Help desk
< November 10	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 12 >

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 11

Heneage Finch, 3rd Earl of Winchilsea

Ref 6 is in red, please repair if able - thanks 58.179.137.31 (talk) 04:07, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Tollens (talk) 04:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request for easier access

FYI

– Added section header. GoingBatty (talk) 06:23, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I suport Wikipedia by buying "Wikipedia pens, mugs, TShirts... etc But it difficult to find any link to the site. Should make it easier to access for seasonal shoppers and generate community spirit. Even this "Help Desk" seemed to create more hurdles with "log in" & "create an account"... Wikipedia has to be more demcratic and allow for "Techo-peasants"! 2607:FEA8:5661:6F00:DD73:A368:BEBD:179E (talk) 06:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! What specific changes do you have in mind? GoingBatty (talk) 06:24, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what site you mean. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It does not sell mugs etc. Where are you buying them from? I stand to be corrected but as far as I can determine no Wikipedia merchandise is sold to support Wikipedia financially. You are only supporting the manufacturer and the retailer. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They may be referring to https://store.wikimedia.org/ 331dot (talk) 09:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the link. It was indeed difficult to find. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:30, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Warning for anyone outside of the USA from the FAQ: "We cannot provide any customs clearance estimates, but in most cases, shipments may spend anywhere from one to three days in customs. IMPORTANT: Any customs or import duties are charged once the order reaches its destination country and must be paid by the recipient of the order". Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:16, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Articles by size

I am interested in finding small Good and Featured Articles. Is there a way of searching for Good and Featured Articles with fewer than 10,000 bytes for example? Ykraps (talk) 08:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ykraps: Yes, the PetScan tool can do this. It can scan the articles in a category testing various page properties, including the length of the page in bytes. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:56, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@John of Reading: Thanks. It took some working out but I have managed to get what I want. Do you know if there is a way of linking those results or saving them so I can show them to someone else? --Ykraps (talk) 09:56, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ykraps The simplest thing to show someone would be Wikipedia:Wikipedia records#Articles (although that only lists the absolute record). Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:47, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ykraps: Have a look at the Petscan "Output" tab. You could try selecting "Wiki" format, which returns the results in a format that you could paste into a Wikipedia sandbox, or "Plain text", which just sticks the article names out one per line. -- John of Reading (talk) 12:23, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both. --Ykraps (talk) 10:29, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bundle AfD help

I have started an AfD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Natural History of Fear. There are around 100 other articles in the same collection as this audio drama which I also believe fail to meet WP:GNG. These are listed at Doctor Who: The Monthly Adventures. I am aware of WP:BUNDLE, but is there an easier way to bulk nominate articles for deletion discussion? It will take me some time to go through every article and add a deletion tag linking back to the deletion discussion of The Natural History of Fear. Thanks! Torpedoi (talk) 09:21, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Search inside Wikipedia

Firefox browser, Windows 7 Pro 64bit. On the main page of Wikipedia clock on the "search" icon or Alt+Shift+f does not get any results. Which make search in Wikipedia impossible. Jrvladr (talk) 10:47, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jrvladr You may have to click on the magnifying glass icon to open the search box. If that doesn't work, then the link Special:Search will. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:51, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gyros in Greece Have No Lettuce

Hello, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyros The cardinal for this site keeps changing the edited part on gyros in Greece where it talks about lettuce. I've lived there, travel back there regularly, and have had hundreds of gyros from all over the country. There is rarely if ever any lettuce in them. Perhaps that person looked at pictures that have parsley in a gyro. Only rarely is there a strand of lettuce included in the toppings. Here's an example of a site with the list of ingredients that are traditional (toppings include tomato, onion, tzatziki): https://www.itinari.com/a-guide-to-ordering-gyros-in-greece-xfr8

Please leave the "lettuce (rarely)" part, and then don't let the editor change the part where tzatziki is added "sometimes." It's been on 100% of gyros I've had. The person editing this page has clearly not been to Greece. Thanks! 24.180.80.253 (talk) 11:36, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what a gyro is, or a cardinal, but the place to discuss edits to an article is the talk page of that article. Bear in mind that Wikipedia simply reports what reliable sources say, not what you know from your personal experience. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hostile UI

I can not understand why do you keep updating (and in fact downgrading) your layouts. It is becoming more and more difficult to use wikipedia for someone who uses many languages. I have already changed my layout to monobook, but recently I noticed that when you try to change language of an article, you can no longer just pick one from alphabetically organised list, but you have to click "show X more" and fight with this clownish crap. Why supposed geographical origin of a language is more important to you than users convenience? It is such a shame that wikipedia contributes to this onepager internet madness. Mewczak (talk) 12:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The UI changes on Wikipedia are pretty deliberative and do not remind me at all of the haphazard, arguably unethical process that other major websites use. Unfortunately it's not to everyone's taste, but design trends hold sway and go out of fashion, that's the nature of media. This ultimately what the web being a dynamic format enables, unfortunately. Remsense聊 12:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, I have overstated the similarity between wiki and other websites - it is certainly pretty far from suboptimal solutions in other places (because fortunately money is not in the game I guess). And at least the possibility to change your layout remains! Mewczak (talk) 13:11, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay problem solved I just learned that you can uncheck "use a compact language list" in your preferences. But I guess I will never learn why one has to put more and more effort (being logged in, changing preferences) to use webpages reasonably and why does wikipedia comfort to this AI dictatorship. Why in the hell would I care what is a guess of a computer about what language I prefer? What is going to be next? Mabe chat-like responses instead of articles, just like in google search engine? Mewczak (talk) 13:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's impossible to have a design layout that everyone on this planet likes, which is why accounts may choose older skins, though that is technically challenging (though possible) to enable for users without accounts. The current default skin was the result of much study, testing, and debate. Please see WP:VECTOR2022 for more information. 331dot (talk) 13:14, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

BND-Archive

Hi Folks!! What is the copyright status of military images from the BND-Archive, the Bundesarchiv. I've found an image I would like to use. Are they public domain per chance? scope_creep^Talk 14:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: check first if it has already been imported to Commons: c:Category:Images from the German Federal Archive. The ones in Commons have a CC-BY-SA-3.0 license. MKFI (talk) 15:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MKFI: I found a Heinrich Reiser and thought that was it, but it was a man from the 19th century. For a second I thought I was sorted. Would the image be automatically under the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license. scope_creep^Talk 15:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On the signature it states:- BND-Archiv, Signatur P1/2831/1_OT, Bl. 170. I tried to find it in the archive but couldn't. Would somebody be able to find it and check if the image licences with a pd image. I could email them right enough. It is the Heinrich Reiser image here: [1] scope_creep^Talk 15:40, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've emailed them. scope_creep^Talk 15:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Update a parent’s name

On List of Frausters: Richard Whitney: the correct name of his mother is: Nellie Gertrude Merrill. I got this info from Website: Family Search. MaryKay2788 (talk) 15:34, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MaryKay2788: More information needed for that citation, and you should be posting this on the talk page of the article you have a concern with. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this on Talk:Richard Whitney (financier). It is not clear from the citations whether or not his mother's name is found in the sources given (and they are not online) but I rather doubt it: so it may indeed be wrong (it seems to say that both his mother and his father were Whitneys, which is of course possible, but unusual).

However, Family Search is pretty clearly an aggregation of data from differentl places, and does not count as a reliable source. In WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 250#FamilySearch and LDS historical figures, an editor said Family Search is just a collection of user created data mixed up with primary sources. It is not a reliable source - no competent professional genealogist would use an entry from Family Search for anything. Instead, you go to the sources that should be cited in the Family Search entry and verify them before considering the information reliable.

Personally, I think there is far too much detail about Whitney's family in the article anyway. ColinFine (talk) 18:12, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proper usage of the ellipsis marks

Hello. There seem to be different styles of using the ellipsis marks. Does WP use any standardized version. I wrote most of the article on Paul Martin (illustrator). Is my usage of the marks acceptable in these examples from that article:

Stories of To-day and Yesterday ..., Frederick Houk Law, editor, February 1930. [My notes: The book title is very long, so only the first five words are stated. Space, three dots, comma.]

"entered a huge, bright room ... This was my uncle's studio. ... Although my uncle" [My notes: This is a cut-out excerpt of a paragraph long, direct quote. The second sentence ends after the word "studio", hence the reason for the period.]

"Overflowing pep and energy is expressed ...." [My notes: Direct quote. Space, four dots. The sentence does not end after the word "expressed." The full sentence goes, "Overflowing pep and energy is expressed by the youngster in the picture." The fourth dot is the period that ends the sentence.]

Thanks, JimPercy (talk) 15:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does have stylistic guidance on this topic, yes, accessible via the charmingly named shortcut MOS:.... Folly Mox (talk) 15:42, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It just doesn't go into enough detail beyond the basics. It might be helpful to know if any of my three examples look "off." JimPercy (talk) 15:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not able to give an assessment based off the MOS, but since you asked if they look off, I can provide a personal opinion:

All of the examples you brought here look ok. I've also truncated extremely long book titles (fashionable in the 1800s and thenabouts) without the use of ellipses.

In the article itself, the ellipses used in excerpts seem like they could sometimes be replaced with quote marks and commas. For example, reference 30 (Ossining Citizen-Sentinel, 1932). You have a lot of ellipses separating unconnected facts published in the source. Since these are unconnected, you could make each excerpt its own quote, and separate them with commas (or full stops, or semicolons). You could also remove the excerpts entirely: it's not necessary to list out all the original text that is used to support article prose.

Reference 29 feels a bit heavy-handed: you have "New ... Old" linking a source titled "The New Testament and the Old".

In reference 50, you've used ellipsis to elide "(Inc.)" from the business name "R. L. Polk & Co. (Inc.)" (according to the source provided). "(Inc.)" could easily be dropped without ellipsis.

On a somewhat related note, you've cited R. L. Polk & Co.'s Trow General Directory of New York City, Embracing the Boroughs of Manhattan and the Bronx, sometimes with ellipsis following "New York City", sometimes not. It would be easier if this source were placed in a Sources subsection, so you could refer to it by a shortened term.

I didn't make it through all 315 citations, and only really skimmed the ones I looked at, but someone here or at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style may have further input. Folly Mox (talk) 16:50, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ref. 30. I reworked it, getting rid of some of the ellipses, to make it less confusing or read smoother. I prefer keeping the text in there, since columns on illustrators before WWII are rare (unless among the most famous). Ref. 29. The usage of three dots there does seem odd. I changed those two keywords and deleted the ellipsis. Regarding: R. L. Polk. That will be a harder one to work on. The official title always seemed long, and the ending part of the title didn't remain constant. Thanks, JimPercy (talk) 23:04, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

English = No gaps

American = Gaps

English = No dots in acronyms.

American = Dots everywhere, especially in acronyms.

English = Quotation marks go outside commas and full-stops.

American = Quotation marks go inside commas and full-stops.

Worldwide English = Ellipsis should only have 3 dots, not 4 or more. Danstarr69 (talk) 20:26, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Four dots are not good. I got rid of the extra dot in one of the above sentences. Re. "Overflowing pep and energy." Thanks, JimPercy (talk) 23:04, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My training as a UK desk editor differs in places from Danstarr69's 'English' above. According to Hart's Rules for Compositors and Readers at the University Press Oxford (OUP 39th Edition 1983):

(p44) Marks of omission

"To mark omitted words three points . . . (not asterisks) separated by normal space of line are sufficient; and the practice should be uniform throughout the work."

"When three points are used at the end of a complete sentence a fourth full point should not be added (unless the incomplete sentence is a quotation within an overall sentence, when the normal sentence point will be added after the final quotation mark); normal space of line should proceded the first full point. But where the sentence is complete, the closing point is set close up, followed by three points for omission."

(p45) Relative placing of quotation marks and punctuation

"All signs of punctuation used with words in quotation marks must be placed according to the sense. If an extract ends with a point or exclamation or interrogation sign, let that point be included before the quotation mark; but not otherwise. When there is one quotation within another, and both end with the sentence, put the punctuation mark before the first of the closing quotation marks."

Hope this is of relevance, though not necessarily identical to Wikipedia's MoS. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.5.208 (talk) 00:11, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can't log in

I never saw a place to create a "User Name" so assumed it would be my email address. I contributed $10 to Wikipedia so I could use it. I'm a teacher and assumed that this would be a good resource but if I can't log in - there isn't even "forgot my password" message ... I'm sorry I spent the $$$ 2603:6081:8F02:DB32:5541:FFCD:4C41:AB55 (talk) 16:38, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You do not need to create an account to use (or edit) Wikipedia, neither is any payment required. Should you wish to create an account there are certain advantages. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Create an account. You cannot set your email address as your user name. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need to donate to the Wikimedia Foundation in order to use Wikipedia (or any of the other projects Wikimedia hosts). Creating an account is free, but donations are not tied to accounts in any way, for privacy reasons. Donating to Wikimedia does not grant an account any special privileges or access. Folly Mox (talk) 16:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect you gave your email address as contact information when you donated and never created a Wikipedia account. It's different and independent processes. You can create an account at Special:CreateAccount. It's linked on a button on the login screen. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just for completeness, @2603:6081:8F02:DB32:5541:FFCD:4C41:AB55|2603:6081:8F02:DB32:5541:FFCD:4C41:AB55 , the "reset password" page is Special:PasswordReset. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:30, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]