Help desk
< July 16	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 18 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

July 17

Help desk/Archives
Help desk/Archives
Born	1989; Madrid (Spain)
Occupation(s)	Musician, composer
Instrument(s)	Double bass, electric bass and fretless bass
Years active	2011–present
Labels	Warner, Global Music Centre, Fish Factory, Avispa, Leyenda records, Holy Grail Records, 12th Isle
Website	http://www.javiersanchezperez.com/

How do I change an Article Title

Dear Wikipedia

Australian Hearing is now known as Hearing Australia...how do I change the title of the article to reflect this?

thanks AWM — Preceding unsigned comment added by HearingAustralia (talk • contribs) 00:09, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HearingAustralia. Articles are renamed with a "Move" to a new title. I moved it for you.

PS: It's very important that you change your user name to something less institutional, as it's a violation of Wikipedia's user name policy. See here --Quisqualis (talk) 01:26, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Was this comma splice necessary?

From the article "Great Ireland" (edit: the original link I put up here was "Celtic Otherworld", sorry about that), I've edited the following sentence:

"Celtic folklore tells of a mythical land across the western ocean often referred to as the Celtic Otherworld, and also known as Annwn or Avalon, among other names."

Both commas I edited in. The second one seems appropriate, but I'm not sure about the first one. Could anyone please tell me if I'm correct on about the first one (and the second one, if it is indeed wrong)?--Thylacine24 (talk) 00:17, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence needs both, and I would remove "and".--Quisqualis (talk) 01:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and you're right about removing "and". I'll do it.--Thylacine24 (talk) 02:59, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My wiki is still in draft version, why?

Dear sirs,

I have drafted my wiki called "King's College International School Bangkok" for a while but it seems to get stuck. I'm not sure if it's going to get published as public or not, please could you help me with this?

I just added a very basic information and will keep adding more later on.

Thank you in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taksina Sakulrattanapornchai (talk • contribs) 04:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Taksina Sakulrattanapornchai: The page has not been submitted for review. You need to add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page... just as it is written in this sentence, without additional nowiki and other coding. Please see WP:NSCHOOL for notability guidelines (and follow the links found there). Please remove bolding from headings; infobox UK school doesn't seem to be appropriate... see Template:Infobox school for more information. Please be sure that the page is ready for mainspace before submitting... to avoid disappointment and extra work for all concerned. Please note that there are roughly 4,000 articles awaiting review and it could take 8 weeks (or more). Good luck. Eagleash (talk) 04:54, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Taksina Sakulrattanapornchai:, you have copied the markup so I don't think what you did will work. I was going to change it for you so that the draft would be submitted for review, then I noticed that you were writing about a future event, and Wikipedia does not make predictions unless they have been made by WP:Reliable sources. I think it might be WP:Too soon for an article about an institution to be set up at some time in the future, but if you can find independent news articles about the future school, then please add them before you submit for review, then you will have a better chance of your article being accepted. See WP:Referencing for beginners for some guidance. Dbfirs 06:41, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The wrongly formatted markup was in the page before the question was posted here. The OP has not edited since. @Taksina Sakulrattanapornchai: In addition to everything above and very importantly, the page is unreferenced. See WP:REFB, WP:RS and WP:CITET for more on adding references. Eagleash (talk) 09:11, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Taksina Sakulrattanapornchai: Please read WP:YFA, and pay special attention to notability. We delete more than 200 articles per day, mostly due to lack of notability. Please start by finding the needed reliable sources WP:RS to establish notability, to make sure you are not putting effort into creating an article that will be deleted. -Arch dude (talk) 16:14, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Book creation

I am very confused--is there a BOOK option or not--there are lots of disclaimers, but I don't see a link to one's own book in the right upper corner--on some page that I can't get back to, it lists one article I saved--on a different Wikipedia page, it shows anoter article I saved--when I tried to save a different new page, I saw nothing on the idebar about storing a page OR downloading a PDF--I"ve contributed to Wikipedia (though not a lot and I don't use it a lot, but I think it is great--but I find it very difficult to navigate except for a search --I have a limited income, or I"d give more, but I really wish there were a webmaster that could make things more user friendly--thx--Ruth STrauss (if you post this, please just post first name or first name and last initial — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruthhstraussmd (talk • contribs) 06:08, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruthhstraussmd: The book creator currently has limited functionality. You and others can see links to the collected articles on a Wikipedia page like Book:Canada. You can order a printed copy (I think this works) but you cannot download a PDF or other file version of the book. Click "Contributions" at the top right of any page to see your edits. If you have many edits then you can click "Subpages" at the bottom to see books and other subpages you have created in your userspace. You have created User:Ruthhstraussmd/Books/ruthhstraussmd/books. You don't have to repeat your username and "books" when you choose a name for your book. Just choose a suitable title for the specific book you are creating. It's possible to create multiple books. Start a new book by clicking "Create a book" in the left pane of an article when the book creator is not already active. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:27, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Where do I find answers from this desk??

earlier, I thought I saw a box that said check back to a certain page to see if thre are any answers to my question, but now I can't find that page--as I said, even though Wikipedia is great for looking up things, the navigability is really not that easy in my opinion--so I sent a question earlier, but I don't know where to look if you answer it-- thx for warning me about not including an email address--can you post as a notification in my box as to where to look if there is an answer to my previous quetison--thx THX username --ruthhstraussmd

THIS IS NOT AN EDIT OF A PAGE--IT IS A HELP DESK QUETSION--I DON'T KNOW WHY AT THE BOTTOM IT SAYS "PUBLISH"--THIS IS JUST ONE OF THE MANY DIFFICULT THINGS WITH NAVIGATION ON WIKIPEDIA--I THOUGHT IW AS CONTATING THE HELP DESK BUT THEN I GOT A WARNING NOT TO USE MY EMAIL ADDRESS (WHICH I 'M GRATEFUL FOR) BECASUE I COULD GET ALOT OF SPAM, WHEN IN FACT ITHOUGHT IT WAS A PRIVATE EMAIL TO A PRIVATE HELP DESK — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruthhstraussmd (talk • contribs) 07:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The button that says "publish" is to remind you that anything you write anywhere in Wikipedia is public. I understand that the WikiMedia Foundation required this change to keep the legal position clear. If you ask a question (please don't use BLOCK CAPITALS, it is considered shouting and rude) on the help page, then your question is published on the help page. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:29, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruthhstraussmd: Click "Contributions" at the top right of any page to see pages you have edited. Replies are usually posted there, or sometimes at User talk:Ruthhstraussmd. You get a notification of posts to User talk:Ruthhstraussmd but on other pages, you only get a notification if the replying poster includes code to notify you, e.g. {{ping|Ruthhstraussmd}} in this post. The reply also has to be signed with ~~~~. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:37, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

POSTING A SOURCE

This is getting ridiculous--verything I"ve tried to do on Wikipedia tonight (except people searches) has beena BUST--I went to a page hwere the preson is living and it asked for additional sources but the links were so convoluted and long and complicated,a fter I read it, I couldn't put down or figure out where to put the source--I have wasted more time on this site tonight--very frustrating--I don't know even where to look if someone answers this--that is how unnavigable the site is, or lacking clear instructions--well I guess it is like "the camel"--a "horse put together by a committee" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruthhstraussmd (talk • contribs) 07:56, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruthhstraussmd: You will find answers here, as soon as someone manages to find any question in what you wrote and writes an answer. Just give people some time. --CiaPan (talk) 08:08, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Please WP:SIGN your posts at Wikipedia – just put four tildes (~~~~) at the end. CiaPan (talk)

There are 5,893,163 pages on the English WP. Trying to guess which one you were working on causes other editors work just to understand your complaint. Please be specific: which page and which link? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:33, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Articles can use different source sýstems and have different source requirements so it's difficult to help without knowing the article and source. The edit notice at top of the edit window for this page includes: "If possible, please be specific in your question rather than general and link to any page or article your question involves, or at least tell us the title of the page." PrimeHunter (talk) 11:45, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It could relat to Fab Five Freddy where this edit added a 'source' but it was not correctly formatted and was subsequently reverted. Eagleash (talk) 13:10, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruthhstraussmd:If you have difficulty formatting information for an article, just use any format at all to add the information and the information about the source to a new section in the article's talk page and request that another editor perform the actual edit. Add {{request edit}} to your section. You can then look at how the other editor did it as an example for your later efforts. Yes, as a volunteer effort with a deliberately unstructured system of editorial control, we sometimes seem chaotic. In 18 years we have had more than 82 million individual editors and we have more than 200,000 editors in the last 30 days. All of these editors have essentially the same level of control over our policies and content, including e.g. where questions are asked and answered. -Arch dude (talk) 17:04, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fundraising timing

I've been getting some questions from my purely wiki-reader friends asking about fundraising timing.

As far as I know we only overtly fundraise at the end of the year - is July advertising normal or just a change for this year (the banners definitely are there)?

Nosebagbear (talk) 16:06, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nosebagbear: There's a note here about some tests of the fundraising system. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:13, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New page needed

it makes no sense that theres an article for The New Nintendo 2DS XL but there isnt an article for the New Nintendo 3DS XL. Can I make an article for The New Nintendo 3DS XL? After all, I Do have a New Nintendo 3DS XL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zygarde45 (talk • contribs) 16:32, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like there's already an article about New Nintendo 3DS XL, but feel free to add to it any information you feel should be added so long as you are able to cite a reliable source for that information. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:43, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How do I make the templates either hidden or shown, by default?

In these three articles -- List of U.S. state representatives (Alabama to Missouri) ... List of U.S. state representatives (Montana to Wyoming) ... and ... List of U.S. state senators -- what do I need to do to make all of the state templates be "shown" (expanded) or "hidden" (collapsed) ... (by default) ... whenever someone accesses the page? I asked this question up above (here: Wikipedia:Help desk#Templates being expanded or collapsed), but I did not understand the reply. I did not understand the technical / computer lingo. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Edit the individual templates that don't expand. For example, in List of U.S. state representatives (Alabama to Missouri), Template:Arkansas House of Representatives has this:

| state = <includeonly>collapsed</includeonly>

that line of code forces the template to always be collapsed. Change that line to look like this:

| state = {{{state<includeonly>|collapsed</includeonly>}}}

now the template will accept |state=expanded.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:49, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I tried that. It works! Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:56, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it appropriate to delete this article?

Wikipedia has this article: List of U.S. state legislators. It contains a list of all senators and representatives in the 50 U.S. states. It is an extremely long / big article. It is 391,773 bytes. So, I broke it down into two separate articles (List of U.S. state representatives ... and ... List of U.S. state senators). Even then, the "Representatives" article was still too big, so I broke that down into two separate articles (List of U.S. state representatives (Alabama to Missouri) ... List of U.S. state representatives (Montana to Wyoming)). As a result, the original article is now broken into three separate, smaller articles. The material is duplicitous. My question: what do we do with the original article? Do we delete it? Keep it? If we delete it, how do we do so? If we delete it, do we somehow "keep" the history of the page and the Talk Page? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:41, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's a procedure for "splitting" an article so as to preserve its history - but I don't know what it is or how to find it. And, "duplicitous" is not the word you want there. Maproom (talk) 21:00, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I meant to use the word "duplicative". I guess spell-check did not catch the error. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:23, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think last time this question came up the advice was to turn the original page into a disambiguation page with links to the new pages thus preserving history and links from other articles to the original page. TSventon (talk) 23:03, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph A. Spadaro: I recently researched this when I split a big section out of the Kilogram article, and then promptluy forgot where I found the guideline. When a dab is not appropriate, You can just create a new article by copy/paste of one or more sections of the article to be split. Your edit summary should state "created by copy/paste from [[parent]]. Go there for edit history". Then, add a note on the new talk page to the same effect. Finally, delete the section from the old article with an edit summary stating that you copied the material into a new article. Finally a not on the old article's talk page to the same effect, possible with you justification for the split. -Arch dude (talk) 02:37, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've already created the three new articles. The original ("old") article is still active, however. And all of the information from the old article was simply diverted into one of the three new articles. So, the old article probably needs to go. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:21, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that is that the old article is the repository for the edit histories, so the "correct" (?!) solution would have been to split out two of them and then rename the old article. Your best recovery is probably to request deletion of one of the three new articles and then rename the old article to become that third article, edit it to remove the material that moved to the other two new articles, and and finally document all of this in the article talk pages. -Arch dude (talk) 04:00, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph A. Spadaro:, @Arch dude:, the guidance is at Wikipedia:Splitting. This states"To conform with Wikipedia's licensing requirements, which require that all content contributors receive attribution, the page receiving the split material must have an edit summary noting "split content from [[article name]]". (Do not omit this step or omit the page name.) A note should also be made in the edit summary of the source article, "split content to [[article name]]". The {{Copied}} template can also be placed on the talk page of both articles. For further information, refer to the main Copying within Wikipedia guideline." Did you see my suggestion above, that last time this question came up the advice was to turn the original page into a disambiguation page with links to the new pages, thus preserving the article history and links from other articles to the original page. TSventon (talk) 08:39, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 14:50, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft idea

Hello and good day! I am currently thinking of creating a draft/article about the international centuries scored by Babar Azam. Similar to (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_international_cricket_centuries_by_Shikhar_Dhawan) these types. However, can I know what is actually the difference between draft and article? Do drafts later become articles? Secondly, just wanted to know if the subject is notable enough. He currently has just 11 centuries. Thanks, Drunkguyash (talk) 18:51, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Drunkguyash: I suggest that you add this as a section of the Babar Azam article. A separate section does not need to meet the notability requirement on its own, but it does still need reliable sources. The difference is that the subject needs to be the main topic of an article to meet the notability requirement. If the main article eventually becomes too unwieldy, the info can then be split out into separate article. -Arch dude (talk) 19:11, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Javier Sanchez Perez

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cuejero (talk • contribs) 20:18, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, new editor. Would you like Wikipedia to make a profile for this artist? Sad to say, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and does not post profiles for artists. In fact, Wikipedia requires that article subjects meet our standards of WP:Notability. If an article (not a WP:Autobiography) is your intent, it must be supported by several independent, published WP:Reliable sources. If you have further questions for the Teahouse, please sign them with four tildes (~).Thanks,Quisqualis (talk) 20:40, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Updating Photo

Hello, I would like to update a photo on a wikipedia page but cannot find how to do so. I was able to upload a new photo but had troubles updating the picture that is associated with the page. Please let me know the easiest way to update the current photo on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmazanke (talk • contribs) 21:10, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You'd need to change the file name in the infobox template that is in use on the page. Where it says "image = Glen Tullman.jpg". That said, I don't see the point. He has hardly changed in appearance, both pictures have him in a blue shirt looking at the camera. †dismas†|^(talk) 22:34, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How to change a name

Hi. I work in marketing for Avast, which now owns AVG Technologies. Currently there is a redirect from AVG Software to AVG AntiVirus. I posted on Talk regarding why I think it should be the other way around, renaming the main page from AVG Antivirus -> AVG Software. Another editor agreed with me shortly afterward.

What is the procedure from here for getting the name-change implemented? Do I need to ask other editors for permission? How do I actually implement the name-change once “approved”?

Thanks in advance for your help. Empey at Avast (talk) 21:19, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Empey at Avast: I suggest you add the following at the bottom of the talk page without a new header:

{{subst:requested move|AVG Software|reason=Place here your rationale for the proposed page name change, ideally referring to applicable naming convention policies and guidelines, and providing evidence in support where appropriate. If your reasoning includes search engine results, please prioritize searches limited to reliable sources (e.g. books, news, scholarly papers) over other web results. Do not sign this.}}

Don't forget to fill in the reason. A bot will handle the rest of the required steps automatically (such as listing the request and placing a tag on the article). --MrClog (talk) 21:34, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tense of this sentence

Could anyone please tell me if the tense of this sentence from the article on Helen Keller, and in particular the section on her writings, is correct? It pertains to Emanuel Swedenborg, and uses the present tense:

"It advocates the teachings of Emanuel Swedenborg, the Christian revelator and theologian who gives a spiritual interpretation of the teachings of the Bible and who claims that the second coming of Jesus Christ has already taken place."--Thylacine24 (talk) 22:11, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The present tense is fine for the first part, but Swedenborg died in 1772, so I would use past tense for the rest of the sentence. " ... theologian who gave a spiritual interpretation of the teachings of the Bible and who claimed that the second coming of Jesus Christ had already taken place." Dbfirs 22:37, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's more or less what I figured.--Thylacine24 (talk) 22:48, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One more question: What about the claim that "the second coming of Jesus Christ has already taken place"? Couldn't that theoretically stay as "has", since it's not referring to an action of Swedenborg?--Thylacine24 (talk) 22:51, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be "had", since it does refer to something that Swedenberg did in the past, namely he "claimed" that something else had then already happened, in contrast to Keller's writings, which physically exist in the present day and so are currently still "advocating." {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.177.55 (talk) 23:42, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I'll take your word for it.--Thylacine24 (talk) 23:49, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]