Help desk
< May 14	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	May 16 >

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.

May 15

Problem with Creating Draft

Problem solved! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JudithMHWhite48 (talk • contribs) 02:43, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is it useful to add "language" parameter to English citations?

{{Cite web}} says: "When the only source language is English, no language is displayed in the citation." I see some editors add "language" parameter to English refs. Does it improve the ref? Is it useful? --Mann Mann (talk) 05:50, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say WP:If it ain't broke, don't fix it. No it isn't useful. So far, the language parameter, if English, doesn't modify the reference in any way, but it doesn't break it either. Not worth wasting time and effort and getting into needless edit wars with others who add this needless parameter. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 06:03, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@CX Zoom: Thanks for the reply. I agree with you. I wanted to remove it from the articles I watch and edit. But as you said, it's better to ignore such stuff. --Mann Mann (talk) 06:26, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've also seen (but can't remember where) a suggestion to keep the tags as they can help Wikipedians working to translate articles for our sister projects. I haven't done translation work, so I don't know how much of a benefit they are. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:37, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some tools automatically add language to items, you can safely remove them if they do - but it's usually pointless changing. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:04, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers and Lee Vilenski: Interesting info, thanks. --Mann Mann (talk) 03:04, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Automatic redirection for broken links

Hello. I would like to change the section title of some articles. But that would break many links to there. Do you know if there is a mean (say a robot) to redirect the links automatically to the new title. I mean, if I change "The surface integral" to "surface integral" for example, I would like to use a robot to say it: change every link to "the surface integral" to the new link "surface integral". Thx. maimonid (talk) 08:35, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Cewbot 6 does try to fix these. Galobtter (pingó mió) 09:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Galobtter. But I'm not sure I understand this bot: If I change the title of a section completely say, and leave the content of the section unchanged, will the bot do its work (automatically)? maimonid (talk) 10:55, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Maimonid: I believe that one can use Template:Anchor in such a case. If you create an anchor in a heading, with the former name of the section (such as ==Surface integral{{subst:anchor|The surface integral}}==), links to the old name of the section will still work even after you change the name. Deor (talk) 13:07, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Deor: Thank you so many for this answer; that's exactly what I needed.maimonid (talk) 06:04, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New article

Hello

I'm new to wikipedia but very interested in making my contributions. How ever I don't seem to be able to make new articles. Why is that and how can I do it?

Regards, Lárus Sigurður. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lárus Sigurður (talk • contribs) 13:35, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia editing Lárus Sigurður. New editors are prevented from creating articles directly into Mainspace, as experience tells us they often don't do a good job. However they can use the articles for creation system which among other things allows experienced editors to review and accept/decline/reject the work. Please read WP:YFA or start by improving one of our existing articles in an area you are interested in — that way you'll learn the ropes before you tackle the bigger challenge of writing something from scratch. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:51, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Welcome to Wikipedia. In most cases, new accounts cannot create articles until they are 4 days old and have made 10 edits. I would recommend creating your first article in draft space and submitting it through WP:AFC so that you get feedback from experienced users. I also would not recommend trying to create a new article until you've been around for a while working on improving existing articles and are significantly familiar with the confusing maze of policies and guidelines that govern content here. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 13:58, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What links here

I'd like to see this link-list [1] with links from templates like Template:Underwater diving excluded. Is that possible? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:05, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You can select the Template namespace from the dropdown near the top and then check the box that says "Invert selection". Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:06, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers Thanks, but that doesn't seem to work [2]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:14, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can't solve the general problem, but a Wikipedia search for "History of Diving Museum" finds "History of Diving Museum" plus five other articles before it starts finding articles with Template:Underwater diving. Only the first two are links. TSventon (talk) 16:41, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That does help a bit, thanks. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:47, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This search?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:25, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trappist the monk, thank you, that confirms my conclusion, is Help:Searching a good place to find what you just did, or is there anything simpler? TSventon (talk) 18:51, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Searching is how I knew to try that search. What do you mean by simpler? Simpler search, simpler documentation, simpler something else?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:55, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Trappist the monk I meant simpler documentation, to see if my Google search had found the simplest available explanation of what you had done. TSventon (talk) 20:58, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Trappist the monk Can you also make a search for only the unlinked "History of Diving Museum" in mainspace? I can of course briefly remove it from the template and then search. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This search?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 11:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Trappist the monk You're a wizard, thanks! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:53, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:PrimeHunter/Source links.js can search for links which are in the source and not only a transcluded template. It eliminates all templates at the same time and still finds articles which both have a link in the source and a template. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:39, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the helpful replies! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:07, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Josquin des Prez image scaling

In my work on Josquin des Prez for FAR, I was trying to make the lead image a little larger, as it is rather small. For FAs we're told not to use px size (I have no idea why) so I was trying to use 'upright=1.7' (or whatever number worked nicely) but for some reason this isn't altering the size of the image in preview? Aza24 (talk) 19:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aza24. I don't think that pixel size has anything to do with the article being a candidate for FA status; rather it has to do with WP:THUMBSIZE and other MOS:ACCIM issues. Thumbnail images shouldn't really be fixed to certain pixel size because that forces the same size on all readers regardless of the device they're using or how they've set their preferences. If you want to resize an image and it's a thumbnail, you should file the guidance in MOS:UPRIGHT and scale the image instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:08, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of my name

Dear Wikipedia, Due to privacy reasons I’d like my page to be deleted. The page is for Phyllis Grant. I don’t like having my personal info on the internet. I’m deleting all my presence. Please help! Phyllis Grant [redacted] to discuss. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balin80 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Phillis, I have redacted your contact number: it's a bad idea to publish it in a public forum like this, particularly if you have privacy concerns. I will shortly ask an Admin to remove it from the page history where it can still be seen if someone looks. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.88.97 (talk) 23:14, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. I find I cannot email the Oversight Team myself (not having an account or registered email). Could someone else please do it? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.88.97 (talk) 23:18, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for removing it! I thought this was a private message platform! -Phyllis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balin80 (talk • contribs) 23:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As to removing the article, Wikipedia does not routinely do that merely at the request of the subject (which, strictly speaking, we do not at this point have proof you, Balin80, are, although I am assuming it). After all, everything in the article should be cited to published, publicly available sources. I see that it's quite lightly referenced, so someone may decide that it could be argued not to demonstrate sufficient Notability (in the sense of not having enough independent documentation to qualify for a Wikipedia article – nothing to do with your actual prominence in the Real World!), and nominate it for Deletion. I will leave such matters to editors with more experience in this field. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.88.97 (talk) 23:28, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way I could provide proof of who I am? At any rate, I hope it has insufficient independent documentation. I’m surprised there’s so much info on the wiki page: my age, where I live specifically, my affiliations. I am a well-known artist in Canada, yes, but it makes me feel uneasy seeing photos that someone had to really dig for posted on my wiki page from ages ago (I tried to remove it, I’m sure it’ll be added back). I enjoy wiki but I don’t think people should have access to so much of my personal life. Thanks so much for your help. I wish there was a way I could prove I’m the person in the article! -Phyllis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balin80 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. We publish articles about notable subjects, using information from published reliable sources. The article does not belong to you and we do not give you any permission to control the article, so there is no reason for you to prove who you are to us. However, we really do try hard to consider your privacy concerns so we insist that any information at all about a living person is properly referenced: see WP:BLP. If you or any one of us sees anything in the article that is not referenced, then we are supposed remove that information. -Arch dude (talk) 02:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Balin80: The Phyllis Grant article has now been nominated for deletion. The nominator said that the references are insufficient, but this is not a valid reason for deletion. I went ahead and also recommended it for deletion because there does not seem to be anything in the article that indicates that the subject is notable by our definition, which is a different issue. Note that Phyllis Grant may eventually do something that makes her notable, and it that happens, someone may create an article and she will have no control over it. -Arch dude (talk) 02:55, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Arch dude:, you didn't sign your post to the deletion discussion. TSventon (talk) 03:03, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks Arch dude! -Phyllis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balin80 (talk • contribs) 03:00, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! Thank you. -Phyllis — Preceding unsigned comment added by Balin80 (talk • contribs) 02:50, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused about what to do now

I reverted this edit because it looked like content removal without an adequate reason. But then the same IP reverted my edit with this edit summary:

Big Lies! Liar! Liar! That's a Big Lie! Don't Do That or You are Grounded!

(The diff is here)

Should I revert again (this is the 2nd out of three reverts if I revert again)? I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 22:53, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@I.hate.spam.mail.here: Reverting clear cases of vandalisim or other disruptive editing would most likely be considered and exception to the three-revert rule per WP:NOT3RR; at some point, though, it might simply be better to seek assistance from an administrator at WP:AN, WP:AN3 or WP:AIV per WP:DENY. An administrator may decide to block the account in question to prevent any further disruption or may decide to protect the article instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And also, does anyone know why the edit that added this section was suppressed? I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 04:20, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When a edit is suppressed or revision deleted, there's usually a good reason for doing so that almost certainly can't be discussed in specifics on any public page. If you want to see who suppressed the edit on a page, you can usually find out by looking at the page's history or checking the page's log. In almost all cases, you find an edit summary listing to policy based reason why the edit needed to be surpressed or revision deleted. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:33, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly,I.hate.spam.mail.here: when an edit was suppressed, it won't show in any public log entries. Suppression is logged in the non-public suppression log, which is inaccessible with exception to oversighters, arbcom, stewards, ombudsmen and some WMF staff. In this case it seems the edit had to be suppressed because someone added private data in #Removal of my name above, which was not removed until after this section was created. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:31, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying things Victor Schmidt. @I.hate.spam.mail.here: if you really want to know why an edit was suppressed, you might have to contact an WP:OVERSIGHTer directly and ask. They might only just give you a general explaination like Victor did in this case. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:38, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Got it, thanks @Marchjuly and @Victor Schmidt mobil. I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 05:54, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]