Help desk
< April 4	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 6 >

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.

April 5

This edit is clearly poor. How to deal with it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Breach_of_contract&diff=prev&oldid=948823130&diffmode=source Is it vandalism? Nonsense? Good faith mistake? What is it. I for sure think that this edit doesn't belong.

If you see an edit that does not look good, feel free to revert it, and explain why in the edit summary. Another editor has done that already in this case. RudolfRed (talk) 01:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It has already been reverted. JIP | Talk 01:38, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Emmanuel College, Warrnambool

1 - please make the photo file in the History section smaller and use the caption provided. Please place a dot at the end of the word Est in the caption - like this - Est.

2 - Please check ref number 5 - it is a book and I've had trouble with the IBSN number.

Thanks 175.33.49.35 (talk) 01:03, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, and also fix two dabs and other ref errors you cause by using {{cite journal}} without using |journal=. MB 02:42, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan_Molyneux

This article is completely incoherent and biased to the point of operating as nothing more than a consolidated hit piece. Only cited from heavily left wing sources with financial interest in creating boogeymen for clicks. Simultaneously describes Molyneaux as 'anti-statist' and 'nationalist.' Also accuses him of creating a cult. The only evidence provided to support the bizarre accusation is that .04%(!?!?!? yes, seriously) of people on his radio show's website have not retained contact with their parents.

73.81.144.30 (talk) 01:34, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to discuss this on the article's talk page. You will have better luck there if you identify specific assertions in the article that are not properly cited to reliable sources. -Arch dude (talk) 03:06, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate user names

I have wondered before, and now have an example to present - What do I do when I see a User name that is clearly intended to be provocative, and will highly likely offend some readers and editors? Is there an obvious place (that I am not seeing) to report such things? The example I'm seeing right now is User:My ass is. HiLo48 (talk) 02:18, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@HiLo48: Check out WP:Username. It lists the guidelines for acceptable or not acceptable names, along with guidance on how to deal with it. RudolfRed (talk) 02:31, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The user has managed to get himself blocked indefinitely for vandalism, so I probably don't need to do anything at this stage. HiLo48 (talk) 03:38, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Browser Refresh vs. Purge

I just read the Help information on purging, in particular with respect to what the difference is between a browser refresh and a Purge. I would like to verify that I understand correctly. It appears that the browser refresh will only pick up a change if the page itself that I am viewing was edited, so that if I am viewing this page, and an editor posts a question, a browser refresh will pick it up. However, if a page is populated by a Category, then am I correct that a browser refresh will not pick up the addition or deletion of an article? So if I am looking at a list of Articles for Creation, and I want to see the most current version, am I correct that I need to Purge? Are there any other oddities that I need to be aware of in when I need to Purge rather than to Refresh? Robert McClenon (talk) 02:26, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If it's a page in the Category: namespace neither of those update it. You have to do a null edit, which is also talked about on that page. Do you have a specific page in mind, like Category:Pending AfC submissions? If a more detailed explanation helps at all: clearing your browser cache tells your browser on your computer, "Hey, throw out anything you have stored and download the page again." The purge feature instructs the Wikipedia cache servers to throw out their cached copies; the MediaWiki software then generates the page "from scratch" the next time someone requests it. Neither of these affect category lists because those are assembled "magically" by looking through the database for every page with the category in it. As this is resource-intensive, this is done through the job queue, which means the servers do it "in the background" so it doesn't lock up the site. This means it takes time for category lists to be updated. Purging a Category: page will only make the server regenerate the "wikitext" content on that page (the stuff that shows up when you edit the page). --47.146.63.87 (talk) 05:18, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref

Can I please place a quick closing </ref> on this edit, thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Reeves#Parliamentary_career — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ed cleaver (talk • contribs) 03:31, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ed cleaver: Yes, go ahead. You don't need permission to fix errors. RudolfRed (talk) 04:05, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Emmanuel College, Warrnambool 2

Ref number 9 is a booklet and it is in red - please check the IBSN number. Thanks Sorry 175.32.219.132 (talk) 07:04, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Removed, it has no isbn--Pierpao (talk) 07:16, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please - in the info box - place a line that says "Years 7-12". At the moment I had to put it next to the "Enrolment" tab. Please remove it from the enrolment tab and put in one that is specifically for the year level - Years 7-12. Thanks 175.32.219.132 (talk) 07:53, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Eagleash (talk) 10:01, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Modification

Hi ,

I just made my first modification on the "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_display" page which is mentioning one of our projects: the 2019 launch of the new Peugeot 208 over Paris.

I added Dronisos, the company I'm working with, who did this world premiere for Peugeot. Dronisos is credited by Peugeot in the video available in your page (https://twitter.com/peugeotfr/status/1180926476243353602 Time=6 seconds, left bottom)

My change has been removed. I find this quite unfair are other companies like SPAXELS are mentioned into the same section.

We are pioneers inventing this new digital art I think we deserve some credits.

Thanks for processing my request,

And stay safe ! (here in France we are all blocked at home) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdlauwereins (talk • contribs) 11:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your use of Wikipedia to advertise your company is questionable. And you have a conflict of interest, which you need to declare. In any case, your addition of a direct external link to the text of an article is clearly against Wikipedia policy. Maproom (talk) 11:18, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)There's a couple reasons why this was reverted. Not least because it uses an external link in the prose, which isn't suitable. As you work for the company, you need to read our policy on conflict of interest. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:20, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jdlauwereins: To rephrase this more positively: Please make an {{edit request}} in a new section on the article's talk page. Make sure you cite a reliable source (WP:RS) that is unconnected with your company, and make sure you declare that you are a paid editor (WP:PAID). If you do these things, your suggested edit is likely to be added to the article after suitable modifications to remove promotional language. It will go even faster if you avoid the promotional language (WP:PEACOCK) in the first place. Good luck, and stay safe. -Arch dude (talk) 18:09, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Emmanuel College, Warrnambool 3

In the categories section at the end of the article, please add the link "Private schools". I cannot. Thanks175.32.219.132 (talk) 13:55, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done MB 14:57, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What are the notability requirments for including something in a list article

Hi all

I'd appreciate some guidance on notability requirements for list articles.

Given that very nearly 90% of children and students are out of school I wanted to improve articles which will help people find suitable educational resources. One article I'd like to improve is List of MOOC providers, there are many MOOC providers which are not in this list including 10s of governments, see UNESCO's list for more info.

However there is a comment in the article which says . I seems that people have tried to add new MOOC providers and they have been deleted because they didn't follow this message. I've read Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Stand-alone_lists#Selection_criteria and I can't see where is says this is true. Even in very well covered areas I have found lists which include subjects without their own article e.g List of Harry Potter characters. Has this requirement simply been added by editors who want this to be true for this article? Or is this a rule that just isn't being followed widely? I feel like I'm missing something

Any help would be appreciated

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 14:43, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John Cummings, WP:LISTCOMPANY is the guideline is question. In practice, because of the amount of non notable business adding themselves to lists, the de facto guideline is that having an existing article is required. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 14:48, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The guideline you linked to says that entries should be notable, but not they necessarily need to have an article when being added. So it's possible that an organisation is notable enough to have an article but doesn't have one yet. Creating the article wouldn't be a prerequisite to being added to the list, though including references to demonstrate notability would be very helpful. Richard Nevell (talk) 18:53, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In order for references to demonstrate notability, we have to know what they say- which is done in an article. Otherwise any business could claim to be notable and put up a link to a press release. 331dot (talk) 18:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That wouldn't work as a press release wouldn't count as an independent reliable source to demonstrate. If we want to know what a reference says we go to the reference. Having an article is useful, but not a necessity. Richard Nevell (talk) 19:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Richard Nevell: and @Alex Noble:, so I can add things to the list from the UNESCO list and ignore the notice and just use that as a reference? John Cummings (talk) 19:23, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, John Cummings, I don't think you can, I'm afraid. Appearing a list somewhere is almost never relevant to notability, irrespective of the origin and reliability of the list. Entries on lists are usually mere mentions, and if there is more information, it usually comes from the subject or someone close to the subject, so it not independent. Note also that (perhaps paradoxically) being useful is rarely a relevant argument for inclusion in Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 22:24, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine: ok, so I would need more independent reliable sources? I'm just trying to understand the requirements for adding something to a list.... John Cummings (talk) 11:11, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

John Cummings, by far the best answer is to Write the article first, even if the rules don't make that obligatory. If it is notable, you will have added far more value to Wikipedia than just adding an entry in a list; and if it isn't, you will have saved time wrangling, and avoided filling up a list with things that just need to get removed. (Remember that there is no deadline). --ColinFine (talk) 12:31, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's certainly the gold standard practice, but also the most time consuming. As there's no deadline, it's fine if the individual articles come later. Richard Nevell (talk) 12:40, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It needs to have an article. It used to be acceptable to create a stub article, and I think this is still the case. A stub article is not supposed to be deleted if it makes a valid assertion of notability that is supported by reliable sources that meet the notability requirement. It should be acceptable to create a 2-sentence article with 3 good references and marked as a stub. A more complete article is clearly preferred, of course. -Arch dude (talk) 17:34, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Arch dude: where is this rule written down? Thanks, John Cummings (talk) 21:04, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@John Cummings:Which rule? "A stub should not be deleted if the subject is notable": see Wikipedia:Stub. "A list item must have an article": see WP:CSC. This one seems to have some wiggle room, but as a paid editor, you should probably not count on that. Wikipedia operates by consensus, not by rigid rules (with a very few exceptions). The rules we have do not override consensus, but in general, if you position follows a rule and is within the spirit of the rule, you will be able to help build a consensus by citing the rule. Narrow, rigid citing of a rule against consensus is called Wikipedia:Wikilawyering and will get you nothing but trouble. -Arch dude (talk) 01:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect age

Hello.

I’m a politician and my age is wrong on my page so media always quote it incorrectly.

Rosena Allin-Khan MP

Can you please help?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C6:1E82:B200:21A3:CBA7:F69:324A (talk) 15:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a publicly available reliable source with your correct birthdate on it? 331dot (talk) 15:14, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed your date of birth from the article, as unreferenced. Maproom (talk) 15:33, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not directly related to the above – I see that the infobox in Rosena Allin-Khan says "Leader Jeremy Corbyn". But Corbyn is no longer the leader of her party, and anyway "Template:Infobox officeholder" doesn't have a parameter "leader". Maproom (talk) 15:44, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maproom, unless I'm reading it wrong, isn't it stating the leader at the time she in shadow cabinet - i.e. ending January? ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 16:18, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Of course! That makes sense. (I still don't understand why an unsupported parameter has any effect.) Maproom (talk) 16:24, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The "leader" parameter is included in the template source code, even though not mentioned in the documentation. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:06, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How can I fix this page so that the sidebar links to the correct page in the Japanese Wikipedia?

Regarding Lilium lancifolium:

Its wikidata links correctly to ja:オニユリ. But, the interlanguage link for Japanese in the sidebar points at ja:東北森林管理局. The text of Lilium lancifolium contains this citation tag, whose author-link points at this very page:

<ref name=MAFF-forestry-agency-online>{{cite web|author=Tohoku Regional Forest Office, Forestry Agency, MAFF |authorlink=ja:東北森林管理局 |title=Angiosperms |script-title=ja:被子植物 |website=Shinrin no ikimono tachi [The forests' living things] |url=https://www.rinya.maff.go.jp/tohoku/koho/tohoku/3_zukan/1_syokubutsu/3_hishi.html |date=2016 |accessdate=2020-01-16}}: "{{lang|ja|鬼百合}}" [[kanji]] form is verified.</ref>

I'm not sure if this is actually related to the root cause, but this citation seems to be getting rendered without an author link:

15. ^ (2016). "Angiosperms" 被子植物. Shinrin no ikimono tachi [The forests' living things]. Retrieved 2020-01-16.: "鬼百合" kanji form is verified.

I have very little knowledge about how templates work and am not sure how to fix the sidebar link. Entotto (talk) 20:22, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Entotto: Removing "|authorlink=ja:東北森林管理局" seems to have worked, but I have no idea why it caused the problem. TSventon (talk) 22:59, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

TSventon I believe that inserting a colon (authorlink=:ja:東北森林管理局) would have fixed the problem. An interlanguage wikilink without a leading colon is interpreted as a page link (the older way of doing it, before WikiData). See WP:ILL --ColinFine (talk) 23:03, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ColinFine Thanks, it would have and has. TSventon (talk) 23:19, 5 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ColinFine TSventon Thank you! Confirmed fixed Entotto (talk) 00:32, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]