Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2022 February 19

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.

February 19

delete suggested languages

In the upper left hand corner of every wikipedia page under the words 'article and talk', there is the word 'language'. When the word ' language' is touched it tells you 'suggested languages'. There are two foreign languages listed under my 'suggested languages' which are errors. I accidentally touched two foreign languages which translated the wikipedia article into two other languages. I don't know why these languages were saved under 'suggested languages'. How do I delete these languages? I would appreciate your referring this inquiry to the appropriate help technician. Please respond at your earliest possible convenience.

2603:7000:7600:734D:6475:FE37:7C25:1DC7 (talk) 00:18, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Is this on one of the webapps for Wikipedia? Because that's not a thing on the desktop site. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 00:20, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

What is the URL of the article were you reading when this happened? GoingBatty (talk) 01:20, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

It can be on articles in the mobile version. I for example see it at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia where "Language" links to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia#/languages. The language links go to articles about the same topic in other Wikipedia languages. They don't have to be translations of the English article. Each Wikipedia language is edited separately and it varies which languages have an article on a topic. I don't know what determines whether "Suggested languages" is present and which languages are shown, apart from the need for an article to exist in the language. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:22, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

This sounds like the Content translation tool, see Wikipedia:Content translation tool#Turning the tool on and off. However the tool is only available to extended confirmed users. TSventon (talk) 11:36, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

"(disambiguation)" redirects

It seems that for disambiguation pages without a primary topic, in English Wikipedia it is default to create a redirect with "(disambiguation)", e.g. Eris (disambiguation) to Eris; but not in all such cases, e.g. no Mabeta (disambiguation) to Mabeta. What are the respective reasons? --KnightMove (talk) 06:16, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

The reason is that nobody has created them. In case of Eris Eris (disambiguation) the redirect was created by a move. Ruslik_Zero 08:38, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

It is only necessary to create them if there is a link that needs to use them, for example in a hatnote that says

For other uses, see Lincoln (disambiguation).

. Not all dab pages are used in that way. MB 12:03, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Disambiguation#How to link to a disambiguation page for the rule about always linking through a "(disambiguation)" name. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:03, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you all, understood. --KnightMove (talk) 07:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

A script warning problem

I recently edited the Wind power in the United States page. I have included a reference (this one ) to cite the new content I added, but a script warning in the preview told me that the "cite web" template apparently has a maintenance message. However, I cannot see any problem with the reference, not even the common ones listed in Help:CS1 errors. Can you tell me what is the exact problem here, please?--Inky100 (talk) 08:35, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

References

This one has a meaningless |url-status=live parameter. To enable maintenance message display, see Help:CS1 errors § Error and maintenance messages.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:34, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

How to better format a cite web

I have just added this reference into Queen's Pier, Ramsey. There is no overall problem with the cite, but it actually refers to an article in The Railway Magazine via pressreader.com. Is there any proper way to make that fact apparent in the ref, and include magazine title, issue number and page? Since I found it online, I assume it would be dishonest to write it up as a reference to the printed version, as there might conceivably be differences. --Verbarson ^talk_edits 15:58, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

References

A magazine is a magazine is a magazine whether as a dead tree or as a passel of electrons.

{{cite magazine |title=La'al Ratty celebrates 60 years of preservation |url=https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-railway-magazine/20210830/page/77/textview |magazine=The Railway Magazine |volume= |issue= |page= |date=30 August 2021 |access-date=19 February 2022 |via=Pressreader}}

Add the bits that you know, omit those that you don't.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 16:10, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Resolved

and thanks for your help. --Verbarson ^talk_edits 16:24, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

What's an appropriate cleanup template for an article that reads like a list of achievements?

I don't think {{like resume}} fits Kevin Møller.A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 18:29, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@A. C. Santacruz: Hi there! The article already has a stub template. You could consider adding {{prose}}. GoingBatty (talk) 21:31, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Posting something

How do I post the following entry?

The Women’s Basketball Journal

The Women’s Basketball Journal was published from October 15, 1997 to January 28, 2002. It was dedicated to providing up-to-date coverage of women’s basketball, at all college levels. Coaches, star players, conferences, tournaments and up-and-coming high school stars all received attention. Sixteen issues were published each full year of publication with a total of seventy issue over four and one-half years. Each issue had a color photo cover page showing one or more players or coaches. It was the first publication in the United States devoted to women’s basketball.

Founder & Publisher: Doug Herakovich Initial Publication: October 1997 Final Publication: January, 2002 Headquarters: Raleigh, NC Herakct (talk) 19:02, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This would need to meet the general notability guideline for a standalone article. I do wonder if there would be enough sources for this, as it is not a very well known journal. Alternatively, you could find a basketball related article where it could be mentioned.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:12, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Herakct. The "zero-th step" in writing an encyclopaedia article (which is what you are contemplating, rather than simply "posting an entry") is to find the independent reliably published sources that are a non-negotiable essential to establish that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for WP:notability (ianmacm has given you some useful links above). I call it the "zero-th step", because if you do not succeed at that step you should give up the project, since an article on the subject will not be accepted, however it is written. If you can find such source, your first article will tell you how to proceed. I always advise new users to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to some of our existing six million articles before trying this difficult task. --ColinFine (talk) 21:43, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@ianmacm and @ColinFine, it's pretty clear from the OP's name, and the journal publisher's name, that they are the same person. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 06:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

I'm seeking to use sources but am not sure if they would be considered reliable or not. I have checked the list but they do not appear there. For example, islandecho.co.uk countypress.co.uk 39essex.com capitalfm.com hampshirelive.news onthewight.com As a rule, does anybody have any advice on what to do? I'm new to this and struggling a bit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BrownieFudgeLawyer (talk • contribs) 19:56, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@BrownieFudgeLawyer: I think local news sources that have an identified publisher and editor are assumed to be reliable unless otherwise known to be unreliable. However, they do not contribute to the notability of an article's subject: that would require a national major regional news source. -Arch dude (talk) 21:06, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Arch Dude: are you sure that regional newspapers aren't good for notability? I thought they were, if the coverage is in-depth and not an interview (same as with all other news sources...) 73.127.147.187 (talk) 06:39, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

I always assumed the same thing, that regional newspapers contribute to notability. I have no idea why they wouldn't? Skarmory (talk • contribs) 12:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Arch dude: Courtesy ping; the IP capitalized the first d in dude, which broke the ping. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 12:48, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Skarmory: Sorry, I meant to say "national or major regional". The argument, if any, would be about what distinguishes a "regional" from a "major regional". However, a local newspaper or TV station does not count toward notability, although they are usually excellent sources after notability has been established. -Arch dude (talk) 16:23, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

_{I've always thought that the notability guidelines are to prevent having millions of stubs on Wikipedia.} Thefficacy (talk) 01:26, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Unsourced content removal

On Hawke government, I removed content that was unsourced so the article can be more accurate. I instantly got reverted by someone who told me that I should have left the unsourced claim in place, citing Wikipedia:Content removal#Unsourced information. However, there is a rule on Wikipedia:Verifiability that says, "The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material." Now these unsourced claims are back on the Hawke government article even though there's no sources backing them up.

I am really confused here. In terms of unsourced content, should we leave a [citation needed] tag or just delete the content as it is unsourced? Ak-eater06 (talk) 21:27, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ak-eater06: Hi there! Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, you can start a discussion on the article's talk page with the editor who reverted you. The two of you and others can work to form a consensus on the best way to improve the article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:36, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Ak-eater06, it is always better to search for a source and add it as a reference instead of removing possibly accurate content. If you are unable to find a source, you can note that in your edit summary. Cullen328 (talk) 22:59, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Wiki APP no longer opens after clicking a Google search result

Recently, when I do a Google Search and click on the Wikipedia link, it no longer opens Wikipedia APP. Instead it opens up the Wikipedia website in the Chrome browser. How can I fix this to open my Wikipedia APP once I click a Wiki link from a Google search? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevenpucci (talk • contribs) 21:37, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

How do I get a new article to appear on a search bar?

On the "Search Wikipedia" bar on the top right corner, how do I get my new article (that was even reviewed), Premiership of Jean Chrétien, to appear on the search predictions? Ak-eater06 (talk) 22:44, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

@Ak-eater06: It happens automatically with a delay, probably within a day. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:21, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

This isn't a reliable source

My teachers say this isn't a reliable source. Why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.8.25.132 (talk) 22:56, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Please read about that here. 331dot (talk) 23:33, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

However, a well-written Wikipedia article will have many reliable sources in the References section, so you can read those books/journals/magazines/newspapers to learn more, and then cite those in the reports you write for school. GoingBatty (talk) 23:39, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

The main issue with Wikipedia that is part of what makes it not a reliable source is that it's an encyclopedia anyone can edit. So if you use a Wikipedia article as a source in a paper, when your teacher goes to check the article to make sure the information you are saying is there (And that you didn't just straight up steal the info from Wikipedia), a vandal may have come along and messed up the article (or maybe it was another student trying to sabotage you) and it isn't reverted by the time the teacher looks at it. Now the teacher is seeing a completely different version of the article than what you saw. Now, while some articles on Wikipedia may be better than others to use as a source, generally you shouldn't due to the chance of someone coming along and messing it up. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 23:46, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

It's not, that's why, for reasons explained above. Take the references from the references section, and look at the inline citation for the statement you need to back up if you only need one statement. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 12:50, 20 February 2022 (UTC)