Jump to content

Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 2a00:23c7:6085:6201:5530:c490:a171:aa5e (talk) at 11:35, 2 September 2022 (→‎I've tried to edit a page and want to revert to an earlier version: 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?)
    Ask a question

    August 30

    When could someone get a long term abuse page?

    In the past few days, a bunch of sock puppets have been spamming information about South Dakota Pizza on the Sioux Falls article. (By my count, four). The sockpuppet investigations page lists a lot more. I'm just wondering, when can a sock group get their own long term abuse page? I don't think this disruption is enough for a long term abuse page, but I'm just asking. Weeklyd3 (talk) 00:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    PhantomTech is probably best suited to explain this. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:39, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    TLDR: There is disagreement about when someone should get an LTA case page but in my opinion, several months of abuse after an indefinite block where the abuse would not be obvious if seen by most editors, but could be made significantly more obvious with knowledge included in the LTA page.
    Thanks for the ping. There is disagreement about when exactly someone qualifies for an LTA case page, but the following information from WP:LTA is relevant:
    • This page summarises a limited number of long term abusers, to assist members of the community who believe they may have cause to report another incident.
    • Only add vandals that have a need to be pointed out, especially ones whose contributions could be confused for good-faith edits by somebody unfamiliar with their modus operandi.
    • Blatant vandals whose sockpuppet accounts would be blocked swiftly as vandalism-only even if they weren't evading a previous block usually do not need to be listed here.
    All cases should meet the following basic criteria, which is presented at various parts of the process to create a new case:
    • The user is banned, indefinitely blocked, or is an IP user that would be indefinitely blocked if they used an account
    • Abuse from the user continues despite the ban or block being in place
    • The level of abuse is unusually high compared to other banned or blocked users
    • There is evidence to support that the criteria is met
    Additionally, there are two ambiguous qualifiers:
    1. The abuse has been ongoing for a long period.
      In my opinion, this is a balance between keeping information from dying out due to people familiar with the user leaving affected areas and denying recognition. An exact time period is hard to give but a few weeks, probably even months, is likely too short of a time while multiple years would definitely be long enough.
    2. An LTA case is beneficial to preventing the abuse or significantly reduces the resources needed to respond the abuse.
      This is also due to WP:DENY, and the point at which the benefit outweighs WP:DENY is not fully agreed on. If anyone can identify the abuse by looking at it, with no previous knowledge of the user, then there should not be an LTA case, there are multiple places within WP:LTA where a message similar to this is given though not everyone agrees with this and not everyone follows this. At it's most basic, an LTA page will link to SPI cases, and give an earliest know activity date. If there is nothing added that cannot easily be found from the SPI cases and that helps identify future abuse, then I'd say a case definitely doesn't meet this criteria.
    As a final note, not having an LTA case doesn't mean someone can't be called an "LTA". People are often called long-term abusers even if they don't meet the last requirement I listed for an LTA case, though it could be argued that they should not be per WP:DENY. Hopefully that helps, but let me know if you have other questions or if you'd like me to clarify anything. I haven't looked at the specific SPI you linked, but I can if you'd like information specific to it. PhantomTech[talk] 01:57, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the detailed answer, @PhantomTech! Weeklyd3 (talk) 03:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I've added it to my watchlist. I'll check everything that comes in for the next six months and report those who are dodgy. scope_creepTalk 17:35, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Question from 50.39.208.57

    My name is Gregg Eugene Harris. The page for me is very much out of date. I am now living in Silverton, Oregon. I operate Silver Falls Terrariums www.silverfallsterrariums.com and I am the Inn Keeper for The Noble Inn www.nobleinn.org. How can I get my page updated? 50.39.208.57 (talk) 00:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    You need to visit Talk:Gregg Harris and make an edit request by typing {{request edit}}, then listing the changes you would like to see made in a "Change X to Y" format, and citing some reliable sources for each change. Then, wait. Edit requests are handled by volunteers and they can take quite some time. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 01:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You may also enjoy using the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard to make your request. GoingBatty (talk) 02:46, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    profane subject line

    when searching Boris Johnson, a profane defamatory sub topic came up 2601:803:7F:2510:31AA:7A43:E1E:E565 (talk) 01:05, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I assume you are talking about the song [you might not want to reveal this title]. Sorry, but we don't censor Wikipedia. However, this title can be perceived as defamatory. I really don't know how the search results are ranked, and we can't manually pull a page off search suggestions.. Sorry. Weeklyd3 (talk) 01:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Wow, it's even a GA. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:17, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Why "Wow"? It's a GA because people such as ISD have put effort in to making it so. Bazza (talk) 08:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: Wow, I hear you. I await equally defamatory songs about Liz Truss. MinorProphet (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    No need. Already been done - X201 (talk) 14:25, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Weeklyd3: this title can be perceived as defamatory In matters of speech, Wikipedia only cares about US law. For instance, certain current events are described as an invasion of Ukraine by Russia, which is not allowed by Russian law, and the WMF has been fined in Russia for this. Even if our article about Boris Johnson stated in wikivoice that he was an [expletive], that would not be actionable in the US (only statements of provable facts are). Reproducing what other people have said, with enough context for readers to discern that it is someone else’s opinion rather than Wikipedia’s, is even less actionable.
    Of course, many persons "perceive" certain things as objectionable for various reasons, but we don’t listen to them. Maybe Google does, but that is a question for them. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 16:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @X201: Reminds me of the follow-up Alistair MacLean novel, or maybe the film version... MinorProphet (talk) 17:16, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Is this Article Approved?

    Is this Article Approved? Draft:Aniket Dey 103.51.148.84 (talk) 07:47, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    We don't need the whole url. The draft has not been submitted for a review, I will add the appropriate information to allow you to. 331dot (talk) 07:56, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @103.51.148.84: Nothing I see there demonstrates notability. He was nominated for a position, wrote a book and was arrested. A nomination isn't really news. See WP:TOOSOON Avoid repetitive sources without a writer's name. That usually indicates a lazy cut and paste of a press release. For the book to be notable, you need an in dependent review in a reliable source. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 17:17, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Image lost in translation

    Hello! I am trying to translate this page from English to French (here's my final version), but I noticed the first image didn't make it through, while the second did. Did I mess up somewhere, and if so, where? (apologies if this type of question has been answered before, I couldn't find anything in the FAQ) ~~~ Inkins (talk) 12:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    The image File:Rubbletrench.png is uploaded locally to the English language Wikipedia, that image isn't on the French Language Wikipedia (at least not with the same name). The file appears to be a candidate for copying over to Commons, from where the French WP could easily link it. I've never transferred an image before, I'll find out what is involved. - X201 (talk) 13:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Inkins It just need to be transferred to Commons to be used on the French article. Copyright looks OK to me, so you can do this at the file's location here by following the instructions. (Maybe X201's going to do it) Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You could also post a request for a translated image at fr:Wikipédia:Atelier graphique/Images à améliorer, or do it yourself if you have suitable software. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I've transferred the image to Commons and got it to appear on your FR version. It will need to be translated at some point. It may be worth pinging @Kickstart70: who created the original image to see if they could help. - X201 (talk) 13:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Re-submitting draft page for publication

    Hi there,

    I submitted a draft page (WagerWire) on Aug. 5, which was declined that same day. I edited it and re-submitted on Aug. 10. The box at the top of my "Read" tab, it still says declined. I want to make sure it is being reviewed again as I believe I addressed all of the editors points. Can you please help confirm that page is in the review cue?

    Thank you!

    Bailey Baileyirelan (talk) 15:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Baileyirelan, you did not resubmit it. You need to click the "resubmit" button to do that. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:15, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    If you submit, I will need to reject as a clear fail of WP:NCORP. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform. scope_creepTalk 15:21, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Baileyirelan Details about funding rounds are not necessary, and don't add encyclopedic value to the article (and these details don't add to the company's notability). You should remove that section. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 09:20, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Basic citation type

    Hi Folks!!, I'm looking for a basic citation for Ref 22 on Harro Schulze-Boysen. It has a couple of pieces of info, location, date, publisher. Its a report. I thought there was basic citation template for this, that stated as "Citation" but I can't find it anywhere. Thanks. scope_creepTalk 15:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I found cite report, and it is a report, which is quite close. I supposed I can use that. scope_creepTalk 15:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    {{cite book}}:
    {{cite book |last=Schulze-Boysen |first=Harro |date=1994 |orig-date=1932 |title=Gegner von heute – Kampfgenossen von morgen |publisher=Fölbach Verlag |location=Koblenz |edition=4th |isbn=3-923532-24-5}}
    Schulze-Boysen, Harro (1994) [1932]. Gegner von heute – Kampfgenossen von morgen (4th ed.). Koblenz: Fölbach Verlag. ISBN 3-923532-24-5.
    which more or less mimics the style chosen by the editor who added the citation. {{cite report}} has a different style:
    {{cite report |last=Schulze-Boysen |first=Harro |date=1994 |orig-date=1932 |title=Gegner von heute – Kampfgenossen von morgen |publisher=Fölbach Verlag |location=Koblenz |edition=4th |isbn=3-923532-24-5}}
    Schulze-Boysen, Harro (1994) [1932]. Gegner von heute – Kampfgenossen von morgen (Report) (4th ed.). Koblenz: Fölbach Verlag. ISBN 3-923532-24-5.
    —Trappist the monk (talk) 15:38, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]


    re tag "Tag: Disambiguation links added"

    Other than waiting for a notice on my talkpage, is there a tool I can use to find why "notice Tag: Disambiguation links added" showed up when I did &action=history to review a series of edits. Nuts240 (talk) 22:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Nuts240: Please always post a relevant link or example. I guess you refer to [1]. I have enabled "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. It displays checks in orange. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:22, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    August 31

    visa

    Can anyone come your country for visit. 103.120.36.213 (talk) 01:15, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    This is a worldwide project. Please read Travel visa. Cullen328 (talk) 01:27, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Wikipedia:Mohalla Altaf shaheed

    Can anyone look at the page Wikipedia:Mohalla Altaf shaheed. Regards. — Meghmollar2017 (UTC) — 10:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I have moved your draft back to Draft:Mohalla Altaf shaheed. The Wikipedia namespace was the wrong one anyway (that is for pages about the creation of Wikipedia), but it is not ready to be an article, as it has not a single source. Please read your first article. ColinFine (talk) 11:32, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Can I nominate

    There's an article which meets FL criteria imo. Those who improved it are not very active. Can I nominate the article for FL and give the entire credit to them? Dr Salvus 12:43, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Dr Salvus: I think you mean FA for featured article, unless you're referring to a featured list. See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:04, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    How to create company page in wikipedia

    I want to create a company page for House of Party as House of Party is famous brand in USA for party supplies. Can anybody guide me about creating a company page? Abubakarpetra (talk) 12:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    There are no 'company pages' on Wikipedia. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:56, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Abubakarpetra:You may create an article about any notable subject, so your first task is to verify that this company is notable: see WP:NCORP. If the subject is not notable, we will delete the article. This happens more than 100 times a day. Don't waste your time or ours if the company is non-notable. After you are sure the company is notable, proceed to WP:YFA. -Arch dude (talk) 13:09, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    If you have an association with the company, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 13:11, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Company is currently selling its products at Amazon and Also have their official website. Abubakarpetra (talk) 13:26, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Abubakarpetra: Neither of which establishes the notability if the company. Please read the policy pages linked to in this section. Wikipedia is not a directory of companies that merely documents existence, there is criteria for inclusion. 331dot (talk) 13:34, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Suggesting reordering some medical articles...

    You know how there are many stories about people googling a symptom and getting all the scary results first? I just saw an example of that, in the article Cramps, and think it would be ethical to rearrange the introduction so the common causes (fatigue, electrolyte imbalance) are well before the scary stuff (neurological disorders).

    Physicians have a saying, "when you hear hoofbeats, assume horses, not zebras." Anyone else think we should be making an effort to put the zebras at the bottom of the list?

    // I just realized that this sounds like I'm saying "somebody else should do this" but I meant "is it cool with you guys for me to rewrite this"

    // [NomadicVoxel] [talk\ctbs] 17:50, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @NomadicVoxel: It wouldn't hurt to suggest changes on individual talk pages, and then if there's no response, make the edit. WP:BEBOLD. If anyone disagrees, you'll eventually find out. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:06, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks @Timtempleton. Sorry I didn't think to ask on the talk page, new to this.
    // [NomadicVoxel] [talk\ctbs] 18:53, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Makes sense. Appreciate that.
    Sorry, just relatively new to this stuff. // [NomadicVoxel] [talk\ctbs] 18:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Edit Page Photo

    Hello! To represent AstraZeneca properly, we would like change the current and incorrect photo on our page to The Discovery Centre (DISC) in Cambridge, UK which is our new main building. The current photo is incorrect and misleading. Below are press release: [2]https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2021/astrazeneca-unveils-the-discovery-centre-disc-in-cambridge.html [3]https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/astrazeneca-breaks-bank-again-for-new-futuristic-hq-pkhpjnf7b https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AstraZeneca Grace8888 (talk) 20:01, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, Grace8888. Once you have made the mandatory declaration of your status as a paid editor (see that link for details), you are welcome to
    1. Upload a suitable free image to Wikimedia Commons using the Upload wizard, and
    2. Make an edit request on the talk page of the article to use the new image.
    Note that the image must have been specifically either placed in the public domain, or licensed under a free licence such as CC-BY-SA by the legal copyright holder. ColinFine (talk) 20:10, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Bio for Maria Barrett US Army Commander of Army Cyber Command

    Hello, I reviewed her bio. It shows "Died" "Gitmo". Is this an error? Thank you! Dale Moon Moon Insurance 2600:1702:3FB0:1DE0:495F:532:2CC7:3634 (talk) 21:22, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    It was vandalism, a few hours ago: I have reverted it. Thank you for pointing it out. ColinFine (talk) 21:40, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    LiveRamp/Acxiom Company Correction

    Hello Help Desk – I am an employee of Acxiom and understand that I’m not supposed to do any company editing myself. I'm hoping someone here can help me. Acxiom used to be LiveRamp, but the companies split. The confusing history is correctly explained in each article, but when the names of the articles were switched, the corresponding Wikidata files weren’t properly updated. The LiveRamp Wikidata file still refers to the company as Acxiom. The Wikidata file for Acxiom is newer and correctly just calls it Acxiom. When someone does a Google search for Acxiom, Google seems to be pulling some of the incorrect LiveRamp Wikidata into the search results. You can see Acxiom all over the LiveRamp Wikidata file, such as in the other foreign language Wikipedia sites, and in the main box where it says “also known as Acxiom”. Does anyone here know how to correctly update the LiveRamp Wikidata file to break this association, so Google will display the correct search results? Anthonyacxiom (talk) 21:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Anthonyacxiom Not saying it shouldn't be updated, but we have no control over Google search results, for that you will need to contact Google. You will also need to make a formal paid editing disclosure, please see WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 22:02, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @331dot @Anthonyacxiom You are both right, the LiveRamp Wikidata file should not refer to the company as Acxiom, should it?
    The OP wants to know how to update Wikidata items. I am not familiar with that process. 331dot, who can help? 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:45, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know anything about it, I assume someone else around here does. 331dot (talk) 07:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Anthonyacxiom I have a little insight into this. I updated both the articles a few years ago, when these two companies basically switched names. I also moved the Acxiom dab page to Acxiom (disambiguation). I didn't think to do anything with the Wikidata file. It looks like there are two things going on now. When someone Googles either Acxiom or LiveRamp, Google just brings up LiveRamp results in the Knowledge Graph. As 331dot points out above, we have no control over this. There's a feedback link at the bottom of the Knowledge Graph, and I already took the initiative to report the incorrect display result for Acxiom to Google. You should notify them as well. I'm sure they get many correction requests. I see what you're saying with the incorrect LiveRamp Wikidata file. That IS a Wikipedia issue. I just went over and changed the title from Acxiom to LiveRamp, but there are other foreign Wikipedia pages that say Acxiom. I'm not a Wikidata expert so I have no idea what impact that has on articles. Perhaps someone better versed in Wikidata and also possibly fluent in German or Spanish might take a look and see what kind of housekeeping needs to be done. And please make sure anyone from the company editing either article makes the proper disclosures per WP:PAID. Better yet, rather than editing yourself, we suggest you make a connected edit request. See Wikipedia:Simple conflict of interest edit request. You can also ping me or post on my talk page. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:50, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, Tim. I'm pretty sure that the label on the Wikidata item has no effect on any Wikipedia article linked to it, unless the article specifically goes and gets the label (for example in an infobox) - and I doubt whether anything does so use it, though I don't know for sure. So I don't think that changing the English label will have any effect in Wikimedia projects outside Wikidata. Whether Google uses the label, I have no idea. ColinFine (talk) 22:50, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I think you're right. I think the solution is just to keep pinging Google's feedback button and telling them to not show the LiveRamp Knowledge Graph for Acxiom searches. To be certain, I posted a question at the Wikidata help desk linking to this question, and the other Wikidata question below. [[4]] TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 01:02, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    September 1

    Removal of birthdate per WP:BLP

    Per WP:BLP you may ask to have your birthday removed. When I asked, someone was kind enough to do this for me, including removing it from the article history. My friend Lindsay Burns would also like her birthday removed. I took it off the page. Is there a way I can remove it from the page history or request this be done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asbruckman (talk • contribs) 16:03, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    1. You have misrepresented or misunderstood what WP:BLP says about birthdates, and
    2. In spite of your declared WP:COI, you have already removed the reliably sourced birthdate (rather than reducing it to just birth year), and
      Struck (I see you corrected it to year only in the next edit)
    3. The declared COI/paid editor requesting the birthdate removal is SighSci (see User talk:SighSci#August 22); your post here could be interpreted to mean that SighSci is Lindsay Burns.
    The full matter is currently being discussed at SighSci's talk and at the COI noticeboard. [5] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:41, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Pueblo Nuevo, Temuco

    Hello, the article Pueblo Nuevo, Temuco has an error in reference 27. And the references in the Share taxis, Metro and Metrotren Araucanía sections do not appear in the References section.I don't know how to fix it. Thanks in advance. Soy Juampayo (talk) 04:41, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Done, I was able to do the correction myself. Hugs. Soy Juampayo (talk) 04:54, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Outdated Data for Emplifi Article

    @Timtempleton: said here the Emplifi Wikipedia page is pulling out-dated, pre-acquisition financials for the infobox from Wikidata (no new information is publicly available). He suggested I post here about how to stop wikidata from auto-populating the infobox, if possible, as it would be better to leave it blank than use financials that are just of the acquired business. JordanJulian19 (talk) 08:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @JordanJulian19: I think this is an easy delinking question for someone who knows the ins and outs of Wikidata. If that person isn't here, I also posted a question linking to this question and the other Wikidata question above at the Wikidata help desk. [[6]] TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 01:05, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Tool for seeing how people navigated to a page

    What can I use if I want to see how users navigated to a certain page (so like, if I wanna see how users got to the page for "Canada", I can see that 23% got there from a search engine like Google, 10% got there by searching, 8% got there by clicking a wikilink on the "North America" page, 5% got there by clicking a wikilink on the "Ontario" page, etc.). I definitely have used this tool before, but I can't remember what it was called, and couldn't find it listed in relevant WP/help pages. TheGEICOgecko (talk) 09:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @TheGEICOgecko toolforge:WikiNav 163.1.15.238 (talk) 16:42, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! TheGEICOgecko (talk) 18:29, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Wrong Talk Page

    I just expanded Michigan eLibrary, however there is no Talk Page for this article. The Talk Page goes to Library of Michigan which is wrong. How can I get it corrected, where Michigan eLibrary has its own Talk Page? Keep in mind that Library of Michigan still has to have its own Talk Page. Two different articles that each should have their own Talk Page. Thanks for technical help.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:04, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Click the "redirected from" link at the top of Talk:Michigan eLibrary after it's been redirected. You can edit the page and remove the redirect. Bazza (talk) 10:08, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. I corrected it this way. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:13, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Allied Names for WWII Japanese Aircraft

    The Code name Joyce on the Wikipedia page says it is an unknown Nakajima plane but I found a page that says it was a fictional plane (https://ww2db.com/other.php?other_id=32)

    If I could get logged in I'd be posting under my name  :) 2605:A601:AF50:4200:25A8:3072:A564:4863 (talk) 11:09, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I suppose the page in question would be World War II Allied names for Japanese aircraft, and suggest you post on the article talk page regarding the source. Sam Sailor 16:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    WorldNetDaily

    WorldNetDaily references are unreadable.

    • 1 a b c [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]
    • 2 a b [13][14][15][16][17][18]
    • 26 [19][7][20][4][21][22][23][24][8][25]
    0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 13:48, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you suggesting that there's a wild case of WP:Citation overkill? Or that it's just not human-readable? Explodicator7331 (talk) 14:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems like something went horribly wrong with this edit. The 40+ subsequent edits to the article will make it difficult to fix. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:54, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @ONUnicorn Not sure what you mean, the groups of refs are still there in previous versions, they just appear after the refs inside them (e.g. the first bundle is ref no 9). It would be possible to separate the bundles of references out into a "notes" section using {{Efn}} and {{notelist}} if preferred. This seems to be yet another case of 0mtwb9gd5wx wasting everyone's time by asking poorly written questions: [7] [8] [9] [10]. If they expect other people to be able to help them they should at least put the effort in to write in proper English that other people stand a chance of understanding. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 17:08, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it would be preferable to separate the bundles into a notes section. As 0mtwb9gd5wx pointed out, the way it is now they aren't "readable" - i.e. they aren't expanded. In the article you see a footnote that leads to a footnote rather than a readable reference. I get why they're bundled, but they need to be expanded somewhere. Also, you are correct that they were bundled that way before the edit I pointed out - the bundles just weren't in the same location in the article, meaning it was less noticeable. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 17:14, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @ONUnicorn The "footnote leads to a footnote" setup is intentional, it's called nesting footnotes and is quite commonly used when certain statements need a lot of references, e.g. most of the entries in List of video games considered the best and similar lists use this setup. The citations seem to be fine to me, if you use citation popups (default gadget) you can hover over the reference in the reference to get the full details of each source. As I said above though WorldNetDaily references are unreadable is not a question and we have no way of knowing what the issue here actually is. Unless 0mtwb9gd5wx comes back to tell us what they find "unreadable" about them I don't think there's much we can do here. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 17:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The mess at WorldNetDaily does not resemble anything that's recommended at nesting footnotes.   Maproom (talk) 18:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Need help publishing bio

    New to wikipedia and trying to publish my Bio on wikipedia, I already created a words document draft, if anyone can help me publish it would be very grateful. I can send the word document private if you wish to help. Kanetam (talk) 19:41, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    @Kanetam: You are strongly discouraged from writing an autobiography about yourself on Wikipedia, as it is generally very hard for a subject to write neutrally about themselves. You may want to use a social networking site to do so. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:43, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The article is not about me, it's about a Professor / book publisher that works in my country. Does that change anything? and if so, then how do I publish their bio Kanetam (talk) 21:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Kanetam, create a WP:DRAFT. Read WP:YFA for an overview of the article creation process. Sungodtemple (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Kanetam: In that case I'd suggest following Sungodtemple's suggestion, and make sure you have reliable sources that establish the subject's notability as Wikipedia defines it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:02, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, Kanetam. As Tenryuu says, this is strongly discouraged. If you are unfamiliar with writing for Wikipedia it is unlikely that any of what you have written will be suitable. You would need to find several places where people wholly unconnected with you, and not quoting your words, have written a significant amount of material about you and been published by reliable sources - if these do not exist, then you do not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (like most of us) and no article is possible. If you can find such sources, you will then have the extremely difficult task of forgetting everything you know about yourself, and writing an article based wholly on what those people have published about you - including people who have been strongly critical of you, if there happen to be some.
    If you succeed in getting an article written and accepted, it will not belong to you, will not be controlled by you, and might end up saying what you do not want it to say.
    Do you see why we disourage you from trying? ColinFine (talk) 19:49, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Hello, Kanetam. I've seen your clarification. Much of my reply still applies: it is unlikely that your draft will be appropriate unless you have already worked with sources in the way I have suggested. ColinFine (talk) 22:45, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    User talk page mystery

    I feel a complete fool asking a question here after 16+ years of editing Wikipedia, but when I recently archived my talk page the generated 'User talk:Derek R Bullamore/Archive 25' seems to be hanging on the talk page, rather than nesting in the cream coloured box to the right. There is probably an easy answer to this, but I am stumped (or LBW, bowled, caught, or even hit the ball twice). Many thanks - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:22, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    It was fixed by Trappist the monk in this diff (the link needed to be placed inside the {{Archive box}} template). DanCherek (talk) 20:53, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Recent donation

    I tried to donate $500 as a onetime donation. My receipt said I donated $5000. Please correct this mistake no matter which of us made it. 76.171.34.121 (talk) 20:40, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Please try following these steps to request a refund. DanCherek (talk) 20:47, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    September 2

    USS Grant County (Cuban Crisis Involvement)

    I served on the USS Grant County from Oct 10th 1961 ti Oct 10th 1964. Never did we stop at Camp Pendleton. That's in California! It was Camp LeJuene, N.C. that we stopped and picked up marines and did our thing during the Cuban crisis. I was Radioman 2nd class and served with some great sailors, mainly Melvin Bladen, Jerry Howard, Armando Arredondo, Chuck Chenoweth and Bill Leibold. We stopped at Camp LeJeune several times while I was actively on the ship. Never did we stop at Camp Pendleton. Wow....what an error. Thanks. Richard Warren Rew4219 (talk) 04:53, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Courtesy link: USS Grant County.
    The article could use better referencing, but the statement that the ship was in Camp Pendleton in October 1962 comes from the Naval History and Heritage Command web site, which is an "official U.S. Navy web site". If you are claiming that the US Navy is wrong about the history of one of its ships, you should make your case on the talk page of the USS Grant County article. You will need to present a published source, not merely your memory. CodeTalker (talk) 07:02, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I want to learn about current English Wikiperia POV.

    Hello, this account is 14 years old, but I only did less than 500 edits. I am not a native English speaker, which makes me require fixing Wikipedia pages about my country , made by western views.

    I am currently joining an Afd discussion which needs worldwide views. The editor who created the article says, "English Wikipedia is always like this.Fix the article" (I avoid to talk Afd itself).Was it? Was English Wikipedia always biased unless we non-English countries native join to fix? Please understand, I am asking sincerely. It's always difficult to fix western biased articles. Paperworkorange (talk) 05:57, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I add I noticed there are so many systemic biases here in wikipedia so I joined WikiProject Countering systemic bias.It doesn't mean I understand the current situation.In this 14 years,world changed in crazy way, possibly wikipedia, too. Could you teach me systemic bias is becoming norm or still not? Paperworkorange (talk) 09:34, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    How to nominate day on "On this date" section?

    How to nominate day on "On this date" section in the Main Page. I don't find any route for nomination? The Supermind (talk) 06:24, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    The Supermind See WP:OTD. 331dot (talk) 07:38, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    I've tried to edit a page and want to revert to an earlier version

    Hi I have been editing the University of Sussex page to update with our new Vice Chancellor Sasha Roseneil, but in attempting to rectify links I have altered the text at the top of the page. Could someone help? Many thank, Charlie Charlie Littlejones (talk) 09:55, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

    Ghmyrtle has reverted your changes to University of Sussex. If you are not confident about editing an article, you can always suggest the edit on the article's talk page.
    You say "our new VC": what is your connection with the university? It is possible that you have a conflict of interest, and if you are in any way employed by the universirt, then you count as a paid editor, and you are required to make a formal declaration of that (see the link I gave).
    In any case, if you are connected with the university, you should not edit the article directly, but should use the Edit Request Wizard to suggest edits to it. ColinFine (talk) 10:10, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi @ColinFine, yes, I do work at the University in communications. Apologies, I had not realised we couldn't make factual updates. I will go through the Edit Request Wizard route! Thanks for your help and for coming back to me so quickly! 2A00:23C7:6085:6201:5530:C490:A171:AA5E (talk) 11:35, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=1108075250"