Help desk
< November 22	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 24 >

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 23

Mysterious ways

Can someone remove alternative dance from the infobox on Mysterious Ways as the Allmusic source does not list it as alternative dance? I’ve tried twice but each time messes up the infobox for some reason. 2601:806:8200:ECF0:5E3:3020:D0F2:5A01 (talk) 02:26, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ignore this topic. I posted this same message at the Teahouse so they will probably help me. 2601:806:8200:ECF0:5E3:3020:D0F2:5A01 (talk) 02:37, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Your edits were removing the reference as well at the closing curly brackets that are necessary for that template to work correctly. Cullen328 (talk) 02:41, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please help me translate my line map template to English?

I'm pretty busy and don't have time. I copied Template:HHCJ route from the Chinese WP. Could you please help me translate all the names to English using the data at the article Hangzhou–Haining Intercity Rail? Thanks! Félix An (talk) 03:35, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do it, but it'll take a while. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 06:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help! Félix An (talk) 06:12, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also helped out a little bit as I had some time. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 06:39, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Citing a revised article

Is it okay to make a citation based on the original version of an article (using "date" and "archive-url" parameters) if the current version was revised/pruned/neutered/censored to not include the information that was synthesized? Alexis Coutinho (talk) 04:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexiscoutinho: Yes, and don't include |url-status=live in the reference. GoingBatty (talk) 05:00, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! For example, in the original interview article it said "In the first world war, mutinies interfered before technology could make a difference" while in the revised article it says "In the first world war, politics interfered before technology could make a difference". The citation/synthesis raised the concern of mutinies, namely. So this would be ok right (provided I remove |url-status=live of course)? Alexis Coutinho (talk) 05:09, 23 November 2023 (UTC

@Alexiscoutinho: I would also place an inline comment next to the ref explaining the situation. Otherwise a later editor might decide to "update" the ref to the more recent version. -Arch dude (talk) 05:41, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest setting |url-status=deviated, which I think covers this use case. Folly Mox (talk) 05:48, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Alexis Coutinho (talk) 06:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, could you help out here? Some editors are disputing the validity of my citation. I believe I'm in the right there, but I would like to hear from other experienced editors. ;) Alexis Coutinho (talk) 19:15, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree here. If a source corrects itself then why use the older version? Obviously they had reasons for a correction. The RS criteria is based on “fact checking and accuracy” and a source changing itself is it basically saying “that wasn’t accurate”. I genuinely can’t think of a good reason why someone would wish to use an older, non-corrected version of a source. Volunteer Marek 22:33, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The RS criteria is based on “fact checking and accuracy” and a source changing itself is it basically saying “that wasn’t accurate”. That isn't always the case. Remember that UN report (or some other human rights org) last year that accused Ukraine of war crimes due to using civilians as human shields? Well, after a huge backlash and international pressure they completely changed their tone. The source would still be considered generally reliable even though it caved to the narrative in that specific episode. There are surely countless other examples unrelated to the war of articles being revised/censored after the original publication. Alexis Coutinho (talk) 01:51, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, in that case too the same logic would apply. Also, you can’t read the sources mind and speculate why they corrected themselves, as that’s original research. Volunteer Marek 05:46, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You should remove the {{Cite web}} |url-status= options then if you are so confident that non-live sources are unusable in Wikipedia. Alexis Coutinho (talk) 13:31, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is for dead links and the like. Not for sources that have been revised. That's like knowingly citing a retracted journal article. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 14:16, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I misexpressed myself. I was mostly refering to deviated, unfit and usurped options. Alexis Coutinho (talk) 15:25, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

unfit and usurped are also not for that purpose. The purpose of deviated is unclear to me, but clearly if the source has issued a correction, that means it no longer supports the original text. That this template may encourage citing such information is neither here nor there. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 15:35, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, have you considered using nbsp or nowrap in your signature? I think it would look nicer. ;) Alexis Coutinho (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Collapseable option of Template:Argo Navis

Could any turn the current Template:Argo Navis to {{Argo Navis|state=collapsed}} ? I plan to make {{Argo Navis|state=expanded}} to something else. 117daveawesome (talk) 07:11, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you clarify the "something else"? Usually for a nav template up to a certain size, it is preferred for them to be collapsed by default and set to expanded in certain articles if needed. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 11:40, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, all my progress got deleted. 117daveawesome (talk) 12:07, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just typed it back. For the "something else", click Template:User:117daveawesome/testing 117daveawesome (talk) 12:25, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you make stannum redirect to tin?

I have mentioned above. It's currently nonsense when I typed stannum it directs me to a disambiguation page. I please someone who could handle well that situation so that each time the user type the old Latin name for the chemical element, it should be returned to the element with IUPAC-approved symbol. 2001:EE0:4BC5:A000:1DB:2F3:CF1B:D798 (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not done Were that to be done then the links to Stannum, New South Wales and Fusinus stannum would be lost. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Page views in the last 20 days:

It's very unusual for a disambiguation page to get far more views than the total for all but one of the listed pages. It's good evidence that nearly everybody is looking for tin. I will move the disambiguation page to Stannum (disambiguation), redirect Stannum to Tin, and add a hatnote to Tin with a link to the disambiguation page. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:20, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not able to make factual edits to article

Hi there - There are factual edits in several articles about Palestine and the other users are not allowing the edits.

The first and most obvious is that it is not equivalent to map the Holy Land and Palestine. In fact, mapping one has often either meant to imply the land of the Israelites (as coined by the Greeks in the 5th century), or in direct opposition to the Holy Land as it is in modern times.

Cartography of Palestine

How can I get permanent changes? Raconcilio (talk) 13:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Racincilio No change to Wikipedia is "permanent", but you have chosen to edit in one of the most contentious areas of this project, which has its own special rules. I will notify you of these. Regarding your question, you have already used the edit request process, that is how you propose edits.

We don't need the whole url when you link to another article, simply place the title of the target article in double brackets, as I've done here for you. 331dot (talk) 13:11, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear to see that the mapping of Israel and Palestine are different from modern times.

The methods of mapping are different for mapping the Holy Land which is biblical. Mapping of Palestine is political.

It needs to be changed. Raconcilio (talk) 13:34, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please send the rules to edit. There is no reference for this part and it should be changed. It is erasing modern history and also Jewish history before this. Raconcilio (talk) 13:35, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, please propose your edit for discussion on the article talk page as an edit request, which you have done before. You need to build a case for your edit and gain a consensus; you telling us it is correct is insufficient, especially in a contentious topic area. 331dot (talk) 14:01, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't really need to be a case built. It is easy to see that 'Holy' mapping comes from the Bible and there are at present two different entities mapping Israel and Palestine. I have suggested in the talk page but need additional support.

It's critical because misinformation on this conflict causes people to kill one another. The land is Holy but killing people to call it Palestine vs. Israel is not what makes it Holy. Figuring out how to stop the killing is. This is part of it. Raconcilio (talk) 14:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you think this is a clear piece of information, but that is insufficient especially in a designated contentious topic area. You need to make a case and persuade others to agree with you. That is just how things work here. 331dot (talk) 14:18, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear the way of mapping for different things is different. No map says aka for the others and there is no source. It’s inaccurate and should be deleted 2A01:6500:A036:557F:C01F:9095:26F:26D0 (talk) 14:39, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing we do here will influence or end the conflict, nor should we attempt to do so. Our only interest is in summarizing independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 14:21, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. My interest here is to correct the record.

Trying to emphasize that it’s critical to have someone higher up at Wikipedia look at.

The maps have never overlapped or had an AKA and so the article should be edited.

Keeping it is along the lines of erasing Israel and Jewish significance 2A01:6500:A036:557F:C01F:9095:26F:26D0 (talk) 14:42, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Remember to log in when posting. You will either proceed as advised, or not. 331dot (talk) 14:45, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We don't really report "facts". There is no "higher ups". We simply summarize what reliable sources say about a subject. You need to gain consensus on the talk page of the article for this to be included. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:46, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of grape diseases

Can I remove this template? References are present.

JackkBrown (talk) 13:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, now that there are inline citations, feel free to remove this maintenance tag. Tutwakhamoe (talk) 13:18, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Turnaround time on submitting article requests

Hello,

I added a requested article for an organization called "Young Muslims". I am not in any rush to have the page be considered, but wanted to know what the general timeline and review process was? I had trouble finding this info in FAQ so apologies in advance if I missed it!

Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Organizations#Y

Msiwiki (talk) 16:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Msiwiki There is no specific timeframe. The average time is several months, but drafts are reviewed in no particular order by volunteers. It could be done five minutes after you submit it, or five months from now. 331dot (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot: No mate, they mean they've requested someone write it for them, not that it's a submitted AfC draft. Seven months might be pretty hopeful for article requests - has anyone ever fulfilled one?! ——Serial 17:09, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Serial Number 54129 I actually, did, sort of. I started an article, then I happened to check "what links here" and what do you know, it was listed on WP:RA. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:20, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Msiwiki. I'm afraid that 331dot has probably answered a different question, about the time taken for an submitted draft to be reviewed. I'm afraid that the time for a Requested Article to be picked up generally ranges from months to never. (It could happen that somebody picked it up sooner, but it's unusual).

The next entries after yours were raised in Feb 2022, May 2012, Feb 2021, and May 2012.

Your best bet is either to ask at WT:WikiProject Islam if there is anybody there interested in creating the article or working with you (though Islam is such a huge area, that I rather doubt it), or to do it yourself. Writing a new article is challenging, and I always advise new editors to get quite a bit of experience before trying it; but I see you have been around for a while, so you may have enough understanding of sourcing to try it - I'm not sure that all the sources you link in your request are independent, but there may very well be enough there to establish notability. Please read YFA. ColinFine (talk) 17:20, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, that's exactly what I did. I appreciate the correction. 331dot (talk) 20:49, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ColineFine,

I appreciate your response. I would love to take a shot at writing this and workshop with a wiki editor to ensure everything is credible and accurate.

Should I first begin a draft of the article, or first ask someone else's help on it in the WikiProject Islam?

My goal for the article is to first establish the page and notability so I do not imagine being incredibily detailed in the initial draft.

Thanks! Msiwiki (talk) 02:15, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

False content

Hi

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Moore_(%C3%A9crivain)

My client has advised me regarding the publication of this page about him. It is vastly incorrect and potentially damaging to his career and reputation given the inaccuracies. Jonathan's personal website is at https://jonathanmooreuk.com where you can see the photograph of him which been stolen for the French wiki page.

Please can you remove this page.

Kind regards,

Alistair Martin 62.232.146.42 (talk) 16:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have to raise this at the French Wikipedia; the English Wikipedia has no jurisdiction over what that project does. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:01, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I note that the image has been marked on Commons for speedy deletion as a copyright violation. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:18, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Funny ref template for .pdf

Odd PDF mark up

Hi all. Could someone be kind enough just to pop over to Thomas de la More, and show me where I'm going wrong with this reference?

Kleineke, H. W. (2021). "Parliamentary Elections in the Reign of Henry VI Revisited: Some New Perspectives on an Old Subject?" (PDF). thehistoryofparliament.

It's got a big red box on it which isn't particularly reassuring ;) but I've tried tweaking things, and usually a pdf is easy enough. Any thoughts? Sorry if it's obvious; it probably is! ——Serial 17:03, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Serial Number 54129: I don't know what you refer to. I only see a normal small PDF icon

with white "PDF" on red background on a white paper. It's added automatically to PDF links like http://example.org/test.pdf. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, PrimeHunter; this is what I see, here and there. ——Serial 17:25, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Stand down! I think it's just my browser actually—it's not there when I log out. Thanks for the help, though! ——Serial 17:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have the User:Headbomb/unreliable.js script installed in your common.js file? I also see the red box, which is due to the unreliable.js script marking wordpress.com links as a "generally unreliable source". CodeTalker (talk) 17:42, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Serial Number 54129: The red background is made by importScript('User:Headbomb/unreliable.js') in User:Serial Number 54129/common.js. See User:Headbomb/unreliable. You have a shitload of user scripts. Please try logging out or safemode=1 before reporting issues. mw:safemode deactivates all user scripts and gadgets. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:45, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be that part of your problem is the mess that is your common.js page? In the image you uploaded, the above {{cite web}} template shows a harv warning message. When I looked in your common.js I found several harv warning scripts: line 48, line 69, line 74, line 121, and line 122. Pick one and get rid of all of the others.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:45, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh. @Trappist the monk, PrimeHunter, and CodeTalker: Thanks! I had another query about scripts elsewhere, where I was also rightfully bollocked for my scripts (WPT thread here—similar shenanigans!). So I got some severe culling of scripts to do then? Thanks for all your help! ——Serial 18:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cluebot

In the Talk: Metrication page I automated the archiving using ClueBot III. There were two pre-existing manual archives. ClueBot, the first time it ran, put all the older threads in the first archive, which means that the threads in the second archive are older than many of the threads in the newer archive. Is there a way to sort this out? Jc3s5h (talk) 18:11, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jc3s5h: I have manually moved the archived sections and added |numberstart=2 to the archive instructions [1] per User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis#numberstart. The next archiving should go to Talk:Metrication/Archive 2 now. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:55, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Jc3s5h (talk) 20:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need help with changing the picture for IKEA Map for all stores

List of countries with IKEA stores

The map is incorrect for Kosova and Ukraine as IKEA is made by and the headquarters being in Sweden.

It needs to be changed to the correct policies from Swedens Point of view. Century009 (talk) 19:41, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Century009: Hi there! The image is located at commons:File:Map of IKEA stores.svg. You could try reaching out to the previous editors to see if they would update the map. I suggest providing a reliable published source for each change you would like to be made. GoingBatty (talk) 20:13, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance in writing an article for the National Association of Food Chains

I've been just casually scrolling Wikipedia, when I found that several articles, such as Barcode - Wikipedia and Wilfred Von der Ahe - Wikipedia. For this reason, I've been thinking of creating an article for the National Association of Food Chains. I've so far found some reliable sources mentioning the organization, such as National Association of Food Chains. Better Living at Lower Cost. · (usda.gov), FOOD CHAIN GROUP TO WOO THE PUBLIC; Association Sponsors Campaign Featuring Their Economies in Mass Distribution - The New York Times (nytimes.com), and National Association of Food Chains, 1957 | ArchivesSpace Public Interface (ou.edu) (this one however only mentions the name, and no actual information, which is a bit confusing, but I believe is locked behind some sort of access request). I believe that due to the time that the organization was active (about 1930s to 70s), there isn't many easily available sources for the organization. So, I am wondering if anyone can provide assistance in finding sources to create an article for the National Association of Food Chains, if it is possible? If not, then I guess perhaps it wouldn't be able to make it into an article, but I'm not sure. SonOfYoutubers (talk) 23:05, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SonOfYoutubers, the guidelines for whether therer are enough references for an article about an organisation are at WP:NCORP. You could also ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities to see if the people there can find more sources. If you identify a source, but can't access it, you could ask at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange. We already have an article on the Food Marketing Institute "formed in 1977 with the merger of the Super Market Institute and the National Association of Food Chains", so if you can't find enough references for a whole article, you could add a section to the FMI article and make a Wikipedia:Redirect page at National Association of Food Chains. TSventon (talk) 14:44, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SonOfYoutubers That's the sort of topic where WP:The Wikipedia Library is a great resource. I just did a search for "National Association of Food Chains" and got 164 hits for that string. That isn't a guarantee of notability but it is a good start. Unfortunately, you don't yet qualify to join the library (you need 500 edits, for example). I could email you the hits but many may be paywalled, so a certain degree of commitment will be needed! Take this up via my Talk Page if you wish. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:38, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SonOfYoutubers You may well have access to JSTOR and search there gives ~90 hits. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:06, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael D. Turnbull I found many sources on JSTOR referencing and speaking of NAFC, thank you! I may be interested in seeing sources from the Wikipedia Library, I will see later. SonOfYoutubers (talk) 18:35, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You might be cautious with your language. Saying "for the National Association of Food Chains" rather than about the NAFC implies to the reader that you would be editing on their behalf. I see that this is not the case, but that was the initial impression. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:13, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, my mistake. I usually don't grammar check my comments/topic headings too much, so that's why there's sometimes errors in them. SonOfYoutubers (talk) 00:15, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bar and bat mitzvah

Hi guys, I have learnt to italicise a single word in the title, but here I need to italicise three words (all except "and"); how do I do this? JackkBrown (talk) 23:22, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JackkBrown: {{DISPLAYTITLE:''Bar'' and ''bat mitzvah''}}. See more at WP:DISPLAYTITLE. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:09, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: is it the same in the title of the infobox? JackkBrown (talk) 00:38, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JackkBrown: You can write anything in title, e.g. |title = ''Bar'' and ''bat mitzvah'' PrimeHunter (talk) 01:01, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: I had already tried this before posting the question in the help desk, but by italicising "(|title = Bar and bat mitzvah)", the words are unfortunately not in the same line. JackkBrown (talk) 01:20, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JackkBrown: It works for me in desktop but I now see that mobile is different. That's odd. You can use |title = {{nowrap|''Bar'' and ''bat mitzvah''}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:11, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JackkBrown:, I am probably too late, but I would say don't italicise as bar and bat mitzvah are fairly commonly used in English. TSventon (talk) 00:12, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TSventon: I leave it as is, I have only italicised the title and header in the infobox; these terms, in all paragraphs, were already italicised before my intervention. Remember that if you want to take responsibility for removing the italics from these terms, you will also have to do so for all the other pages that talk about bar mitzvah and bat mitzvah. JackkBrown (talk) 01:39, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]