Jump to content

Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by QiuLiming1 (talk | contribs) at 04:30, 1 August 2022 (→Could someone explain to me why my edit got rollback.: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

    ↑ To top of page
    Shortcuts
    Welcome—ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia! (Am I in the right place?)
    • For other types of questions, use the search box, see the reference desk or Help:Contents. 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.
    • If your question is about a Wikipedia article, draft article, or other page on Wikipedia, tell us what it is!
    • Check back on this page to see if your question has been answered.
    • For real-time help, use our IRC help channel, #wikipedia-en-help.
    • New editors may prefer the Teahouse, a help area for beginners (but please don't ask in both places).
    Ask a question

    July 29

    Editing track diagram Template:Katni

    This is about Template:Katni, which is a track diagram of railways in the Katni area. It shows there being no connection between Katni South and Katni Murwara stations, with the source being Google Maps. Google Maps (not the best source for railways!!) also does not show this. However, the following three sources do show the connecting line between Katni South and Katni Murwara:

    So I believe there is enough data available so that the template does not need to rely on wrong/outdated Google Maps data. My only issue is the template itself seems very difficult to edit. Could I get some help with that? NS-Merni (talk) 06:11, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

     Done, plus conversion to k-curves and reference added. Bazza (talk) 09:41, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Page verification

    How long does it take for a page to go from draft to a published article? And how do one send article for review and publishing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nazario90 (talk • contribs) 06:43, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Nazario90: When you believe that your draft is absolutely ready, you can add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page to let reviewers know it is ready to be looked at. As it is a backlog and not a queue, it may take as long as months before someone takes a look at it. If this is in regards to Draft:Macnuc services, I will tell you right now that no reviewer will approve it: it is only one sentence long, and there are no citations to reliable sources that establish its notability as Wikipedia defines it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:49, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Category:Userspace drafts

    When can userspace drafts be tagged for deletion? Some are abandoned with no indication of notability or are copies of past revisions of certain pages. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 08:57, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Minorax They can't. Userspace drafts are allowed to exist forever. The only exception is if the draft has a {{AFC submission}} template on it, in which case they are treated the same as normal drafts and deleted after 6 months under G13. If the draft content is particularly problematic the general or userspace speedy deletion criteria may apply, failing that you can nominate them for deletion at WP:MFD (though a lot of the regulars will not be happy with this, and will just !vote keep regardless of the actual merits of the draft just to "discourage ragpicking"). Some policies like WP:UPCOPIES may come in handy if you're planning on nominating ancient copies of other pages. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 12:10, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Template: Philippine name

    I revised this template way back few years ago, and now I'm willing to merge to Template:Family name hatnote instead since the administrator prohibited me from doing that by editing or revising the template. RenRen070193 (talk) 09:06, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Recession description

    Hey....couldn't help but notice the description of Recession has changed since yesterday. What happened there???? LOL 64.255.111.26 (talk) 10:48, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    No? Nothing actually changed — maybe you're reacting to what you saw on social media? — TheresNoTime (talk • she/her) 11:10, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Haven't read a thing on social media about it. What are they saying??? 64.255.111.26 (talk) 11:25, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The usual stuff. The WP cabal is being controlled and forced to change the definition by Govt./Big state/illuminati/Bill Gates/Barney the dinosaur/etc - X201 (talk) 11:31, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There's a post on the article talk page that will probably answer most of your questions. It's called ATTENTION_NEW_VISITORS_TO_THIS_PAGE - X201 (talk) 11:31, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you!!!! 64.255.111.2 (talk) 11:53, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Arb case

    Do you know why Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conduct_in_deletion-related_editing/Proposed_decision#Bludgeoning can not pass? Please {{ping}} me when you respond. --Jax 0677 (talk) 11:02, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Jax 0677 Because the reworded version after it, Bludgeoning (alt), has passed, and multiple arbs's votes on that principle stated that their votes were conditional as they only wanted one of them to pass. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 12:02, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Policy/guideline/essay on election coverage

    I remember reading a WP space page that discussed the role of routine election news coverage in determining the notability of unelected political candidates. Can anyone point me in the right direction? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:22, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Firefangledfeathers: Maybe one of these will help? WP:NPOLITICIAN Wikipedia:WikiProject Elections and Referendums. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 13:47, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! Those weren't quite what I was looking for, but they did prompt to me to search in a different way. I was thinking of, and have now found, Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill#Political candidates. Just an essay, but good points nonetheless. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 14:31, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Resolved

    A custom dashboard

    I'd like to generate, for myself, lists of articles in certain broad categories of certain statuses like "botany plus cleanup needed" or "grade C plus dinosaurs"). How do I do this? Is it a "transclusion"? (what is that?) Is it a template I call with some parameters? Do I run a bot? Do I somehow use the Article Alerts thing?

    Many questions. I just want to make it a little easier to focus my efforts on tasks I can do easily in subject areas I like as I learn "the system." Thanks in advance! TK.Stet (talk) 15:19, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi TK.Stet. I think that you can take two routes to the sort of tasks you want to find (in addition to trying some suggestions on the WP:TASK page). So, for Botany + cleanup you might start by looking at WP:WikiProject Biology (the nearest Project that will cover botany) and looking a their table of articles by quality and importance to find a set that might interest you and need work to move, say from "stub" to "start", although these ratings may be inaccurate. Clicking on any of the numbers in the table will give you a list of article titles. Alternatively, go to a page for one of the cleanup templates such as {{cleanup}} and click on the "What links here" menu item. That will provide a list of all articles marked with that template. They won't necessarily be biology/botany ones but a brief look through the titles may allow you to spot some you think you could improve. Good luck! Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:17, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    OH! I didn't realize the "Tools" sidebar changed so much in the context of the page loaded! Definitely a revelation. Thanks so much, @Michael D. Turnbull! TK.Stet (talk) 12:44, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @TK.Stet If you wanted to find articles within a certain WikiProject that need cleaning up, you might want to look at WikiProject Cleanup Listings. GoingBatty (talk) 01:00, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Excellent, yes. Whatever this is (I guess... some user's self-hosted tool?) is impressive. I can see using this too! Appreciate it, @GoingBatty! TK.Stet (talk) 12:48, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Visitor statistics

    Just out of curiosity, is there any infornatuon about the number of unique visitors to this site within, say, the last 30 days? I'm thinking of making a video about the inner workings of Wikipedia, and want to compare the number of visitors to various editor statistics. 172.112.210.32 (talk) 16:18, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't know about unique visitors (given that readers could do so from multiple IP addresses that Wikipedia would count as being different) but you might like to look at this regular traffic report from the WP:SIGNPOST in-house monthly publication. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:25, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Note also that there are tools for doing pageview analysis, explained at meta:Pageviews Analysis. So one nice graph you could construct after reading the help there is this one, as an example. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:40, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Place to Report Off-Site coordination?

    In patrolling recent changes the past couple days I've noticed an uptick in vandalism related to articles dealing with certain economic topics such as Great Recession and Business Cycle. In finding out why this might be, I discovered some fairly popular posts on social media talking about credibility of the platform such as this Tweet and this Reddit thread which I believe can lead to an uptick in vandalism on these topics. Is there a place to discuss potential coordinated efforts off-site to alter pages negatively? Sam Walczak Talk/Edits 16:45, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Sam Walczak: If it does get to the point where someone feels they need to canvas votes by posting on an outside forum, the article has usually become controversial enough that there is already a lot of attention on it. If there is a coordinated attack, an administrator can be notified and page protection can be applied. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 17:54, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Controversies

    I was told (by an Administrator) that we are not allowed to have a section in an article with the label of "controversies" ... because it violates BLP or NPOV or some such. I am quite certain I have seen "controversy sections" many, many, many times in many, many, many articles. I will go look (later) to find specifics. Also, if I remember, aren't there many articles even entitled as "Controversy about such-and-such" ... ? That is, as the article title, not even as a header within an article? Any input? Thanks. If needed, the article in question (at the moment) is Alvin Bragg. (He is a public figure ... and he has had MANY controversies, since taking office ... widely reported in RS's. Just do a quick Google search.) But, I am also seeking clarification, in general ... i.e., for other articles. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:13, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    The admin is User:Muboshgu. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:14, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a matter for WP:NPOV/N, not the help desk. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:16, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Really? Why can I not ask for help, here ... about a Wikipedia editing topic with which I need help? Please explain. I have used this page a million times, whenever I need help. Never heard of that other page (WP:NPOV/N). Thanks! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:22, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The very first words at the top of this page are: The Wikipedia help desk is a place where you can ask questions about how to use or edit Wikipedia. What part am I misunderstanding? Thanks! Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:30, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Joseph A. Spadaro, I'd suggest you start treating people you're asking for help as if they're operating in good faith. You've been advised that a content dispute over a controversies section in a BLP is better handled at WP:NPOVN. It doesn't really matter that you've never heard of that board before, although it's surprising that someone with 93K edits doesn't know there are specialized noticeboards on WP. There are noticeboards for sourcing, notability, conflict of interest, and, yes, neutral point of view, which is what your question is about. This board is for things like "Why didn't my archiving work?" or "I can't figure out why my edits broke this table, can someone help?" Or even, "Where do I ask questions about controversies sections in BLPs?" Valereee (talk) 21:02, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    See Wikipedia:CSECTION which says Sections or article titles should generally not include the word "controversies" and suggests other options. Yes, there are many articles which don't conform to this. CodeTalker (talk) 19:27, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. One - That's an essay ... not a policy. Two - It says "should" ... not "must" ... essentially indicating editorial discretion, as opposed to being required / compulsory. And, again, it's merely an essay ... i.e., someone's opinion. Not a consensus-driven policy. Three - We have "a million" articles that have "controversy" sections. Four - We have "a million" articles that have "controversy" titles. Five - We even have "a million" categories for "controversies". All of this flies in the face that we should (let alone, must) avoid the term "controversy". Clearly, it's open to interpretation ... and something about which reasonable minds can differ. Why is it that that editor does not need consensus (to make changes) ... or at least, claims not to need it? And every time I blink, I need consensus? What's up with that? And why am I not allowed to ask questions at this Help Desk (per that same Admin)? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:30, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Most discussions I've seen on whether or not to have a controversy/criticism section cite WP:CSECTION. I don't believe there's a policy or guideline that addresses the issue. Contested changes to article content do need consensus (see WP:ONUS). You are welcome to ask questions here. It would help if you avoid the appearance that you are using the help desk to further a conduct dispute. Whether intentional or not, your comments here so far do give off that impression. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:40, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. I indicated that contested edits should go through a Talk Page consensus. I was told (by an Admin, via an Edit Summary) ... quote ... Specific talk page consensus is not required to maintain WP:NPOV. So ... is that true or not? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:38, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Joseph A. Spadaro, in general the answer is that the fact other articles contain something questionable (in this case, a controversies section in a biography of a living person) does not mean we should include them in the article we're discussing. It means we should maybe see if the other article needs to be fixed. In some articles it'll be appropriate. In other articles, it won't. Valereee (talk) 20:41, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, exactly. There's no clear-cut rule. In some cases, it's appropriate; in some cases, not. (Which is precisely what you stated.) In other words ... as I stated above ... Clearly, it's open to interpretation ... and something about which reasonable minds can differ. All the more, that calls for consensus ... not a unilateral dictate. So, how do I proceed? If I -- God forbid -- revert an edit, I'd get 100 people crawling up my ass buttocks, quoting 100 policies that I (supposedly) violated ... and then the obligatory threats of being blocked, accused of edit warring, etc., etc., etc. And when other people do it ... ehhhh .... no problem. How do we square that circle? Oh, because that editor is an Admin ... and therefore "knows better" ... correct? Or what part am I misunderstanding? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:46, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You proceed by discussing at the article talk or, if that has failed, at NPOVN.
    As for the part you're misunderstanding, it's this: It has already been suggested at least three times that you need to assume good faith and stop treating that article (and frankly, this noticeboard, per your comments about 100 people crawling up your ass, threatening you, accusing you, and allowing other people to get away with the exact same things you did, assuming an admin knows better) as a battleground. This is a collaborative project, and you are required to assume good faith.
    As an aside, when you say There's no clear-cut rule. In some cases, it's appropriate; in some cases, not. (Which is precisely what you stated.) it feels a bit as if you're trying to say "gotcha" to me. I'm sure that's not what you intended, but that's how it's landing. Valereee (talk) 13:45, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    until a day ago , when reading an article, if I crossed a phrase or noun with more related info, a box would open with a sentence or so of informative text. Now when I hover over the phrase or noun, only a small box opens which pretty much just repeats the phrase or noun. and if I want to learn more, I have to leave the first article. How do I return to that presentation that allows me to learn a bit more without leaving the first article. Thank you Loudfun (talk) 18:19, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Loudfun: I assume you're talking about page previews that appear when you hover over a wikilink. Check and see if Preferences → Gadgets → Empty Navigation popups is unchecked. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:51, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Loudfun: There are two popup features. The default is "Enable page previews" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-rendering. This question was your first edit (although with a ten years old account) so maybe you were logged out. If logged out users disable page previews then there should be a "Edit preview settings" link at the bottom of pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:14, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Recession

    Since this is suppose to be volunteer editing,yet someone changed definition of recession after over century and then lock so it can't be corrected. Just lost my trust in your biased editing. Who died and locked .Deese (HRC) said in 2007 it was after 2 consecutive ,now(Biden) he says not so and on that you change. Sad.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.23.154.5 (talk) 20:09, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    As the lead section there says, "Although the definition of a recession varies between different countries and scholars, two consecutive quarters of decline in a country's real gross domestic product (real GDP) is commonly used as a practical definition of a recession." It's time to put all the Biden vandalism stuff to bed. The article is semi-protected until 3 August.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 20:18, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    See also Talk:Recession#ATTENTION NEW VISITORS TO THIS PAGE. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:01, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Do not reply to threads like this that are written to be inflammatory. They're not looking to talk to someone, they're looking to talk at someone. (And attempting to assign blame for this recession in the US is covered under an Arbitration remedy.) —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 23:25, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Skellig Michael article addition

    The article on Skellig Michael, an island off the coast of Ireland, should definitely be amended to include the following information: On Charles Lindbergh's solo flight from New York to Paris, the first piece of land he saw after taking off from New York hours earlier was Skellig Michael. This was the first indication that he'd actually made it across the Atlantic Ocean and put him on course to finish the trip from there to Paris. This moment was correctly portrayed in the 1957 film about the flight, The Spirit of St. Louis. 76.171.53.117 (talk) 21:56, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Citation needed. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:59, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    is NYT article not sufficient as a source?

    I entered a link to an article from the New York Times that came out today about the wedding of two actors. It was declined due "not showing enough coverage about the subject covered" even though the WHOLE article is about her. Can someone advise please what to do to get the article approved to publish with that source? thanks a bunch! Theyoganinja (talk) 22:42, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Read Wikipedia:Notability (people). A single NYT article focussed almost entirely on a wedding does nothing to establish that Kadia Saraf [1] meets the notability criteria. We'd need significant coverage in sources actually discussing her acting career in depth. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:51, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, Theyoganinja. You need several independent, reliable sources that devote significant coverage to the topic. You only have one borderline source, although you cite the same article several times. Neither IMDb nor her own website are of any value in establishing notability. Cullen328 (talk) 22:53, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    copy that. thanks! Theyoganinja (talk) 22:58, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Theyoganinja Fir future reference, in addition to the above, the picture of her has been flagged and will probably be deleted. You uploaded the picture as "own work", which means that you took the picture. But the picture also says "photographed by Rebecca Weiss". So it's not your work, and it needs a different justification to stay. Just so you know. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 12:11, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks so much, this is helpful. The photo is from instagram. But yes, I'm learning more about how this is done. Thanks for all your help! Theyoganinja (talk) 13:30, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I added another reliable source. Kadia's career is mentioned in both those articles. I hope that will suffice? Also, I will reach out to the photographer of the image from instagram and ask her to release the picture. Hope to get better at this so I can contribute to other articles. Thanks again. Theyoganinja (talk) 18:53, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


    July 30

    How can I read extensive wikipedia help/info pages and policies/guides offline?

    Not sure if this question is appropriate here, but I would love to be able to compile all the wikipedia related pages into a big readable file that I can load into my ebook reader for reference. Is there any such thing done before? Or, are there any projects that create wikipedia related pages and divide them into several books? I've explored the "create a book" wizard on special page, but it do not generate a book, it collect pages and ask me for info, after clicking save book it says that it need to create a page with the <bookname. However, there's no book presented to me after the blank page is created. Any thoughts? Kaveinthran (talk) 01:52, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Kaveinthran It used to be possible to create what you wanted (see Wikipedia:Books) but as that link explains the facility was removed. Individual articles can still be downloaded as .pdf files using the menu option on article pages. It is also possible to download material using the mediawiki API (see this link) but that is not for the fainthearted and would require considerable technical knowledge (and disk space if you wanted a substantial number of articles!). Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:50, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Archiving post at Closure Requests page

    Should Wikipedia:Closure_requests#Wikipedia:Proposed_article_mergers#Merge_requests not have been archived by now? Please {{ping}} me when you respond. --Jax 0677 (talk) 08:11, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Clerks#Geschichte

    The post here from July 9, 2022 has not been addressed. I was told not to post it at WP:CR. Is there another path that I may take? Please {{ping}} me when you reply. --Jax 0677 (talk) 08:26, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    It's likely nothing to worry about. If you believe it's fallen off the radar, you can ping a few Arbcom Clerks at their noticeboard ({{@ArbComClerks}} pings them all I believe.. ) Femke (talk) 18:00, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    LIARS

    Do not reply to posts written to be inflammatory - Alert the poster and move on. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:48, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

    You are liars and changing the definition of a "recession" based on all previous known definitions of the word. Shame on you! 75.144.119.225 (talk) 11:08, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Do not attack other editors or you may be blocked; see the sections above with recession in the title; read and follow the links provided; do not post here again but read the information posted / and discuss at the talk page. Eagleash (talk) 11:44, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    75.144.119.225, in every calendar month, approximately 100,000 different individuals perform edits on Wikipedia (as far as can be measured). Which ones, or how many, of these are you calling liars, pray?
    Wikipedia (or any one of its many, many editors) does not attempt to define the meaning of any word or concept. It only attempts to report and summarise what "Reliable sources" mean by words or terms.
    If significant authorities on the World economic stage decide to change or extend the meaning of an economic term, Wikipedia should incorporate this information in the appropriate articles, without agreeing or disagreeing with it, because Wikipedia aims to present a Neutral point of view: other significant conflicting opinions on the matter should also be included in a balanced fashion. All of these should be cited to sources – it is up to the reader to decide which sources they trust or prefer. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.73.20 (talk) 12:43, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    What kind of infobox should I used on some songwriters' articles that indicates only the year of their birth?

    What kind of infobox should I used on some music articles especially about songwriters that indicates only the year of their birth? Inarawan1979 (talk) 11:24, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi Inarawan1979. If the only information added to the infobox is the person's name and their DOB, then perhaps you shouldn't use an infobox at all per WP:DISINFOBOX. WP:INFOBOXes aren't required to be used in articles. For sure, they can be handy in summarizing article content for long articles with lots of sections, but they often aren't really needed for short articles where all the information in the infobox is basically found in the first few paragraphs. Even if there's a photo of the subject of the article being used, an infobox isn't really necessary if all it contains in a photo, the subject's name and their DOB. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:37, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Inarawan1979: If you are asking if the DOB in an infobox can be just the year and not the exact DOB, the answer is "yes". Just type in "1979" instead of "July 4, 1979". -Arch dude (talk) 14:42, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Farewell speech

    Dear friends and teachers,students This is the day of celebration. Let us make this farewell the best farewell ever.Some tears will be shed and some smiles will be shared as we bid farewell to our school lives. ❣️❣️ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.113.176.111 (talk) 17:51, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Uhh what? This doesn't look like a question about using or editing Wikipedia. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 17:51, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Suggesting Improvements

    How do I suggest improvements to authors of an article? Chair0fPeter (talk) 18:17, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Chair0fPeter, you can be bold and make the changes yourself. (Sidenote: There used to be an article feedback tool, but they took it away.) weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 18:18, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Chair0fPeter, another alternative is to post your suggestions on the article talk page. Please provide links to reliable sources that verify the changes you want to make. Cullen328 (talk) 19:43, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Need help on Convert templates

    I have recently did a major upgrade on Natural Bridges National Monument Solar Power System in hopes of turning it into a Good Article. I need help on Convert templates. Where it says " 576 solar panels have 10,645 square feet (989.0 m2) of solar cell area " I can not figure out how to take out the dot zero and make it read just 989 m2. Also can someone convert the following and then I can take it from there - 18 inches, 2 inch, 200 feet, 1500 gallons, and 100 miles. Thanks for help in this.--Doug Coldwell (talk) Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:05, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Doug Coldwell: It might have to do with the template trying to preserve significant figures (though I would've expected 10,645 to convert into 989.00 instead...). You can change this by using the |sigfig= parameter in {{convert}} to force how many should be shown. I've done 10,645 square feet as an example. Is that what you're looking for? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:26, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @User:Tenryuu Yup! Thant's it - Thanks. Can you help me on the other Coverts and then I can go from there. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:34, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Doug Coldwell: Taking a look at the documentation at Help:Convert#Rounding it might be easier to make the fourth unnamed parameter in {{convert}} 0 to cut off decimal places. I'll see how that looks.
    I converted a few more figures but none of them seem to create the precision issue you were having. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:40, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @User:Tenryuu Thanks for your help. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:59, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    July 31

    Reference question

    I just realized that at Hold On Baby I accidentally repeated some references. How do I fix this? —VersaceSpace 🌃 03:32, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, VersaceSpace. Follow the procedure described at WP:NAMEDREF. Cullen328 (talk) 05:07, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @VersaceSpace  Fixed for you. GoingBatty (talk) 13:13, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, I'll definitely follow Cullen's link in the future. —VersaceSpace 🌃 13:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Creating a page for an artist

    Some artist ask us to create his page on Wikipedia and gave us the material to put it on, about, written books, monarchy, medals and distinctions, but when we finish the page it was in the same day delete and we can't understand why. I would like to know why you delete the page although does not promote violence, the pictures are his, it's not spam and everything is verified but you still delete the page. I was wondering what can I do to be able to get is page up and running with you deleting it? The artist really needs this, has he say is to enahace his work visibility, have a biography in a respectable site and let the world know hi and not just the country where is from. Thank you for your answer. Mboleo (talk) 05:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Mboleo: An article on a subject is not for their benefit; it is meant to inform readers about them, so long as their notability as Wikipedia defines it is established. Promotion is not what Wikipedia is for, and as such is heavily frowned upon on here. Please tell your artist to use social media networking sites like Instagram, Facebook, or (god forbid) TikTok. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:15, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok Rrbigdog1 (talk) 06:37, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you very much for your answer. I'll inform the artist about that although he is quite known in Portugal and he believes that should be on Wiki the information about him. Mboleo (talk) 13:02, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mboleo: Then reliable, secondary sources that significantly cover the artist must be cited to establish his notability. If those aren't provided then there's no hope of there being an article on him. Just being quite known does not hold much weight here. Since you are also in contact with the artist, you must declare a conflict of interest (or any paid or employed relationship you may have), preferably on your user page. Also let the artist know that an article about him isn't necessarily a good thing. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:24, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    According to our records, the only "article" you have worked on was User:Miguel Boléo. Since according to your own words in this post you are not Miguel Boléo, you have been blocked for using two names (that and User:Mboleo which constitute impersonation of Miguel Boléo, your client. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:43, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Articles

    How may i add images to my wikipedia articles Rrbigdog1 (talk) 06:37, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Rrbigdog1 Please see WP:UPIMAGE for instructions. Note that you cannot just add any old image that you find somewhere on the internet here; the best thing would be if you took the image yourself with your own camera. 331dot (talk) 06:57, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Vandalism help request from 2604:3D08:B184:F900:1900:67A0:B10C:8CA2

    I have noticed some vandalism at PFM-1. Namely, constant edit and revisions related to claimed Ukrainian use of Russian cluster weapon in Donetsk, without citation, source or documentation. Suggest disputed template be added or article be locked to logged in users. Would an editor please assist me with fixing it? Thank you, 2604:3D08:B184:F900:1900:67A0:B10C:8CA2 (talk) 09:13, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't think the edits have been vandalistic, but there is an issue at the article that could use more editor attention. I removed some poorly sourced and undue content and commented at the talk page. For requests like this, I would recommend a noticeboard post over using the help desk. WP:NPOVN would have been a good choice for this. If you ever want to request protection of a page, see WP:RFPP Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:53, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    How can I block vulgar articles in Wikipedia?

    I recently did a search for the name “Ana” in Wikipedia and in just the search suggestions, an article about anal sex with a vulgar image popped up at the top of the results. I like Wikipedia for the access to information, but I absolutely do not want to see articles like this, nor do I want my kids stumbling across them. Can I block these kinds of results and access to such articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.36.226.126 (talk) 13:17, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia is not censored. Cullen328 (talk) 16:05, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    On Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Options to not see an image. However, we cannot control Google, unfortunately. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 16:06, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    On Google, there is this feature called SafeSearch that's supposed to filter out explicit content. You might want to try that. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 16:18, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The poster is using the mobile version https://en.m.wikipedia.org and refers to Wikipedia's search suggestions after typing "Ana" in the search box. The second suggestion is Anal sex with File:Wiki-analsex.png displayed without going to the article. I admit that is a very graphic result when you haven't even written anal or clicked any link but as said, Wikipedia is not censored. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:24, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There is something to be said about maybe having the mobile search not show pictures in the search results? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:46, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The images generally seem helpful. The feature uses the page image which is also used in other places. An image can be disallowed as page image per mw:Extension:PageImages#Can I exclude certain page images? But we do it very rarely and only for "random" images which are not representative of the article, not for censorship reasons. Whatever people think of this image, it does illustrate what the article is about. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:37, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Recession Definition Shameful

    Do not reply to inflammatory posts - Alert the poster and move on. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 19:49, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

    How is it your definition of recession changed in light of the 2nd consecutive quarter of negative GDP? We know that has always been the definition......until now. 64.139.93.69 (talk) 13:54, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    You have been lied to. See the section above this one, headlined "LIARS". --Orange Mike | Talk 13:56, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You may be interested in reading the discussions at Talk:Recession. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:02, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It might be worth noting however, that in addition to on-site discussions, that this is discussed by sources such as Newsweek:
    • Bickerton, James (29 July 2022). "Wikipedia suspends editing of recession page as Biden rejects claims". Newsweek.--2603:6081:1C00:1187:49B4:94C7:A931:F855 (talk) 21:25, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Add a foreign language article to a list

    How do I add a German article on a writer to an English article listin notable people of a certain surname? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mommydoctor (talk • contribs) 14:32, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Mommydoctor: You don't. Those are not lists of people. They are lists of articles in the English Wikipedia. If there is a notable person without an English Wikipedia article, then you may create the article on that person, and then add the article to the list. Make sure the person meets the notability criteria for the English Wikipedia (WP:N), and only then proceed to WP:YFA. -Arch dude (talk) 15:09, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Mommydoctor (ec) Please exercise caution in doing this. The standards and policies of the German Wikipedia are different than those of this one, and what is acceptable there is not necessarily acceptable here. 331dot (talk) 15:12, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Editing

     Courtesy link: User:WaxmanRono/sandbox
    The organization I am writing about is very hence no published resources about the organization. What sources should I use for referencing. Thanks WaxmanRono (talk) 15:34, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, WaxmanRono. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes what reliable, independent sources say about the topic, and significant coverage is required. If those published sources do not exist, then it is impossible to write an acceptable article. Cullen328 (talk) 16:10, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello!

    For this site how do I message people? Can you? Katiesage124 (talk) 17:47, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Katiesage124: You can communicate with others about improving the encyclopedia by editing the section where the discussion is taking place (there is also a reply tool that can help facilitate that as well). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:55, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Katiesage124:You may also place a new section on a user's talk page to start a new discussion with that user, or start a new discussion about imprving an article by starting a new section on the article's talk page. -Arch dude (talk) 17:58, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    English

    How do you contact with people ?☹️ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.114.131.98 (talk) 19:32, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    See the thread above. Wikipedia isn't a messaging app, and article talk pages and user talk pages are for discussing improvements to the encyclopedia articles.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 19:37, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


    August 1

    Hi

    Mirza masroor is not current khlifa of Islam even they’re not muslim 86.31.235.87 (talk) 00:41, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    If you have a specific request for an edit to an article, please be bold and make the change. Or you could take it to the talk page to discuss it. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 00:43, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    COMPLAIN TO GOOGLE. We do not make this claim and have never done so; this is entirely on Google and they refuse to listen to our complaints about it. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 00:51, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Please read our article: Mirza Masroor Ahmad. Wikipedia does not claim he is a Caliph. We state that it is his official title within the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community. If you wish to suggest changes to either of these two articles, then make your suggestions on their respective talk pages. -Arch dude (talk) 02:11, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Could someone explain to me why my edit got rollback.

    My edit on Draft:Ash Lu was rollbacked by an admin, could someone explain to me why is that edit wrong? 2601:647:4C00:D260:24B9:3383:F982:988F (talk) 03:00, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    The reason that I tagged this G11 is because the creator is still creating new pages after more than ten triggers on abuse filter in zhwiki and even tried to __INDEX__ this user page, I don't belive it's still in good faith. 2601:647:4C00:D260:24B9:3383:F982:988F (talk) 03:04, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You tagged the page for speedy deletion under G11, but the page did not meet that criterion. G11 only applies to pages that are exclusively advertising or promotion and that would need to be fundamentally rewritten to serve as encyclopedic pages. FAdesdae378 03:07, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It contains an obvious lack of notability, even the "featured" corresponding article on Baidu Wiki only contains user generated sources. And I believe the email address in the information section is a violation to WP:NOT. So how to deal with draft now? Propose MfD? 2601:647:4C00:D260:24B9:3383:F982:988F (talk) 03:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v a little blue Bori 03:37, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Could an IP propose XFD's? Or could someone help me create the page?2601:647:4C00:D260:24B9:3383:F982:988F (talk) 03:42, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, I now found my account. QiuLiming1 (talk) 04:30, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=1101654899"