Help desk
< February 19	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 21 >

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 20

Large number of similar pages that probably should be deleted. Best approach?

There are about 130+ pages on wikipedia that go "List of tourist attractions in ...". I just finished sending two of them through the AfD process to see the response: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tourist attractions in Toronto and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tourist attractions in Kolar district. The response was unanimous. These fit WP:NOTGUIDE and are also very subjective lists with no set criteria for inclusion, and further tend to be underreferenced. As I see it, I have two routes to go with this:

1. Place all of them in one AfD listing, which could work out well or very badly if there starts to be different conversations about individual pages.
2  PROD each one, and then go back to step one with the survivors.

How should I approach this? Thanks P.S. To see these pages, search for intitle:"list of tourist attractions". — rsjaffe 🗣️ 01:18, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, rsjaffe. I disagree with you about any mass deletion of such list articles, although I would certainly agree that such lists should be limited to notable tourist attractions with Wikipedia articles including references that verify that the topic is widely considered a tourist attraction. In my opinion, the solution is not deletion, but as you yourself stated, defining set criteria for inclusion, and removing all poorly referenced entries. I have lived in or near San Francisco for half a century, and to me, the notion that San Francisco does not have many highly notable tourist attractions that already have well referenced articles that deserve to be assembled into a list strikes me as utterly bizarre. After all, the guideline you cited says An article on Paris should mention landmarks and if the number of such notable landmarks with Wikipedia articles AKA tourist attractions grows to the point that a spinoff list is appropriate, then so be it. That reminds me that I was touring Paris almost exactly 50 years ago. I had a wonderful time and would love to return. Cullen328 (talk) 06:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen328 Yes, but is Wikipedia really the best place to look up tourist attractions? I think a search engine would be far better. I see that WP:NOTGUIDE was already mentioned. Edited to add: regarding Paris and even San Francisco, landmarks and tourist attractions are not the same thing. Landmarks, yes, in a city article. Tourist attractions, maybe not. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 06:52, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor, I will look up whatever I want on Wikipedia with its 6.5 million articles and consider its coverage of such topics far superior to the clickbait websites that dominate such searches. "Landmarks" and "tourist attractions" are highly notable topics, and I see zero reason why Wikipedia should not have well referenced lists of clearly notable tourist attractions in various cities, with appropriate inclusion criteria. There is literally nothing in policy that forbids such well referenced list articles. From the point of view of notability, there is no reason to distinguish between a notable landmark and a notable tourist attraction. It depends entirely on the depth of coverage in independent reliable sources. There is massive coverage in reliable sources of tourist attractions in Paris and San Francisco. Why on earth should Wikipedia arbitrarily exclude coverage of such highly notable topics? Cullen328 (talk) 07:09, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cullen328 You make some good points. I used to work in SF and I couldn't always keep with all of the attractions to show visitors. (I think of "landmarks" as things that are easy to see, and might help you navigate an unfamiliar place, while tourist attractions might be harder to find, or off the beaten path. But maybe that's just how I think of it. They are both worth seeing...) But I know that you are quite experienced, and you're probably right. Thanks. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 09:27, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How to use Lowercase sigmabot III

I need Archive my user talk. I want an automated bot to do this. So, I want to preserve my user talk using the Lowercase sogmabot III. How can I use this bot to preserve my user talk? (P.S. At Korean Wikipedia, use ko:사용자:Revibot I. Is this bot available on English Wikipedia?) -- KeySpace / Talk 03:06, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. See Help:Archiving a talk page for more details. According to Help:Archiving_a_talk_page#Sequentially_numbered_archives, you can use a template to archive your talk page. I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 03:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@KeySpace: Revibot I is not active here at the english Wikipedia. Please see User:Lowercase sigmabot III/Archive HowTo for how to set up Lowercase sigmabot III for your talkpage. If you're just want to set up archiving, place {{subst:Setup auto archiving}} (as it appears when viewing this page) on the top of your user talkpage. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@I.hate.spam.mail and Victor Schmidt: Thanks. And am I doing it right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KeySpace (talk • contribs) 07:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@I.hate.spam.mail.here and Victor Schmidt: Repinging as pings (and archiving) doesn't work when you forget to sign your post. GoingBatty (talk) 13:54, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Family of Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge

Refs number 106 and 108 are exactly the same - but both are required.

Please "double them up" which I have seen done on many pages here on Wikipedia before.

Thank you in advance for your time. 49.198.41.28 (talk) 07:06, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See WP:REFNAME for how to do this yourself in the future. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:48, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you still have an account, Bernadette? Robert McClenon (talk) 16:32, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Plant tissue

i want editing in plant tissue culture department. can i use my knowledge here. and what benefits add to me by this work — Preceding unsigned comment added by Er. Mangla Gupta (talk • contribs) 07:58, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for considering contributing to Wikipedia. You can't use your personal knowledge of plant tissue here, but you can use your knowledge of reputable sources (about plant tissue and anything else), and your access to such sources. You won't get any personal benefits by contributing here; just the awareness that you've helped provide better information for our millions of readers. Maproom (talk) 10:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

about our wikipidya page

hello i want to know, how i creat my a page about my self in wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 0786 pawan verma (talk • contribs) 10:15, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

0786 pawan verma While it is not forbidden to do so, it is not advised, please read the autobiography policy. People naturally write favorably about themselves, and it is hard to set aside what you know about yourself and only write based on what independent reliable sources have chosen on their own to say about you. However, if you feel you can do that, I would advise first using the new user tutorial. You should then review the definition of a notable person, gather at least three independent reliable sources that give you significant coverage(and is not based on materials you have put out like your personal website), and you may then visit Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft article for review. Read Your First Article as well. Be advised that writing a new article is hard even when you aren't writing about yourself. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, pawan verma. Please do not try this. Writing about yourself is very strongly discouraged on Wikipedia, and if you try it it is likely that your attempts will not be successful, and you will have wasted your effort. If you have been significantly covered in sources wholly unconnected with you, then there could be an article about you. Such an article would not belong to you, would not be for your benefit except incidentally, would not be controlled by you, and should be based almost 100% on what people unconnected with you have published about you, not on what you or your associates say or want to say. If after this caution you wish to go ahead, please read your first article, and about notability. ColinFine (talk) 10:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion on bot policy regarding semi-automated editing

(Note: This might get a bit technical. If you think I should post this elsewhere, please suggest me a better place to post this. Thanks)

I recently created a small script (covidstats) that I use to periodically update covid statistics in a template. It currently works in a hack-ish way where the script must be executed in a JS console in the browser and a bit of user involvement is needed. I would like to instead run this as a script that makes API calls to submit edits.

I don't really feel like it's necessary for a bot account to be created for this as it's nothing big. I looked through WP:BOTPOL and it seems like there is this huge process that goes into making a bot. I really just want to be able to programmatically edit a page, so I skimmed the page and mostly focused on the WP:SEMIAUTOMATED section.

Now, for my question. The section states "A bot account should not be used for assisted editing, unless the task has been through a BRFA." which is something I desired. However, I am struggling to see how I must move forward with this because reading through WP:CREATEBOT and mw:API:Edit, I see that (while looking at the python sample code) there is a need for mw:Manual:Bot passwords, for which... the use of the main account is not supported. But I would like to do my assisted editing on my main account. So how might I achieve this?

Sorry for the long question. I really want to just do something simple but I can't seem to figure out how to do it right whilst following all the policies. Satricious (talk) 11:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, re-reading this I think I worded this a bit confusingly.
TL;DR: I want to use code to edit a page. But I don't want to make a bot (why? because it's a long process). Satricious (talk) 14:11, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The SVG seems exaggerated, it isn't that hard or bad. If you're willing to check every edit before it saves, that's semi-automated and you can do it without approval. That includes using the edit API, assuming you're creating your own interface to check the edit before it gets saved. If you want to save edits without checking each one before it goes live on a page, you need a bot approval. It's probably better to get thoughts at WP:BOTN than here, as more editors familiar with the relevant policies frequent there. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 14:23, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ProcrastinatingReader: Thanks for the clarification! I'll post about this on the bots noticeboard. But while I have you here, could I ask how exactly I could make edits using my main account? Looking through mw:API:Edit it seems like I need a CSRF token which it seems is possible to get from the JS console, I tried to avoid the 'bot passwords' thing and just tried using my CSRF token with this code and I failed. I don't want to take up your time and have you walk me through things step by step, I'd just like to know what I'm doing wrong since I'm clearly not doing what's supposed to be done. Satricious (talk) 15:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Satricious: at this pont it might be better to move this to WP:VPT. I have checked your code, it does not appear to be wrong at the first glance. From where are you executing this? Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:54, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Victor Schmidt: Got it. I'll just state that my question here has been solved. I've already got an answer on WP:BOTN, but I'll ask any follow-up questions over at WP:VPT if I don't get any other replies on the bot noticeboard. Oh, and the script is just run in a JS console in the browser. (I know, not particularly great but it works). Satricious (talk) 07:22, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This question has been answered. Satricious (talk) 07:22, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming a category

Hi,

Could someone rename the Category:Departmental councilors (France) into Category:Departmental councillors (France), as the use of "councillors" instead of "councilors" is in line with general use of British English on French topics, e.g. Category:Regional councillors of France.

Thanks.

77.63.125.97 (talk) 13:18, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you IP editor, I have added your request to Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Speedy. TSventon (talk) 13:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Photographs as references

Can a photograph be used to reference that the subject of the photo existed at the time and place the photo was taken? If so, is there a template or example? Thank you. Moon Joon (talk) 20:41, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious as to the need to cite the mere existence of a subject at a particular time for an article. 331dot (talk) 20:46, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Immediate goal is railroad locomotives, but buildings and bridges would probably follow. Moon Joon (talk) 21:00, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: it can happen, per Saint-Inglevert Airfield, note 3. Mjroots (talk) 17:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would say, only if the photo has been published by a reliable source, which has also identified the place and time. Otherwise it's original research. --ColinFine (talk) 21:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, they're just from blogs and Flikr. Oh well, thanks anyway. Moon Joon (talk) 21:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

why you gotta dox me if i make an edit while not logged it

like the title says, for instance if i want to make an edit from a friend's place, i can get sharing it with the server, or maybe even the highest ups, but not EVERYBODY who looks at the edit history. Please explain — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.147.156.158 (talk) 23:58, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because that's how we track unregistered users. If you want to hide your IP, make an account. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 00:01, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately this isn't something Wikipedia does. That is simply the information available from an IP address. If you don't want the information to be available to anyone who knows what to look for, you can hide your IP address by creating an account and logging in. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:02, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You may be getting your wish soon. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 10:10, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]