Help desk
< November 20	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 22 >

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 21

Found an unnecessary article that should be deleted, how to proceed?

Hello, I have found an article that is unnecessary and, in my estimation, should be deleted. The article in question is Mann brothers. The article, which is a minuscule stub of two sentences and a single reference, is referring to the writers Thomas Mann and Heinrich Mann (who were brothers). However, I don't see why such an article should exist. Consider the following reasons:

They were never a collective entity and did not work together on any project, like for example the Coen brothers, the Brothers Grimm, or any other brotherly collective artist (as a "fun fact", they did not like each other).
The Mann family, to which they belong, already has an article.
Their family tree shows that they had another brother named Viktor, so they were not really the only Mann brothers in that family.
The only thing the article mentions is that they were exiled in the United States but I don't think that biographical fact alone warrants an entire article devoted to it. Both of their respective articles already make mention of that.

How should I proceed here in order to delete this unnecessary article? Do you also think the article should be deleted? Thanks in advance.

DemianStratford (talk) 03:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DemianStratford: put this reasoning on the article's talk page, then use the WP:PROD process. If someone objects and removes the prod, take the article to WP:AFD. -Arch dude (talk) 05:44, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@DemianStratford:, there is a Wikipedia:Deletion policy with a list of accepted reasons for deletion, but I don't think any of them cover this case except possibly 5 Content forks. There seem to be multiple sources that write about the Mann brothers, so it would be possible to write a useful article on the subject. TSventon (talk) 19:03, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is the current go-to cite tool to just plug in a GoogleBooks link and get a full cite (like reftag.appspot.com used to)?

Hello, I used to use reftag.appspot.com to instantly turn GoogleBooks links into full cites, but that website appears to be defunct? Has a good substitute arisen? Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 08:08, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MatthewVanitasI currently use https://alyw234237.github.io/wiki-doi-gbooks-citation-maker/ , but I wish that the old one was back.Naraht (talk) 15:07, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Publish Article

Hello, would anyone please help me in confirming if the draft submission means that the draft has been submitted as an article on Wikipedia or if the draft is only for viewing it privately? If the draft submission is not submitted as an article, can you please advise on how to proceed with submitting the draft as a Wikipedia article so it can be public? Would i have to submit it from my user page sandbox? Thank you Carma AlYounes (talk) 08:41, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You saved a draft, but you haven't yet submitted it for review. To do so, add ~~{{subst|submit}}~~ {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:01, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for my typo. It should be {{subst:submit}}, not {{subst|submit}}. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:14, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Carma AlYounes Anyone can view the draft if they know where to look for it, but to make it part of the encyclopedia you need to do as David noted above. If you have an association with, or work for, this orchestra, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required disclosures(declaring a paid relationship is a Terms of Use requirement). 331dot (talk) 09:05, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a "References" section to your draft, but while you are waiting for review you can improve minor aspects such as date formats and section headings. More generally you should read the Manual of Style. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:09, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Carma AlYounes I see that the draft has been declined. I noticed some MOS things, as @David Biddulph mentioned, and the date with a superscript "rd", and I was going to fix those. But I'll wait to see how the notability thing is decided. Also, there's a curly quote.

Carma, said you are not paid for the article, but you need to answer the additional question that @331dot asked-- are you a member of, or affiliated with, the orchestra in any way? David10244 (talk) 07:53, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is this OR?

The information x can be extracted if we confront two sources which say y and z. If I show both sources and explain how I extracted x in a note, is this OR? Dr Salvus 11:13, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr Salvus: It sounds like Wikipedia:No original research#Synthesis of published material which says: "Do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source." It's hard to say more without knowing the specifics. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:40, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect, this means I can't publish the info. Dr Salvus 11:53, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr Salvus Note that there are limited agreed exceptions to "no original research" mentioned at WP:CALC and WP:COUNTSORT. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:13, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A source says two players born in 2003 played a match. Two other sources say their dates of birth. If I combine them, I can know who's younger. Dr Salvus 12:17, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr Salvus: Why do you want to know who is younger? If it's a youth record it needs a good source. Otherwise it doesn't seem worth mentioning. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:39, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A team's captain was their youngest player. Do I add the info or not? Dr Salvus 12:41, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would say no. Unless a source has commented on this fact, it is not encyclopaedic. ColinFine (talk) 12:59, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers don't add up to 100%

Hello! On the article United Arab Emirates an IP has pointed out on the talk page that the population % in the table in the section Administrative divisions don't add up to 100% (their math is slightly off as from what I calculated it adds up to 107.1% rather than 105.5%). I'm not exactly sure how to go about fixing it as the table (and section as a whole) is completely unsourced so i don't know where the data is coming from. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:32, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The sum of the population column is about three quarters of a million greater than the number shown for the UAE as a whole, too. That's 107.8% greater, so maybe the individual emirates' percentage numbers were calculated that way? Anyway, there's sources for older figures in Emirates of the United Arab Emirates... not that the numbers in our article agree with them. —Cryptic 14:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

" This sandbox is in the article namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the User sandbox template. "

I have just moved a page I created in sandbox to the (Article) space [from the Sandbox I chose More -> Move -> and choose (Article) there].

The following message appears with red letters at the end of the article: "This sandbox is in the article namespace. Either move this page into your userspace, or remove the User sandbox"

I am not sure what needs to be done. Any suggestions are very welcomed! Thank you in advance. Carve nl (talk) 16:09, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Carve nl, please read and comply with WP:PAID if it is applicable. Your username is likely to be a problem, since it seems to represent a business - I recommend applying for a WP:RENAME. The article has been nominated for speedy deletion. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:16, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: User now blocked (promotional). Eagleash (talk) 18:54, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Errors with Help:IPA/Greenlandic

Moved to Help talk:IPA/Greenlandic

– per WP:MULTI. Nardog (talk) 03:50, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blood Management Title is Incorrect

Hi,

I volunteer with the organization that Internationally supports Patient Blood Management efforts. Currently the site is titled "Blood Management", which is incorrect. How are we able to update this terminology?

Thank you,

Ann S97041 (talk) 20:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

S97041 Please first discuss the matter on the article talk page, so that other editors may comment. Per WP:COMMONNAME, Wikipedia typically uses the most commonly used name for a topic. If no one objects after a few days, you may request a page move at Requested moves. 331dot (talk) 20:34, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much!!!

Ann S97041 (talk) 21:03, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

S97041 and 331dot, I checked the references in the article and did a Google search. A clear majority of reliable sources use the three word formulation, so I moved the article to Patient blood management. Cullen328 (talk) 02:09, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FAKE Wikipedia site

Not a question, but I don't know where to post this:

When searching something today, I was taken to some Wikipedia pages, but each time BitDefender told me it blocked something... I finally looked at the URL: https://www.ca.crh.com>wiki>

I don't know how long this has been going on, it is a bit frightening...

I love Wiki, just sent in my (increased) yearly contribution.

LD, Ottawa Canada 173.206.83.166 (talk) 21:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have not looked at the link you provided, but sites are allowed to copy Wikipedia, if they provide attribution. RudolfRed (talk) 22:43, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Mirrors and forks says that two and a half years ago it listed 1030 mirrors and forks of Wikipedia. I don't know how many it has now. ColinFine (talk) 22:57, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]