Jump to content

Wikipedia:Help desk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Strumoccur (talk | contribs) at 03:19, 27 May 2018 (→‎A Query regarding thumbnail of a page: new section). 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

    May 24

    The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (the Oxford DNB)

    Does Wikipedia have The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (the Oxford DNB) for editors to use online? I see that the Oxford Press has it for $29 per month, but I am asking here before paying for it.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 00:37, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I don't see the Oxford DNB listed on the Oxford University Press page of The Wikipedia Library Card Platform. You might want to use the talk page link there to check with the editor who is in charge of OUP accounts. He or she could tell you more about it. Eddie Blick (talk) 01:29, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • The century-old original DNB is available in its entirety at Wikisource. The new ODNB is clearly a better resource in most respects. However, You can quote extensively from the old one since it's in the public domain, and in some cases it's useful to have the name of the author of the original article instead of the name of the author of the updated article. Also, you can link to the old DNB from the Wikipedia article to let the reader go look for themselves without needing a subscription. It's at s:Dictionary of National Biography, 1885-1900. If you cite it in an article here, please use the {{DNB}} template. -Arch dude (talk) 01:56, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • If you are looking for something from the newer, paywalled, DNB, try WP:REX. That's what they're there for. --Jayron32 02:15, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    My created articles

    I have over 353,000 articles, and I find anyone over 350,000 cannot use the tool to find the list of articles I have created. Is there any other way, or am I out of luck?--Dthomsen8 (talk) 00:41, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Welcome to the Teahouse Help desk, Dthomsen8. Surely you mean that you have made over 353,000 edits to the encyclopedia, not that you have created that many articles. Are you now unable to use the "Contributions" function? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 02:32, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    It's about the "Articles created" link at the bottom of Special:Contributions/Dthomsen8. I don't know an alternative. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:40, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Cullen328: Seems you visit teahouse very often. Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 03:20, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, Abelmoschus, I have been one of the most active Teahouse hosts for several years. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:25, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Cullen328: Help desk here, why you welcome them to teahouse? XD Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:05, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Because the Teahouse is supposed to be a friendly place, Abelmoschus Esculentus. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:19, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Cullen328: Mmm I mean here is Help Desk. "Welcome to the Teahouse" should be in teahouse instead of here? I think "Welcome to the Help Desk" should be more appropriate. Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:23, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    You are right, Abelmoschus Esculentus. I forgot which place I was at. My apologies. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:30, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Cullen328: No worries. I also forgot where I am sometimes. Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 04:32, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Hope this helps, I_0urclc5 08:52, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    F1 Triple Battle for the Turbografx16 World Championship Playthrough Speedruns Levels 1 through 4 Speedruns Videos.

    Can you do F1 Triple Battle for the Turbografx16 PC Engine of Videos of this game in World Championship Mode Levels 1 2 3 & 4 in F1 Triple Battle in World Championship Mode Please Wiki Videos? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baron5291 (talk • contribs) 03:17, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, Baron5291. The Help desk is only for questions about editing Wikipedia. For general questions, ask at the Reference desks. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:28, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Where to report vandalism

    Hey Folks, it just took 27 years to read through how to report vandalism and I still don't get it. And that's a long time for something that should have been 2.3 nanoseconds (what would the math on that be?). Just to give you a sense of my awesome skill set, I can barely fix a typo. And I Can Capitalize Things. I checked the vandal report page and it just didn't parse. Should I just let it be? It's pretty minor and dumb. Am I missing a checkbox?

    Thanks -rudyard (talk) 04:36, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello Rudestar. If you see minor, one-off vandalism, simply revert it. If the editor has vandalized more than once, warn them. If the vandalism is persistent and ongoing, make a report at Administrator intervention against vandalism. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:55, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Revert ==> click article history tab, find the edit that caused the vandalism by clicking on the "diif" links, then hit the "undo" at the top of the right-hand side of the two-column diff. If the sysstem cannot figure out the revert it will tell you. In that case, just edit the article in the usual fashion with a comment of "RVV". Warn ==> edit the offending user's talk page by adding the appropriate {{warn}} template. -Arch dude (talk) 05:21, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rudestar: See WP:WARN for more warning templates. Abelmoschus Esculentus (talk to me) 05:39, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    New article

    Snigdhojyoti Banerjee is an Indian artist. | name = Snigdhojyoti Banerjee | image = File:Snigdhojyoti Banerjee - | imagesize = | alt = | caption = | birth_date = (1999-04-07) 7 April 1999 (age 25) | birth_place = Katihar, Bihar, India | othername = | occupation = Artist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Snigdhojyoti1 (talk • contribs) 12:05, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    This isn't the place to start a new article. I would recommend looking at Wikipedia's notability guidelines, Wikipedia:Notability (people), before attempting to create the article though. Deli nk (talk) 12:43, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Recent Changes

    Hi,

    Fairly recently I started heavily using the recent changes list, both for some general basic vandal hunting but also just normal edit-making. All good.

    However today I can't access lower pages (that is, any after however many posts I've selected on the initial list (250, 500 etc). There are clearly plenty of posts within the time-gap I've selected. The older 250/newer 250 bit has always been at the bottom of the page for me, but I can't see it there or anywhere else.

    I have a strong feeling I'm being an idiot, but after 20 minutes of failure on my own I thought I'd ask for some help .

    My filter set is: "May have problems", "unregistered", "newcomers", "human", "latest revision", "page edits", "page creation", "logged actions".

    Nosebagbear (talk) 12:49, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Nosebagbear You'll have found it is easy to increase your RecentChanges list as far as 500 edits, but this page tells us you cannot go back further than 500 edits or 90 days, whichever is more restrictive. To see older edits (within the 90-day limit) you'd have to apply more filters or select fewer namespaces: Noyster (talk), 12:28, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Virata Kingdom

    Virat kingdom is situated in choudwar, Odisha( Tradition holds that it was the capital for Virat, the brother-in-law of Kichaka. Additionally, the five Pandava brothers, with their consort Draupadi, took shelter in Choudwar during their secret exile.) please clear my doubt. Uttareswar temple is the witness (From the year 2003, Archeological Survey Of India (ASI) has started digging the site which is believed to be Virat's Palace and found lots of utensils, Boudhic elements. It is around 54 acres of land in which 10 acres is fenced by ASI and is declared as a Heritage site. The site after digging, in the year 2007, a foundation of an ancient Shiva Temple of 13th century. It is now a tourist place surrounded by a developing garden.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.113.181.23 (talk) 15:43, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi, this isn't the place to create a new page. Have a look at Wikipedia:Your first article - this takes you through the process Nosebagbear (talk) 16:01, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Grammar

    Hi,

    Should I write "the lower house of the French Parliament" or "the lower house of French Parliament" when writing in a British English style?

    Thanks

    WhatsUpWorld (talk) 16:38, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    The first one is correct, with the definite article in English. Dbfirs 16:50, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. WhatsUpWorld (talk) 18:44, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Traditions and celebrations

    Traditions and Celebrations Culture, Language, Family Faith and Spirituality 

    History and Geography

    I have an Assistant about this Inuit — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.5.36 (talk) 18:22, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, did you have a question about editing Wikipedia?: Noyster (talk), 20:22, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Error!

    Is it just me, or is Wikipedia experiencing "technical difficulties": "Cannot access the database: Cannot access the database: No working replica DB server: Unknown error (10.64.16.84:3318)" —2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 19:54, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    No, it's not just you. General Ization Talk 20:00, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    It is know, and being fixed.--S Philbrick(Talk) 20:27, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Old account, can't re-use it?

    I had an old account, User:Chelston, Special:Contributions/Chelston but lost the password and can't re-use it as I didn't have email, no way of merging the older account into this one?

    I last used it in 2004 so it's a really old account.

    No issues with this, is there? --Chelston-temp-1 (talk) 22:57, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Chelston-temp-1: Accounts cannot be merged. Passwords never expire so you can still try to guess it. If you don't remember it then the account cannot be retrieved. If you really want the username then you can try Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations but it may be declined when there are old edits. If a request is granted then the 2004 edits [1] would be assigned to a new name of the old account and not to you. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:15, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]


    May 25

    Blank lines

    I was trying to follow the guidance on blank lines of MOS:INDENTGAP in an edit in the Pedro Perebal AfD talk but it didn't work. Could you tell me what went wrong and how can I add the blank lines to my wall of text following the guideline? Thinker78 (talk) 00:49, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Just add blank lines by pressing <ENTER>. Anyway, I did it for you. Warmly, I_0urclc5 04:41, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    But MOS:INDENTGAP states that blank lines like that shouldn't be used... Thinker78 (talk) 05:58, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't (usually) use a blank line at the beginning of a new post as the indent (colon) or, where used, bullet point takes care of the formatting for you. However, if a post is long enough to split into paras, then pressing 'enter' to create them is fine. On another point, please don't post the same question in multiple locations. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 06:32, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for your input. I think it is helpful to post the same question elsewhere to get a second opinion, although I dont regularly do it. In this case, although I thank her for her input, Lourdes is advising me to do exactly what MOS:INDENTGAP says not to do: "Blank lines must not be placed between colon-indented lines of text". So my question is why after I followed the procedure stated in MOS:INDENTGAP of adding colons in lieu of blank lines, the result wasn't apparent blank lines within the text. Thinker78 (talk) 07:25, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    To clarify previous answer: you don't add a blank line in the source, because the requisite number of colons will create a para. with a correctly fmtd whitespace between the last line of the previous para. and the first line of the new one.
    Thus. Eagleash (talk) 09:25, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you provide an example using <nowiki> if necessary because I'm not understanding how it is done. According to MOS:INDENTGAP, " If a blank line is needed, place the same number of colons on it as those preceding the text below the blank line", which is what I did but it didn't produce a blank line. Thinker78 (talk) 23:03, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Glastonbudget

    We need to place a block onto the page due to someone constantly adding miss guiding information which is both libellous and slanderous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Turnpost (talk • contribs) 01:11, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello Turnpost, instead of adding templates like "protected" to the talk page of the article, you should simply start a new discussion on the talk page of Glastonbudget, in the same way as you started the discussion here. But focus on discussing why do you feel that the content does not meet Wikipedia's editing policy, rather than simply claiming that the content is libelous or slanderous. The page has been protected so you will need to reach out to the other editors on the talk page and reach consensus for your point of view. If this reply is not clear, please ask again. Thanks, I_0urclc5 04:29, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Turnpost I've blocked your user name since it breaches our rules. There are no circumstances in which you should edit the article directly because of your obvious conflict of interest (which, incidentally, you must declare). If you do make significant changes to the article after this warning, you may be blocked from editing at all. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:29, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Incidentally, there is no point you adding "protected" templates, since a bot will remove them from unprotected pages. The page has now been semi-protected by admin KnightLago. Also, at least one of the paedophilia accusations you describe as slander is referenced to the Leicester Mercury, a reliable source. Whether it should be in the article is another matter Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:29, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Adding a new MLM company to your list

    Hi I would like to add my brand new company to your Multi Level Marketing Company list please It’s called MACPI Australia (Making A Child’s Place Important) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.110.96.227 (talk) 03:32, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Hi. Please don't. Wikipedia is not a directory for new companies to be added. When your company becomes notable and qualifies under Wikipedia's notability guidelines for organisations – WP:ORG – some or the other editor would probably create an article about your company then. While you're here, please also do read Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines. Feel free to ask for more assistance. Warmly, I_0urclc5 04:35, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, Wikipedia lists are lists of Wikipedia articles -- unless/until your company has an article, it won't be on the list. —2606:A000:1126:4CA:0:98F2:CFF6:1782 (talk) 10:37, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, no. That's absolutely incorrect. Wikipedia lists don't need to be lists of Wikipedia articles. Lourdes 17:34, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

    Multiple-language page

    Hello,

    The company I work for has multiple-language wiki pages, however, the English version is the only one that is correct, updated and created by our company. We were wondering if there is a possibility to delete the other versions (in other languages) and if not, how we can redirect the users from the page in another language to the one in English. Thanks a lot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Margarita.knysh (talk • contribs) 07:43, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Please stop updating your company's page immediately. This editing violates WP:COI at a minimum, and if anyone from your company is paid to edit, then this editing violates WP:PAID, which is against Wikimedia's terms of use. Any paid editing MUST be disclosed per the policy at WP:PAID, and all edits by users with a conflict of interest (including unpaid edits by employees) should be proposed on the talk page of the article, following Wikipedia's guidelines at WP:COI. Iffy★Chat -- 08:33, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    As to your actual question, we only deal with the English Wikipedia here, questions as to whether the pages on other Wikipedias should be kept are dealt with on each Wikipedia. Iffy★Chat -- 08:33, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    How can I change the name of a page?

    Hello,

    I have just created https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Urban_Alps and it has Draft in its title.

    Can you help me and delete Draft from title?

    Thanks! David — Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidMihailMitran (talk • contribs) 11:37, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @DavidMihailMitran: Hello, a pagename is changed by moving it to a new location. This is done via the 'more' tab at the top of the page. However, this will not be available to you until your account is at least four days old and you've made 10 or more valid edits. On the assumption this relates to Draft:Urban Alps, the page is not ready for inclusion in the encyclopedia as it stands. It is promotional in tone and there are a numberof style / layout issues. Please see WP:MOS for more information. When the page is considered ready for 'mainspace' you can add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft which will submit it for review, but if you do so now, it will almost certainly be rejected. I will also leave some useful links at your talk page. Please read those carefully before proceeding. Please rturn here if you need further assistance. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 11:52, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @DavidMihailMitran: Also, it looks like promotional article and no significant sources. Most of the sources are from primary website. The subject of this article is not notable yet. Please see WP:NPOV, WP:N and WP:GNG. Thank you, Siddiqsazzad001 <Talk/> 13:45, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Using data/information gathered from Wikipedia??

    To whom it may concern, We have written the first in the series of books about Wild Swimming in Cornwall that is enhanced with additional information about the swimming locations and as well as generic information about Cornwall. This first book is an arc from Bodmin Moor, via Lostwithiel, on around St Austell and Mevagissey Bays and down to the Fal estuary. 

    The generic part of the series includes a Chapter entitled A Duchy Download that is separated in to sections on; geology, weather, demographics, economy, the arts and parking.

    We gathered information from many sources including your own and would appreciate your consent to use information gathered from your web site or publication. Chapter 9 will be titled; “References, Citations and additional sources of information; Apologies , Thank yous and contact details for feedback ; positive or constructively negative J” and we will be referring readers to your sites/publications for further information. 

    There are no direct quotes included and the information was integrated often with other sources and personal knowledge and thus cannot be directly or specifically proffered as your own.

    We have a deadline for mid June with our printers and therefore ask you to respond in writing within two weeks of the letter’s date with permission to use you as a source within our book. If you have any questions, please do get in touch. Yours Truly,

    Chryseis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chryseis66 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, Chryseis66. Nobody will get in touch with you: that's not how Wikipedia operates. The good news is that almost all the content of Wikipedia is (by design) licensed under a free licence such as CC-BY-SA, which means that anybody can reuse it for any purpose (commercial or not), without permission or payment, as long as they give appropriate credits. The exception is that some of our images are not so licensed, and are used under a "fair use" justification. If you plan to use any images from Wikipedia, then unfortunately you need to click on each one and look at its licensing status. See Reusing Wikipedia content for full details on all of this. --ColinFine (talk) 13:45, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Chryseis66: In addition to the excellent answer above, see also Wikipedia:Copyrights, in particular the big red box which states Important note: The Wikimedia Foundation does not own copyright on Wikipedia article texts or illustrations. It is therefore pointless to email our contact addresses asking for permission to reproduce articles or images, even if rules at your company, school, or organization mandate that you ask web site operators before copying their content.. TigraanClick here to contact me 15:25, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • You also also free to use direct quotes, up to and including entire Wikipedia articles. For quotes, you probably need more explicit attribution than you do when merely citing information, to avoid allegations of plagiarism. -Arch dude (talk) 16:03, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    No menu Displaying on page

    This page (Wax foundation) is not displaying a menu for the sections. Can someone explain me why this is? I can not find any technical explanation in the code or in any other setting.

    Can someone fix it and provide some documentation on how it is done for future reference?

    Thank you, Blazing Liberty 12:30, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

    Can you explain what you mean, I'm seeing a table of centents when viewing the page; are you editing from a mobile device? If so try scrolling to the bottom of the page and select 'desktop' mode. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 12:41, 25 May 2018 (UTC)][reply]
    I just went back to the page and it is now displaying. No, I was editing and viewing on a Windows 10 machine and viewing in Chrome. Problem solved but it remains a mystery as to why. Blazing Liberty 13:05, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
    I note some new sctions have been created today: there may not have been enough to generate a TOC prior to this. Eagleash (talk) 13:08, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Right, four section headings are required to automatically generate a table of contents unless the page contains __TOC__. The article had three at the time of the original post but now has four. @Blazingliberty: Please remove the checkmark at "Treat the above as wiki markup" at Special:Preferences. This will generate a correct signature with a link to your user page. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:38, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Will my draft be published?

    Hi, I'm sorry for being such a novice at this but today I wrote a draft article for Wikipedia. It now looks to be saved/published as a draft. The title of the page is Headcount Records. It's about a record label. Will someone eventually get around to publishing this page or is it just sitting there in the wrong folder. Any help is much appreciated.

    Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by CJL 2008 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Hello, CJL 2008. I have added a header to Draft:Headcount Records so that when it is ready to be reviewed you can submit it for review. However, I'm afraid it is a long way from that point at present. I suggest you read Your first article and NCORP carefully. Basically, Wikipedia is not interested in the slightest in what you, or I, or any random person on the Internet, knows, thinks or believes; and in an article about Headcount Records it has hardly any interest in what Headcount Records or its employees, friends, or associates, think or say. It is only interested in what people who have no connection whatever with Headcount Records have chosen to write about it, and been published in reliable sources (that is, those with a reputation for editorial control and fact checking). So rather than writing what you know and then looking for sources, you should be finding sources, and writing based entirely on what those sources say. If in fact there are few or no substantial independent reliably published sources about the label, then it does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for Notability, and no article will be accepted however it is written.
    One more point: are you Chris Leigh? If you are (or are in any other way associated with the label), you need to read about conflict of interest and possibly Paid editing.
    Sorry to throw so much at you. But the fact is that creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do successfully on Wikipedia; and if you have a conflict of interest it is several degrees harder. --ColinFine (talk) 22:53, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    ColinFine pings still don't work when you fix and resign a previous post so let me do this CJL 2008 to make sure they get a red dot :-) MarnetteD|Talk 22:57, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    How to find articles pertaining to a geographical area

    I'm interested in finding all the Wikipedia articles associated with a small geographical region. I'm familiar with categories, which can help find some articles, but it would be really cumbersome to find them all and to be certain that I've found them all. Does Wikipedia have any kind of feature where I could pull up a map and it would drop a pin (or something like that) on every feature that has an associated Wikipedia article? Or maybe there is some external website that does this? Thanks in advance for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justalittlequestion (talk • contribs) 17:42, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @Justalittlequestion: One possibility is, enter a keyword into the search box (top right) and you shoukd get a drop down. At the bottom of this you should see a 'selection' "containing xxxx". Clicking on that will take you to a list of articles. Whether that will find them all is debatable... that could be a little unlikely howver you search. Eagleash (talk) 18:30, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Articles with coordinates have the coordiates automatically copied into the article's wikidata item. Wikidata is a searchable database. However, 1) I am not knowledgable about how to do general searches in wikidata, 2) I do not know if coordinates are reduced to single numbers, and 3) I do not know if range searches are possible. If they are, you will still need to be careful for locations near the equator, the prime meridian, and the anti-meridian, because the numerical coordinates there may be discontinuous. You search will be of the form "all articles with lat> X-d and lat < X+d and lon >Y+d and lon <Y+d". If you do find a way to use wikidata for this, please report back here. (Meanwhile, I'll wander away and try to do some research...)-Arch dude (talk) 20:36, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      There are example queries for this at d:Wikidata:SPARQL query service/queries/examples#Items around with user location. Find an example similar to what you want, click on the "try it!" link to preload it inot the query editor, edit you query, and then run it. The result will be a map unless you modify the query to produce a list instead. -Arch dude (talk) 21:31, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Google Maps has some way to identify nearby wikipedia article locations on a map based on the wikidata, but I have not used it for awhile. (sigh, more research...)-Arch dude (talk) 20:36, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      Sigh. It looks like Google disabled this years ago. -Arch dude (talk) 21:31, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input. I accidentally pressed the reference button and now I can't fix my own mistake.

    I can't fix my own mistake in the Arcadium Release section.
     Done see why here.--Moxy (talk) 20:46, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Change title of a draft

    I started and article and then I saw errors I made in title afterwords, Draft:The Kiddnapping of Rosalynn McGinnis, I would like to correct it to be: Kidnapping of Rosalynn McGinnis. How can I do that? Thank you. MissTofATX (talk) 22:52, 25 May 2018 (UTC)MissTofATX[reply]

    See Wikipedia:Moving a page. Adam9007 (talk) 23:02, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Adding a Sortable Table to a Page

    I would like to add a bibliography or book list to the Shooting of Michael Brown page. I've set up the list with a sortable template, which I've added about thirty titles to, along with the authors, publication dates, topic, and descriptions. All the books are relevant to the Ferguson, MO incident. When I attempted to insert it into the category, the table I created didn't appear under the heading. It's appearing after the reference section. How can I fix that? B'H. 69.113.156.172 (talk) 01:28, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I can't see your edit in the history of that page, but when a table is displayed at the bottom of an article, it usually means the end-of-table marker |} is missing or damaged. -- John of Reading (talk) 05:53, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    May 26

    Meghan, Duchess of Sussex

    SO SORRY - I accidentally removed a section. Please replace. My fault entirely. Srbernadette (talk) 01:11, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

     Fixed. If you look in the pages edit history you will see a little "undo" button next to the date stamp. Clicking that will revert the most recent edit. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 01:13, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    "Pass thru" citation

    I have a citation in one WP article and I can to use it in another article. Unfortunately, the citation is a book which I don't have access to. I have no reason to believe that the specific information I want (or any of the book cited) is false. Can I just copy the citation from the first article to the other one and use it as a footnote? The reason I'm concerned about this is that I'll be using a piece of information in the second article for which I have not seen the specific reference; for example, the page number.

    To be more specific, the article that I want to add the citation to is Resettlement policy of the Neo-Assyrian Empire, in particular, the CN in first sentence: "In the three centuries starting with the reign of Ashur-dan II (934-912 BCE),[citation needed] the Neo-Assyrian Empire...". My source is the article on Ashur-dan II which says "Ashur-Dan II (Aššur-dān) (934–912 BC), son of...". This is referenced by "Cambridge Ancient History. Cambridge University Press. 1924-01-01. ISBN 9780521224963."

    I want to copy the entire reference into Resettlement policy of the Neo-Assyrian Empire and use it as an inline citation, replacing the citation needed: "In the three centuries starting with the reign of Ashur-dan II (934-912 BCE),[1] the Neo-Assyrian Empire...". Can I do that in spite of the fact that I have never seen the exact passage in Cambridge Ancient History where the years of Ashur-dan's reign is mentioned? --RoyGoldsmith (talk) 03:28, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    • The proper answer is "no, you cannot do that". I fear that editors do it all the time, but your citation is an assertion that you have actually checked the reference. Your best approach is (probably) to see which editor inserted the citation in the first article, and ask them to add the citation to your article. You can put your information in your article but leave it unreferenced or add the reference and tag it somehow with the appropriate tag. You can also ask if someone at WP:REX can find the book and check it. -Arch dude (talk) 03:46, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe append the {{Verify source}} template. -Arch dude (talk) 03:51, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    In practice, a plausible reference is unlikely to be challenged unless you are aiming for FA or GA status, where the absence of a page number might be an issue Jimfbleak - talk to me? 04:50, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    True, sadly. This means that "anyone can edit" a plausible-sounding article into existence if none of the references are online. For references published before 1923, we are OK because we can usually find a free online copy, and for recent stuff we can usually find news articles, but stuff that happened in the interim (1923-1990 or so) we are forced to go to a physical source or behind a paywall to verify. -Arch dude (talk) 07:05, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • That particular book (actually a massive multi-volume work) is available online behind a paywall. However, it's apparently part of the "Cambridge core" and you can request access via the Wikipedia library card platform. see this page for specifics. I've never done this personally because I'm a dilettante, not a scholar. -Arch dude (talk) 07:23, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The key to good referencing is to provide users with sufficient information that they can locate the original source with a minimum of fuss. In the absence of page numbers, readers might have to read an entire book before locating the relevant passage - and this is too much to expect of any casual user - and obviously should be avoided. However, I have noticed that e-book editions often don't provide pages numbers - which may not be a big headache because the text is usually searchable. However, if I cite an e-book, I always try to give other information that might assist users to validate the content e.g., Chapter 2 or Section x.x. or if an Encyclopedia then at least give the title of the article within the work and/or the name of the article author. Maybe this helps. BronHiggs (talk) 07:30, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    In my opinion, it is completely wrong for any editor to add a reference to an article if that editor has not read and verified the relevant content. You do not need to read an entire book but you need to read the applicable pages. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 08:17, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course, you are right, it is a fundamental mistake to list a reference if you have not consulted it directly. But perhaps I did not make myself clear- my main point is that the key to referencing is to provide useful information (eg. page numbers) to those who might be reading your article or your writing, and want to investigate the subject further. And, very occasionally there are documents that for a variety of reasons, lack page numbers - in which case as a courtesy to readers, authors should provide whatever information might might be useful to assist readers in locating the relevant passage without going to a lot of trouble. BronHiggs (talk) 09:12, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    In this particular case, the article Ashur-dan II uses the ref five times and has no page numbers, but it's a 19-volume work. I added a link to our article on the work and a {{pages needed}} template to the ref. Using a ref to a massive work with no page number is like telling someone that your address is "Earth". -Arch dude (talk) 16:21, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    duplicate name?

    I am a published playwright but there is already a Wikipedia page with the same name for a 17th century American. How do start a new page with same name for my own work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:2C1D:1800:20FF:CFFF:62D7:5F6D (talk) 11:47, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I would very strongly recommend against creating an autobiography, or an article on something you have a personal connection to (see WP:COI). ƒirefly ( t · c · who? ) 12:34, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • When you become NOTABLE (by our specific definition) then someone else will write the article. This ordinarily happens without you needing to do anything, but if you are notable and no article has spontaneously appeared, then you can request one. Whoever writes it will use our "disambiguation" scheme to distinguish you from the other guy. -Arch dude (talk) 15:02, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Macro to automatically add [[ ]]

    Hey there,

    I can't help but think that there might be a macro or browser addon out there to help with editing/authoring. Is there a way to let a macro parse to a whole lot of article-to-be-text and add [[ ]] automatically (and only for the first occurrence) where a wikilink actually lands somewhere? Especially for a longer technical article this could be helpful. --AufdieSocks (talk) 12:42, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    @AufdieSocks: Unfortunately, this might add many links leading to articles that were not relevant to the text's topic! -- John of Reading (talk) 12:51, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I see! But if it were to choose from a limited catalogue of 2-300 terms? Writing within the same themes, I often find myself linking to articles I frequently use, so a bit of time is lost while checking whether I did or didn't link to it previously already etc. This seems such an elementary time-saver that I'm not easy to convince that someone on the www didn't program it yet!--AufdieSocks (talk) 13:17, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    User:Nickj/Can We Link It did it but was shut down. I don't know a current tool. User:Edward/Find link does the opposite: Look for other articles which could add a link to a given article. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:37, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    At least you can use User:Ucucha/duplinks to highlight duplicate links that are already present in a page: Noyster (talk), 14:40, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you good sirs and madams!--AufdieSocks (talk) 15:23, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    How does one appeal an administrator's decision?

    Is there a hierarchy of admins such that one can appeal to an admin's "manager?" soibangla (talk) 17:23, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    • The answer depends on the type of the decision. There is not a hierarchy of admins, so the general process does not depend on finding somebody's boss. Please point us to the decision, and we can find the proper process for you. -Arch dude (talk) 17:49, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Rollback/lockdown on Second Amendment article soibangla (talk) 17:56, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The handling by an admin of the content dispute is what I want to appeal, not the content dispute itself. The content dispute could/should have been resolved on Talk, but the admin chose to "go nuclear" and obliterate my very presence in the article by rolling back edits that were never in dispute. soibangla (talk) 21:53, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    You have already taken the first step in the process, which is discussing the reversion with the editor (who happens in this case to be an admin) who performed it. Since you have not yet received a reply and it has not even been 24 hours since you posted on that editor's Talk page, no request for dispute resolution will be entertained at this time. General Ization Talk 21:59, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    This was handled in a wholly inappropriate and unacceptable manner. If this was anywhere but WP, I would express my disappointment using considerably less polite terms. soibangla (talk) 22:11, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Also it is clear from the editor's edit summary that what they were doing was reverting to the most recent version supported by consensus prior to what they determined was an edit war between you and another editor. This is standard procedure; an intervening editor or admin cannot always evaluate each and every edit made during an edit war to determine which should stay or which should go. General Ization Talk 22:05, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    In fact, the rollback removed edits of mine from prior days that had never been challenged and had nothing to do with the current dispute, thus obliterating my entire history in the article. A reasonable person might wonder if a message was being sent: "get off our page." soibangla (talk) 22:13, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    You also have the option of bringing up the issue at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. However, beware the boomerang. Your posting there will by necessity trigger a thorough review of your editing behavior, and unless you are absolutely certain it is sterling (I make no judgment here), you may want to wait until you have thoroughly discussed the matter with the other editor on their Talk page. General Ization Talk 22:17, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah yes, yet another "gotcha." It's fascinating how one editor can effectively throw another editor into a iron cage on a whim, then demand that editor leap backwards through rings of fire to prove his innocence, only to discover that their appeal can also be denied on a whim and/or bring retribution. I've been online for 35 years and I've encountered every known trolling technique, but this one is particularly amusing given the venue. soibangla (talk) 22:36, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    If you have been online for 35 years, you have no doubt during that time observed others shoot themselves in the foot. This has nothing to do with iron cages, whims, and trolling. Take the advice or don't. General Ization Talk 22:44, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Sadly, there are trolls on WP. Cheers. soibangla (talk) 22:49, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Also note that you must notify the other editor(s) involved if you take an issue to WP:ANI. General Ization Talk 22:20, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Soibangla, your edits are still present in the edit history of the article. I suggest that you present your edits and your references on the article talk, page, with a request that they be added back to the article. In my opinion, your indignation is misplaced, and your characterization of the actions of an administrator is unfair. A calmer, more collaboratiive attitude is likely to lead to success. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:34, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    My response to this event is entirely proportionate: My entire edit history in the article was obliterated, including edits that were never challenged and were not part of the dispute in question, and it was an absurdly disproportionate reaction to a routine dispute that could've been settled on Talk. soibangla (talk) 22:42, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Where to go to ask for someone to take a 2nd look

    Hi.

    I mainly do RC patrol, and occasionally I find something that looks suspicious or maybe problematic (I know where to ask for help if something looks serious0 and want a more experienced set of eyes to look at, is there a place to post a quick "hey can someone take a peak at this?" request

    I have wondered this for awhile, and some recent edits on McMartin preschool trial are what is prompting this. please ping in replyTantraYum (talk) 20:12, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    Bad-faith editor

    What should I do regarding an editor with whom I am in a content dispute, but who refuses to engage meaningful discussion on the matter? At Talk:Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, I am engaged in two discussions regarding some of the changes another editor wants to make to the article. I want to resolve the disputes, but the other editor now only makes mocking comments to whatever I say. Any suggestions are welcome. SMP0328. (talk) 22:56, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    I am the editor to whom you refer. I have previously extensively engaged you in a sincere effort to resolve our dispute. I concluded that you were not acting in good faith, and I have good reason to wonder if your bringing this topic up here, only minutes after I had an extensive discussion about appealing the decision of a certain admin whom you had asked to lock the article, is a continued demonstration that you are not acting in good faith. It smacks of trolling. You and I have obviously reached an impasse in our negotiations, and I suggest that we both stand down until the article lock clears on June 1st. soibangla (talk) 23:05, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, the fact that the article is protected for the next several days presents you and the other editor the perfect opportunity to discuss your differences of opinion about it on the article's Talk page without edit warring. Waiting until the protection expires and then resuming right where you both left off is not going to improve the situation in the least. General Ization Talk 23:14, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The immediate solution for "normalized relations" and continued negotiations is to restore my edits that were nuked for no reason, and to restore the edit that SMP0328 and I already reached agreement on. Do you actually think it's a coincidence he brought this topic up on this page just minutes after the previous thread? Do you think that's a "good faith" action? It reeks of trolling, just like I told you. He just proved it. That does not give me confidence that he is acting in good faith in this dispute, in addition to a number of other things he's said on Talk, and now he's actually here whining (trolling!) that I'm being a meanie. This is all just too funny. soibangla (talk) 23:25, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I did not know you were talking to that admin. BTW, I didn't ask that specific admin. I asked for full protection and that admin is who responded. I'm not trolling you. I don't even disagree with all of your edit to the 2A article. I want to reach a compromise, but you have stopped giving me constructive feedback (e.g., "HA HA HA"). My worry is that once the full protection expires, you will restore the disputed edits and we will be back at square one. SMP0328. (talk) 23:23, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know what else to do but HAHAHA! to someone who asserts s/he's only being reasonable after I provided 12 reliable sources that overwhelmingly establish that Warren Burger was a conservative, yet you blithely shrug it off and say it still seems subjective to you. And that was after you asserted that I was injecting bias into the article when in reality I was removing pre-existing bias that perhaps you preferred. And now you're here pulling this stunt. I mean, come on, do you actually expect me to take you seriously at this point? soibangla (talk) 23:31, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Your question here, and it's timing, gives me very good reason to suspect you are attempting to bait me into a violation to get me blocked. soibangla (talk) 23:34, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Please note my comment above: on the article's Talk page . This discussion belongs there or on one or the other of your Talk pages, or you (either of you) can take other actions that have been suggested above. But this Help Desk is definitely not the the place for mutual airing of grievances. Please move it to one place or the other. General Ization Talk 23:36, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I absolutely agree, this thread was a trolling stunt. soibangla (talk) 23:39, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    May 27

    Thomas Markle

    Can the photo please be made smaller - thanks175.33.22.145 (talk) 00:47, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    A Query regarding thumbnail of a page

    Whenever I type of a page in the search box, an image appears on the left side. The page has got many pictures but only a particular image is displayed while searching for the page. How is that determined?

    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&oldid=843134665"