Help desk
< November 21	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 23 >

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.

November 22

Sophie, Countess of Wessex

I have made an edit which has a verifiable citation - yet it comes up as a possible vandalism?!!! Please check our edit - we are all sure it is fine and adds to the biography of the person in question. Thanks 02:06, 22 November 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.250.204 (talk)

Yes, the edit looks fine. Thanks. Grayfell (talk) 02:49, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help - BUT the Debrett's Peerage book - which is currently beside me as I write - was published in 2000, NOT 2015 - should the correct date be amended on the recent edit on the Sophie, Countess of Wessex page? Or is it fine to leave it as 2015? Thanks again101.182.250.204 (talk) 03:22, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please someone help

Is the date on ref. number 29 0k on the above page? Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Srbernadette (talk • contribs) 06:11, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to upload new version of an image file, but it stays the same

I'm trying to upload a better version of the image file: File:EU members where more people in favor of the European Federation.png. I've tried twice now, but the new version that I'm uploading doesn't show up. It still just shows the old version with mistakes, even though the file size has changed. How do I get the image to actually change? Do I just have to wait or something? (note: I'm doing this on Wiki Commons by pressing the "Upload a new version of this file" button) --Hibernian (talk) 08:35, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The file as I see it has your changes. (BTW your link to the file above was wrong; so I fixed the file link.) —teb728 t c 10:43, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have had the same problem recently and had to wait several hours before the new file displayed...GrahamHardy (talk) 11:49, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it seems to be displaying correctly now. --Hibernian (talk) 14:57, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

create new wikipedia page

Hello,

i am new to wikipedia. Can you please guide me how to create a new article on wikpedia. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chayan11 (talk • contribs) 08:53, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Chayan11: there are a couple of guides available, how about you check out My first article, and when you've given that a good read, try using the article wizard to create your page. What are you going to write about?

samtar ^{t} 08:58, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing errors on List of PlayStation games

Reference help requested. Well, I was editing List of PlayStation games in Wikipedia because I wanted to fix the tables a bit, however, ReferenceBot told me that one of the links is broken. As I'm checking which link is broken, I found out that the broken link in question was containing somewhat profane words (which happens to be the name of one of the video games there), it was automatically censored when I was editing with the censorship filter on (maybe I shouldn't keep the filter on when in the middle of editing next time). This gives me a dilemma. I wanted to keep the knowledge alive, but I don't want to write the profanity words because I'm not fond of that word, so, what should I do? Thanks, WindVee (talk) 13:59, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is a space character in the |url= value. Remove that and the error goes away and the link works. It appears that all you actually need of the url is:

|url=http://www.gamefaqs.com/ps/196708-

Wikipedia is not censored. It does not matter that some might consider the game's name to be 'profane'. The game's name is the game's name and we don't hide it behind !@#$%^&*! non-sense strings.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:20, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. See WP:NOTCENSORED. You might be offended by a word but that doesn't mean that others are. Dismas|^(talk) 14:30, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yeah, but I have no idea that the add-on on my browser's part doing the censorship on the edit box as well and replacing it with !@#$%^&*! strings as I'm editing it, even though it was not my main purpose when editing at that moment, and I don't think I want to write that word because, sadly, it's forbidden for me to do so :( WindVee (talk) 14:40, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jim

IM CHRIS CORNELL AND TRYING TO LOCATE MY FAMILY. MY GREAT GRANDMA WAS MOMAC AND HER SON BILL MCFARLAND.PLEASE GET BACK TO ME AND THANK YOU. CHRIS CORNELL. P.S. MY STOLEN ANGELS ON UTUBE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Former Mcfarland (talk • contribs) 14:46, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, based on your question, that you found one of our over 5 million articles and thought we were affiliated in some way with that subject. Please note that you are at Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is for asking questions related to using or contributing to Wikipedia itself. Thus, we have no special knowledge about the subject of your question. You can, however, search our vast catalogue of articles by typing a subject into the search field on the upper right side of your screen. If you cannot find what you are looking for, we have a reference desk, divided into various subject areas, where asking knowledge questions is welcome. Best of luck.--Fauzan ^{✆ talk}_{✉ mail} 15:00, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm tagging the OP since they likely don't know how to get back here given that they didn't know where they were in the first place... User:Former Mcfarland. Dismas|^(talk) 15:09, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Referencing errors on Billesdon

Reference help requested.

Hi, I'm new and ran out of time yesterday. I am going to try to sort this out later today

Thanks, PBrist (talk) 14:59, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi PBrist. The first time you use a citation, give it a name <ref name="Intuitive Name">Citation text</ref>. The next time you want to use that citation, use just the first part with a forward closing slash at the end before the ">" (a space also is conventional, though not required). Thus: <ref name="Intuitive Name" /> See Help:Referencing for beginners#Same reference used more than once). Do not use one cite for each sentence. In general, if the content of a single paragraph is all verified by one reference, and there's no other cites to be placed in between, just place the one citation to the source at the end of the paragraph. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:49, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

moved from section with duplicate name lower down to keep issues together. DES ^(talk) 17:28, 22 November 2015 (UTC) Hi there, I'm new and had some problems with referencing yesterday, but had to leave it as I ran out of time. Page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billesdon I responded to this in 'talk' to say I would be back to it today, and now I've read the guidance again I went in to fix the errors and find someone has already done it. Thanks for that, whoever it was. That person has also removed many of the references so there is just one per para. I agree there were too many, and was going to remove some today after a final read through when I had sorted out formatting, but would like to know if one ref per para is 'house style'? For example, one of the church paragraphs is quite long, and now the only ref is at the end of the section, if someone else adds a sentence in the middle and references that, then people will be confused about where the info before that point is from. As I would like to edit more pages, would someone please clarify correct procedure. Thank you. Oops, sorry, just realised someone has answered this - although no new message indicated in Talk. Hopefully I'll get the hang of this soon.[reply]

Thanks, PBrist (talk) 16:53, 22 November 2015 (UTC) End content moved from below.[reply]

PBrist How often to repeat a citation is a judgement call, there is no one answer that is always correct. A fact that has been challenged, or that is controversial and is likely to be challenged, should have a cite directly after the sentence, or perhaps even the clause, that states the fact. Direct quotes should be cited right after the end of the quote. Where several sentences in a paragraph are all supported by the same source, and no other statement in the paragraph needs a different citation, a single cite at the end of the paragraph will do. See Wikipedia:Citing sources#When and why to cite sources and the later sections of that page for more detail. DES ^(talk) 17:28, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

need log in help

Hi,

I have not edited in a couple of years. I have some new historical info to impart. However, when I try to log in it says "Fill in one of the fields to receive a temporary password via email. There is no email address recorded for user XXXXXXXX" (my user name..not x's)

however all fields are filled out.

Should I just start a new account? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.13.95 (talk) 15:25, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yes: if you didn't save an email address with your account, the system will not be able to send you a temporary password, and you will have to register a new account. There's a bit more detail at Help:Logging in#What if I forget the password?. -- John of Reading (talk) 17:25, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Accounts and passwords never expire so if you have an idea what it might have been then you can try more possibilities. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:22, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help with Template:Public health

the user Bazj are wreck the template page Template:Public health.

delete random stuff that he don't like, without proper reason — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.225.97.247 (talk) 16:12, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A few links, two of them redlinks, that is links to pages that do not even exist, and one image (unreadable at the scale involved) were removed by Bazj, and later reinstated by 36.225.97.247. This hardly constitutes "wrecking" the (already very large) navigation template. The proper place to discuss what should and should not be included is at Template talk:Public health. I have reinstated Bazj's removal of the graphics and the redlinks. DES ^(talk) 17:11, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The removals were this edit and this edit the reversions are directly after in the template history. DES ^(talk) 17:14, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

making an edit on a article

Hi, I made a contribution on the bio of Patricia Barry with regard to an episode of the Virginian she appeared on. I really want to remove my contribution how do i do that once it has been saved Tank you for your time and help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WhyWkik4me (talk • contribs) 17:11, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to remove your contribution because it was incorrect, the easiest way is to go to the page history find your edit, and undo it using the undo link. If the contribution was correct, you can remove yours, but there is no guarantee that someone else won't add it again. Prodego ^talk 17:17, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How to add citations

I made an edit on the page for Libraries (in the Research Libraries section) and it was accepted. At the end it says "citation needed". I have the citations but I don't know how to put them in. Thanks. Lakelandcrib 11/22/15Lakelandcrib (talk) 17:40, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Read though this:Wikipedia:Citing sources. --Aspro (talk) 17:51, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Lakelandcrib, please read Referencing for Beginners. the short version: insert a <ref>...</ref> pair, and inside pair (after the <ref> and before the </ref> insert the citation details. Personaly i prefer and advise the use of citation templates such as {{cite news}}, {{cite web}}, {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}}, and many others. They format citations consistently, and also embed machine-readable citation information in the page that various programs can use. However, they are not required. If you want to use them, there is a "Cite" menu in the editing bar above the edit window. Click on this, and then on the "templates" item in the sub-bar that displays just below, and pick the desired template, and a handy fill-in form is displayed. Or you can add them manually, see the directions on each template's documentation page, linked above. Does that help? DES ^(talk) 17:52, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Aspro, I find that Wikipedia:Citing sources is often a bit much for an editor new to adding citations to Wikipedia, and generally prefer to link to WP:REFB. It contains a simpler set of directions that covers the most common situations. DES ^(talk) 17:54, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you think that’s a bit patronizing to a new editor? He may have a computer science degree for all we know (but not necessary familiar with WP protocol) and neither of us know what he wants to cite. If he/she he finds problems understanding my direction (which includes Referencing for Beginners etc.) lets credit him with enough sense to come back here. If you teat children like children, one will end up with children. Relax DESiegel--Aspro (talk) 20:32, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No actually i don't think that at all, Aspro. I don't know Lakelandcrib's level of general computer knowledge at all, i only know that s/he said "I have the citations but I don't know how to put them in." My experience has been that when an editor new to Wikipedia, or to Wikipedia's citation requirements, is simply thrown at Wikipedia:Citing sources with no further assistance, that editor all too often finds it too hard and gives up in despair. Whereas with a bit of focused basic information, the editor can then go on to the full scope of that page. I don't think it is in any way patronizing to suggest that in starting a new task, most people do better with a basic intro than a fully-detailed user manual, provided that the full details are available when wanted. WP:REFB links to Wikipedia:Citing sources and to several other useful pages and resources. All that said, you can give advice in whatever way you think best, but I urge you to consider pointing editors at WP:REFB in such cases. DES ^(talk) 20:44, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

With respect, that’s an auto-centric point of view. If you had difficulties understanding citations in the beginning, that does not mean every other new editor will find it unfathomable to the degree that you did. You appear to be presuming that everyone starts at your level and has to be spoon-fed from there up. That's patronizing. The OP had enough sense to post here and knows he can post back for further clarification should s/he need it. Which is why I pointed it out.--Aspro (talk) 19:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Actually, you are making an incorrect assumption, Aspro. (Or perhaps that was sarcasm.) I didn't have much trouble learning how to do citations, and that was in the days before ref tags and cite.php existed, using the much more fragile {{note}} and {{ref}}. I had no problems adapting to the current system. If I judged others by myself, I would never refer anyone to WP:REFB. I am, instead, judging by the many people I have assisted with such issues here at the Help Desk, at the Teahouse (I have about 2000 edits between those two pages), at AfC drafts, and on various user and article talk pages. Many people have said that they have found WP:CITE confusing and too much information to handle at once. Several have also been kind enough to say that my advice was helpful. I also base this on working with and training many people in non-Wikipedia contexts, where I have generally found that most (but not all) people do better when given a comparatively simple summary of a task to start with, and then fuller complexities after they have mastered the basics. I think this is a common human style, along the lines of the common maxim "you must walk before you can run". Since I think this a common style of human learning, attributing it to a particular person is not in the least patronizing -- it merely assumes that the person shares the common human experience. All that said, there is no one-true-way to edit Wikipedia nor to advise and help them. I merely suggested that you consider pointing inquirers who ask about the basics of citing sources here (not about the nuances or more complex cases) to the basic set of instructions. I note that a number of other regular helpers here and at the Teahouse point people to REFB routinely, as does at least one version of the welcome template. So some editors other than me have found it of value. DES ^(talk) 23:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Using a 'Ref Name' group, without losing page numbers?

Hi, is there a way to group references from the same source, without losing page number information? Thanks. cӨde1+6^LogicBomb! 18:04, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Code16: See WP:IBID for common methods to handle it. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:17, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, thanks. cӨde1+6^LogicBomb! 18:32, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]