, but I have just used the underlying doi extracted from the URL you linked with the standard citation tool to create [1] and [2]. Presumably you can use whichever is most appropriate source for the content you are citing (the chapter in most instances, I guess). If this isn't the solution, please provide more detail, SusunW. Note that you can combine these citations with the {{rp}} template to specify pages more precisely. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:30, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, Mike Turnbull, I know that there are ways around the problem, but my point is that it doesn't make sense to repeatedly have to make multiple references to the same source because of a technological limitation. A classic citation gives the article name within the work in which it appears. It seems completely illogical to me that we have to work around our own technology to make a proper standard citation. If this were say a work within an edited anthology with different editors for the book and article, our coding is also limited. I should be able to cite either the editors or the author, providing links to both of their contributions, but I think it just cannot be done with our current markup without doing what you have said and making multiple reference entries. SusunW (talk) 14:14, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- And, Hoary following your advice to ask at Citation, I got an answer of how to include both in a single citation. Not a solution I ever would have figured out, but that's how wikitechnology works. Thank you so much for sending me there. SusunW (talk) 14:32, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- I see you got an answer about how to include both DOI in a single citation, although I can't see a reason to do so! I thought I'd mention a couple of other ideas, SusunW. In this particular example, chapter 9 has the same authorship as the whole book but supposing it was authored by John Doe and edited by Huneke, we could have this.[3] For a reference to another chapter/author in the same book it seems reasonable to create individual full citations crediting the respective authors separately, which is the style I used in Coral Bell. Or, as here where the book has just one author, one could use [1]: Ch9:200 since the rp template takes any text as a parameter. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:02, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, Mike Turnbull, I know that there are ways around the problem, but my point is that it doesn't make sense to repeatedly have to make multiple references to the same source because of a technological limitation. A classic citation gives the article name within the work in which it appears. It seems completely illogical to me that we have to work around our own technology to make a proper standard citation. If this were say a work within an edited anthology with different editors for the book and article, our coding is also limited. I should be able to cite either the editors or the author, providing links to both of their contributions, but I think it just cannot be done with our current markup without doing what you have said and making multiple reference entries. SusunW (talk) 14:14, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not sure of the context, but I have just used the underlying doi extracted from the URL you linked with the standard citation tool to create [1] and [2]. Presumably you can use whichever is most appropriate source for the content you are citing (the chapter in most instances, I guess). If this isn't the solution, please provide more detail, SusunW. Note that you can combine these citations with the {{rp}} template to specify pages more precisely. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:30, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks y'all, I appreciate you looking at it. I'll ask there. I know you don't have to include the links, but if you are writing an article with GA or FA in mind, it's better to have the links in for the review. SusunW (talk) 13:02, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
References
- ^ a b Huneke, Samuel Clowes (2022). States of Liberation. doi:10.3138/9781487542122. ISBN 9781487542122. S2CID 247209536.
- ^ "9 a Golden Age in the Grey Republic: Liberation and the Stasi in East Germany". States of Liberation. 2022. pp. 189–225. doi:10.3138/9781487542122-015. ISBN 9781487542122.
- ^ Doe, John (2022). "9 a Golden Age in the Grey Republic: Liberation and the Stasi in East Germany". In Huneke, Samuel Clowes (ed.). States of Liberation. pp. 189–225. doi:10.3138/9781487542122-015. ISBN 9781487542122.
- Mike Turnbull thanks for that. Knowing the rp parameter will allow me to use say Intro:ii is helpful. Yet another thing that would never have been intuitive to me. Often the editors will describe what author is saying in an introduction or preface which is useful for demarcating between independent/non-independent sourcing, thus I see a need for including both links, and being able to use that markup may come in very handy in such a situation. SusunW (talk) 15:14, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Why won't my page publish?
I am new here. This is the first time I am publishing a page, or attempting to rather.
I used the sandbox feature to edit my drafts and then I hit 'publish' and I can't find the page.
I can't provide a link to the page because it isn't published yet.
Please help!
Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Softwhiteunderbelly (talk • contribs) 20:31, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Link: User:Softwhiteunderbelly/sandbox. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:36, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Softwhiteunderbelly, I found the page by checking your contributions (Special:Contributions/Softwhiteunderbelly). I think you should be able to get there yourself by clicking "Sandbox" at the very top right of your screen, where it also says Talk/Contributions/etc. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:39, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- But Google isn't returning the Wiki page when I google it.
- Also, when I search the page itself on Wikipedia it says that the page doesn't exist?
- How do I go about publishing a page? This is for my work. I have been assigned the task of creating a page for my employer, who is a public figure.
- The page needs to be searchable and findable...
- Thanks! Softwhiteunderbelly (talk) 20:42, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ah. There is a great deal more we need to go over, then, @Softwhiteunderbelly. First, as a paid editor, you must read and heed WP:PAID. Second, you need to go about finding reliable, independent, published sources to back up every single fact in this biography of a living person. See WP:YFA for instructions on creating your first article, Help:Referencing for beginners on how to cite sources, WP:RS to figure out the kinds of sources needed, and WP:NPERSON for our guideline on what makes a person notable by our standards (not by the standards of folks outside Wikpedia). Once you've read and followed all those instructions, you'll have a draft article ready to submit to WP:AfC. Acceptance may take months. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:50, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Softwhiteunderbelly Adding to the above, the good news is that sources like [1][2] exists. Find a few of those, write your article as a summary of what they say, with inline citations. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:54, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I would add to the excellent advice here, Softwhiteunderbelly, that Wikipedia has no interest in enhancing search results for your employer or in any other benefits a Wikipedia article might bring them. Those are on the side and not our goal. There are, in fact, good reasons to not want an article about one's self. I would suggest that your employer read that. Our only interest here is in summarizing independent reliable sources. If they exist for your employer, they will merit an article. 331dot (talk) 21:26, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, understood.
- Thank you everyone for responding to me! Softwhiteunderbelly (talk) 21:33, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Side note: how do I go about just deleting the whole draft? Abort mission.
- Thank you! Softwhiteunderbelly (talk) 21:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Softwhiteunderbelly. If you insert {{db-user}} (exactly as you see it in the display text here, including the double curly brackets) at the top of your sandbox, an admin will come along and delete it for you. ColinFine (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Now deleted. Thank you for being so understanding and reasonable about the whole deal, @Softwhiteunderbelly! Many folks come here with misunderstandings, but as long as they're willing to ask questions and listen to advice, things generally work out okay. Your employer may very well get an article someday; in that case, feel free to come back and ask more questions (either here or at the Teahouse). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:59, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, Softwhiteunderbelly. If you insert {{db-user}} (exactly as you see it in the display text here, including the double curly brackets) at the top of your sandbox, an admin will come along and delete it for you. ColinFine (talk) 21:43, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
June 11
Aligning a table
Dear experts,
On my user page, I have created a "button" that when pressed takes the user to a subsidiary table of contents ("subsidiary" because the TOC relates to notes on copyright -- it isn't the main table of contents). I have formatted the button as a one-cell table, and I'm happy with that. My problem is that the table is on the left-hand side of the page; I want it to be on the right. I haven't been able to incorporate information from the Table:Help page; advice would be greatly appreciated. It's here. Cheers, Simon – SCHolar44 🇦🇺 💬 at 03:43, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @SCHolar44: Use can use
class="floatright"
after{|
at the very start of the table. The table would become right-aligned. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 06:57, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
WIKIPEDIA EBOOK
Hi is it illegal to create an ebook with all the references included and sell it? The ebook will contain everything that is on wikipedia and nothing at all will be altered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.80.112.42 (talk) 21:07, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Why would I purchase an ebook of Wikipedia when I can access the actual Wikipedia for free? 331dot (talk) 21:10, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- But the answer to your question is probably no, because not all of the images in Wikipedia are free to reuse (though many of them are). The intention of the project is that all material is free for reuse, and if we achieved that, then you could do what you're suggesting - see WP:REUSE. But because that would mean a lot of articles had no images, English Wikipedia relaxes that requirement to a degree (see NFCC - some other Wikipedias do not relax it). This means that if the material you want to copy contains any images, you need to check the copyright status of each image, and if any of them are not free, either omit them or ask their copyright holders for permission to reuse them. ColinFine (talk) 21:19, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- An ebook like that would be huge. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 05:22, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- An interesting point/question about "will contain everything that is on wikipedia and nothing at all will be altered" is: everything that is on Wikipedia--at what particular moment in time? Or more likely, unless someone can somehow capture the whole thing in a moment--at what vast collection of moments?? This person's proposed snapshot of Wikipedia (I guess one could describe it that way) would be frozen in that moment, or myriad moments, while the genuine article is being constantly altered. And we hope, of course that overall, at least, the constant alterations are improving the product. Uporządnicki (talk) 20:32, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- An ebook like that would be huge. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 05:22, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Move advice?
I am planning to move a page (El Dorado Jane Doe) to "Kelly (murder victim)". This is my first move I plan on performing, and in light of that, I would like to ask two questions:
Q1. Is this page move a good idea? I am still not 100% familiar with page moves.
Q2. I do know that moving a page might cause problems with redirects, called "double redirects". Is there a place or page where I could check the redirects to an article so I could clean up after move?
Any advice and assistance with this question or move would be appreciated.
Thanks, L'Mainer (talk) 21:28, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @L'Mainer: Uncontroversial moves can be done by yourself. No need to worry about double redirects, they're handled by bots. But in this case, it doesn't look to be uncontroversial. The current title is in place ever since the article was created, and name was only recently reported. I'll suggest you to follow the steps at WP:RSPM. This will initiate a community discussion. When the discussion is over, a closer will move (or not move) the page as per the outcome of the discussion. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 21:43, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Also, all incoming links can be checked via Special:WhatLinksHere/El Dorado Jane Doe. You can switch between links, redirects & transclusions using the show/hide options. This feature can be found on all pages using left sidebar > "Tools" section > "What links here". —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 21:50, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "it doesn't look to be uncontroversial.". Did you mean the move done by myself would be not controversial? The way you phrased your response looks to me as a double negative, and an unintended meaning to your response, may I have clarity? Also thank you very much for the response.
- Thanks, L'Mainer (talk) 21:53, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @CX Zoom oh yeah, forgot to ping L'Mainer (talk) 22:05, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @L'Mainer: My guess is that CX Zoom meant the page move would likely be seen as controversial and thus should be discussed first. The "not" and "un" combination is a double negative, but they cancel each other out; so, the sentence reads (at least to me) "It does look to be controversial". -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:31, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Marchjuly I did not feel like the move would be seen as controversial, so I just did the move myself. I followed my natural instinct. L'Mainer (talk) 22:37, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hey @L'Mainer: I'm sorry for whatever confusion my reply had caused and that I wasn't around to reply. It appears Marchjuly has cleared any confusion I caused. Thanks Marchjuly! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 08:57, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- @L'Mainer: My guess is that CX Zoom meant the page move would likely be seen as controversial and thus should be discussed first. The "not" and "un" combination is a double negative, but they cancel each other out; so, the sentence reads (at least to me) "It does look to be controversial". -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:31, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @CX Zoom oh yeah, forgot to ping L'Mainer (talk) 22:05, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Also, all incoming links can be checked via Special:WhatLinksHere/El Dorado Jane Doe. You can switch between links, redirects & transclusions using the show/hide options. This feature can be found on all pages using left sidebar > "Tools" section > "What links here". —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 21:50, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Linking to wiki pages in other languages
I couldn't figure out how to add a link to the same page in another language while editing Lacinato_kale. I tried both the source editor and the visual editor, but couldn't find out how to do it. I've done this in the past, so I guess something changed in the interface? bernie (talk) 21:34, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- If you mean how to link the entire article to other languages, this can be done via wikidata. The article is already linked, wikidata:Q2048275 in this case. The links to non-English Wikipedias can be found in the top right in the WP:New Vector (rather than in the left menu).
- If you want you to add a normal wikilink, use the {{ill}} template (interlanguage link). That displays the non-English language link if no English Wikipedia article exists. Femke (talk) 21:45, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Bernie74. If you're using the source editor, you should see a section called "Languages" in the left sidebar. If you then click on "Edit links", another window should open for the Wikidata page for that subject matter. On that page, you see a box called "Wikipedia" near the upper right which contains nine entries (one for English and eight for other languages) for the various language Wikipedia articles about the subject. Make sure you're logged into Wikidata (it should automatically do this for you but refresh the page if you're not), and then click on "edit" for that box. You should see some information about licensing as well as a way to edit the links. At the very bottom (below the last link entry) of the box, you'll see the word "wiki": click on it and enter the language code for the other language Wikipedia. Once you've done that, click on "page" (in the same line) and enter the name of the other language Wikipedia article. For things to work correctly, you're going to need to make sure the name and the language code for the other article is correct. Once everything is done, go back to the top of the box and click "Publish". I believe that should take care of things. You may need to refresh the English Wikipedia article once or twice for the new link to appear, but that should do it. If you make a mistake, you can always repeat the process, but only delete the link you created. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:03, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, Femkemilene and Marchjuly. Now I found the editor to link pages between languages.
- I still couldn't link the English page to it:Brassica_oleracea_gruppo_acephala because it's already been used in wikidata:Q4673093. It seems the English and Italian Wikipedia disagree on the taxonomy of Tuscan Kale aka Cavolo Nero, and I have no idea which one is correct. I asked in the talk page of the Italian article: it:Discussione/Brassica_oleracea_gruppo_acephala. bernie (talk) 04:28, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Can I use sfn to cite webpages?
Hi people, I have been helping to cite books on the Nazi racial theories article and in the References section there are still plenty of websites. Could I add 'online' as a sub-section in the Bibliography section to cite online articles? I've tried looking at Manual of Style for citations, but I couldn't find any information about it.--FriendlyFerret9854 (talk) 21:47, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- That's certainly allowed, and is even done in some WP:featured articles, for instance climate change.
- The sfn template is really great for sources you want to reuse with different page numbers. There isn't much of an advantage for citing newspapers that way though (imo). The standard use of sfn is to use authors, but some newspaper articles or other websites do not have a byline. You can choose to cite by publication instead, but it may want to consider to just leave it be. Femke (talk) 21:56, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- You can, though I don't know that it is necessary to segregate online sources from books and journals. Before you do that, perhaps you should fix: Hitler 2000, sfn & Read 2014, Hitler 2000, and Mazower 2008. Also, there are 17 sources under §Bibliography that aren't linked from §References (delete or move to §Further reading) and Connelly 1999 is missing
|journal=
. - —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:13, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Trappist the monk: Is there a tool I can use to check that all of the situations are correct? Or, do I have to do it manually?--FriendlyFerret9854 (talk) 22:31, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Femke: I want to keep all of the references as sfns. Is there a Wikipedia article about it? How can I go about it? I can add a few more references, but they are websites and not books.--FriendlyFerret9854 (talk) 22:32, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Trappist the monk: Which 17 sources?--FriendlyFerret9854 (talk) 22:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- User:Trappist the monk/HarvErrors.js emits a warning message when a long-form citation does not have a matching short-form citation; I don't know about User:Svick/HarvErrors.js or User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:58, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Trappist the monk: Which 17 sources?--FriendlyFerret9854 (talk) 22:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- See Help:Citation Style 1 § Tools > Error checking and Category:Harv and Sfn template errors § Displaying error messages.
- —Trappist the monk (talk) 22:58, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Femke: I want to keep all of the references as sfns. Is there a Wikipedia article about it? How can I go about it? I can add a few more references, but they are websites and not books.--FriendlyFerret9854 (talk) 22:32, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Trappist the monk: Is there a tool I can use to check that all of the situations are correct? Or, do I have to do it manually?--FriendlyFerret9854 (talk) 22:31, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @FriendlyFerret9854: You should keep WP:CITEVAR in mind when making any changes to the citation style of an article, unless you're doing something that has little chance of being seen as contentious. While it might technically be possible to convert everything to sfns per WP:SRF, it might not be the consensus style established over the years. So, you might want to propose such a thing on the article talk page first to see what others think first. If you're bold and just go ahead and do this, you'll need to discuss things if reverted. As for a tool to look for fixing bad citations, try Help:Cite errors#Tools. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
June 12
How to interpret WP:BIASED (on the topic of religion)
Hello, I'm wondering about identifying bias in sources. I'm aware of the guidance at WP:BIASED and at WP:NPOV#Bias in sources but neither is very clear about when things cross the line into being "biased". In particular, I'm wondering when the religious affiliation (or absence of religious affiliation) of the author of a reliable source is grounds to consider the source biased, when it's a Wikipedia article on religion. I realize that sources should not be excluded because of bias, but I'm wondering whether it should be noted in the text (e.g., Hindu cosmologist XYZ argues that ZYX, rather than just cosmologist XYZ argues that ZYX). Is there some more specific guidance on this? For example, to say a source is biased would we have to show it has been criticized by another reliable source, or is it adequate just to show the potential for bias on the topic of religion given their religious views?
I know that this is not the place for dispute resolution, so I wrote the whole question above in general terms. However, in case more context is helpful, I'm having a disagreement with another editor at Talk:Baháʼí views on science#Baha'i status. My view was that since most of the reliable sources on the topic are by adherents of the religion in question, we should note their religion when discussing their opinions (though not when discussing uncontroversial facts). He feels that if they've published their views about the Baháʼí Faith and science in academic sources, their religion isn't relevant and shouldn't be stated. Again, not asking for dispute resolution but just if there is general guidance on this sort of case. If this isn't the best place to ask about this, let me know. Best, Gazelle55 (talk) 00:25, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Ethiopia–United Kingdom relations
I want to add this bilateral image map to Ethiopia–United Kingdom relations. The Supermind (talk) 09:21, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- In Visual editor, you can add images by clicking Insert -> images and media.
- In Source editor, you can add [[File:Ethiopia–United Kingdom Locator.svg|thumb|Ethiopia–United Kingdom Locator]] in the appropriate location. Femke (talk) 10:24, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Did that for you! If you need help, check the wikitext for other "relations pages", this helped me. If you don't know what I'm talking about, I used this:
Ethiopia |
United Kingdom |
---|---|
Diplomatic mission | |
Embassy of Ethiopia, London | N/A |
Envoy | |
Canadian Ambassador to the United States Kirsten Hillman | List of ambassadors of the United Kingdom to Ethiopia Alastair McPhail |
- See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada%E2%80%93United_States_relations, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China%E2%80%93Russia_relations or others. Hope this helped! Mozart12345678910 (talk) 16:06, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Change from stadium
How to change from stadium to main domain ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:16A2:CB13:4A00:E45C:55D4:9575:ED94 (talk) 11:30, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I have no idea what you are asking about. Is this about editing Wikipedia? If so, which article. If it's not about Wikipedia, then you've come to the wrong place. ColinFine (talk) 11:46, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
How to use this wikipedia?
To get knowledge about to become smart class expert teacher? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uday1975 (talk • contribs) 11:32, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hello Uday1975 and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a big place. I suggest you start by reading Help:Introduction to navigating Wikipedia/1. Shantavira|feed me 12:16, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Policy on videos
Do we have policy or guidelines on whether vidoes should be added to articles? Uploading, copyright and licensing are dealt with clearly, but is there anything from a content point of view? When I saw some video lectures on various article subjects added just below the infoboxes (one per article), my first thought was that WP:EL might help, but these are Commons files. Do we have anything specific on whether such videos should be included at all, selection criteria or positioning? More broadly, is it more common on en.wiki than I realise? NebY (talk) 12:33, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Mere lectures do not add to articles, in my arrogant opinion, not least because of accessibility issues; but there is long-standing consensus that videos can be very useful for articles on things like dances, martial arts moves, etc. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:16, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- I like those examples; I'd only thought of animations of machinery or orbital mechanic and suchlike, likewise coming under the general principle of adding something that couldn't be in the body of the article - much like ELs. I don't think about accessibility enough so a good corrective there. Thanks. NebY (talk) 17:35, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Do you have some examples of articles where this has been happening? As User:Orangemike notes, videos that simply recap an article's topic or deliver a lecture tend to be problematic for a number of reasons. The essay Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not YouTube is germane.
- I remember we ran into a serious problem a few years ago with Wikipedia:Osmosis, where an outside company generated (hundreds of!) videos about a wide assortment of medical topics, which were then inserted prominently into Wikipedia articles with a minimum of discussion.
- At the time, a number of issues were identified with this sort of content. Videos are difficult or impossible to edit, so minor errors are virtually uncorrectable by third parties. Sourcing, to Wikipedia's usual standards, is essentially impossible to incorporate. There are accessibility concerns, as well. Near the end of that kerfuffle, in an attempt to summarize some of the major outstanding issues and lessons learned, I wrote:
- Long-form video presents unique challenges with respect to editability. For anyone without access to the original narrator, for instance, correcting something as a small as a single word of narration often means re-recording the entire voice-over. Videos aren't susceptible to the same easy discussion and revision that text is; we're much closer to a binary take-it-or-leave-it situation.
- Long-form video presents particular challenges with respect to WP:V and sourcing. Do we require inline notes at the bottom of the screen? Endnotes at the end of the video? Footnoted scripts? Throw up our hands in despair?
- Long-form video often has accessibility issues, unless great care is taken to ensure consistent and complete captioning.
- For long-form video summaries, how do we decide which articles get them, and who decides if they stay or go, and where do they appear in the article? Who signs off on the script and storyboard?
- Is it appropriate or viable to present many of our topics in a long-form video format at all?
- Though it's been a few years, it strikes me as unlikely that those issues have all been satisfactorily resolved. Videos that attempt to mirror all (or a portion) of a Wikipedia article will struggle to remain aligned with the much-more-easily updated, expanded, and corrected Wikipedia text, even under the best of circumstances. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:21, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you TenOfAllTrades; that's deeper and more comprehensive than I dared hope. I've found 28 examples by looking for edit summaries mentioning "video" of an editor[3] whose addition came up on my watchlist, upon which I found more they'd added that day. These might be all or we might find more if we could eg identify which files in the Commons category are in use on en.wiki. Starting with the most recent we have University of the Netherlands lectures uploaded to Commons from Youtube and used in:
- Memory (reverted and reinstated)
- Serendipity (reverted and reinstated)
- Statistical correlations of criminal behaviour (reverted and reinstated)
- Co-living
- Humanitarian aid
- Propaganda
- Control of fire by early humans
- Video game#Beneficial uses
- Sustainable seafood
- Action film#Female characters and actors
- Artificial intelligence#Risks
- Noise-induced hearing loss
- Value of time
- Online dating application
- Allergy
- Human trafficking
- List of female action heroes and villains
- Anorexia nervosa
- Attention
- Fire making
- Antibiotic#History
- Global digital divide
- Digital divide#Global level
- Internet in Africa
- Environmental issues with coral reefs
- Impacts of tourism#Environmental impacts
- Plastic pollution
- Environmental health#Concerns
- (That edit summary search also has the earlier additions of an Osmosis video to Irritable bowel syndrome and a US Department of Energy one to Electric vehicle#Stabilization of the grid and Smart grid.)
- I've checked a couple on Youtube and found "Creative Commons Attribution licence (reuse allowed)".
- I'd hoped to discuss with the editor per WP:BRD when they'd picked one article talk page – I suggested that when they posted to my talk page at User talk:NebY#Educational/explainer videos – but they reinstated some anyway. Now that I've found all those examples, I'm wondering whether an article talk page really is best. Suggestions welcome, and if you'd like to take the lead, having thought about it much more than I have, that would be absolutely fine! NebY (talk) 20:34, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
June 13
My edits are never saved
I am trying to edit this page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viber, and I am adding words/sections that are updated and relevant about the company, including sources, and it's still always reverted back to the way it was and not saved. Why it is not saved despite the fact that I am always providing the reasons and links? Who can I speak to in order to solve this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CKWiki1818 (talk • contribs) 07:09, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- An edit will not save if it has an external link on the spam blacklist. However, could you give some more detail or a screenshot showing what is happening here?--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:12, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Please do not ask for help in multiple places. Look for a response at the WP:TEAHOUSE MB 07:15, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Vandalism help request from Tbeut
I have noticed some vandalism at [[4]]. Namely, the link to the Calf Creek Texas History website http://www.calfcreek.net/calfcreek.html. goes to a pornographic website. Would an editor please assist me with fixing it? Thank you, Tbeut (talk) 11:56, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Tbeut! The link you have copied here does not do that for me, not does the one in the article (which has not been edited in the last 4 months). Perhaps there is malware on your own device?.
- Edited to add – now the destination page is showing up blank. I suspect that the website itself is undergoing some kind of attack and/or maintenance issue. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.131.154 (talk) 12:44, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
KwaZulu Natal Floods
In April 2022, days of heavy rain across KwaZulu natal in Southeastern South Africa led to deadly floods. Particularly hard-hit were areas in and around Durban.At least 435 people died across the province with an unknown number of people missing as April 22. Several thousand homes were damaged and destroyed. Critical infrastructure, including major roads, transportation, and electrical systems were also impacted by the flooding, and this damage greatly hampered recovery and relief efforts. It is one of the deadliest natural disasters in the country in the 21st century. The floods have caused more than R17 billion in infrastructure damage. Rescuers are in search of dozens of people who are still missing in floods. After floods and mudslides friggered by heavy rains recent days killing more than 500 people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.116.242.160 (talk) 12:33, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Why are you copypasting the lede of our article 2022 KwaZulu-Natal floods to this editing helpdesk? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.131.154 (talk) 12:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Images
How could i add images to my articles while editing by source please tell me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rrbigdog1 (talk • contribs) 13:47, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Rrbigdog1: see Extended image syntax. The most basic form is [[File:Example.jpg|thumb|image caption]] and looks like on the right. Hope this helps, Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 14:14, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Rrbigdog1:: For an image that is not already uploded to Wikipedia or Commons, the single most important step is to ensure the image copyright is acceptable. If it is not, then we will delete the image.
- find or create an appropriate image on your computer. If you did not create the image yourself, make sure the copyright holder has provided an acceptable license.
- use the upload wizard to upload the image to Commons.
- Add the correct "file" syntax to the article.
I can't view images
For some reason I am unable to see images on either wikipedia or at Commons, but can see pictures everywhere else I go. This is after 15 years (or whatever) of being able to see them. Is there a setting or something I can do to change this. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 15:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Help on citing
In the article Lakeside, Ohio, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakeside,_Ohio, I saw the error message in my citing, problem = External link in |<param>=, and I went to the help page, but when I looked through and went back to the original article, the parameter that I was using to hold the URL wasn't on the list of non-URL-holding parameters on the Help: page (I think!). So currently I am stuck on what to do! Am I wrong? I'm definitely not a tech person, so if this could be explained that would be great, Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mozart12345678910 (talk • contribs) 15:46, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Mozart12345678910 - Eagleash has fixed the error with this edit. The error is that the "website=" parameter is not supposed to contain a URL, but rather the name of the website hosting the content (see here for more information about what that parameter is asking for). That said, I don't think Kiddle meets Wikipedia's requirements for a reliable source as the disclaimer at the bottom of the website notes that, "Kiddle encyclopedia articles are based on selected content and facts from Wikipedia, edited or rewritten for children." In other words, using this as a source for a Wikipedia article presents circular referencing problems. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Mozart12345678910: (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this:
~~~~
. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 17:31, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Moving a page over a redirect
I was curious whether moving/accepting Draft:Blind Landing to Blind landing would cause issues. I've never come across a draft with a pre-existing redirect in mainspace. Based on WP:MOR, I think it would be fine, but I'm not sure how the AFC helper script differs from just moving the draft. I'm also not sure whether to move or accept the draft. I found it after it had been rejected and made improvements to it, which is okay to do before accepting a draft. However, I was also the one who resubmitted it to AFC. I just don't see the point of waiting any longer for another AfC reviewer to accept it when the backlog is so long and I am confident it should be published to mainspace. TipsyElephant (talk) 19:23, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Or perhaps I should move Draft:Blind Landing to Draft:Blind Landing (podcast) and then accept it or move it to mainspace. I suppose I could have asked this at WP:AFCHD. TipsyElephant (talk) 19:47, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- @TipsyElephant There is a speedy deletion criteria just for that situation, CSD G6. Tag the redirect with {{Db-move}}, include in your reason that it is holding up an accepted AFC submission, and wait for an admin to come along. You should do everything else that needs to be done for it to be mainspace ready, including removing the AFC templates, etc., so all the admin has to do is delete the redirect and move the page. You should also make sure there is no history behind the redirect that needs to be preserved (in this case I already checked and their isn't, but if it was ever merged and the history needs to be retained the process is more complicated). ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:40, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- @TipsyElephant: You (or someone) will need to fix all the incoming links to Blind landing, and also place hatnotes on the new article and on Instrument approach. -Arch dude (talk) 21:41, 13 June 2022 (UTC)