Help desk
< October 19	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 21 >

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.

October 20

Revalidation article said "good"

The article Fursuit is marked as "Good", but... does not deserve! There are several marks of maintenance and the version in Portuguese and Norwegian is much more complete. It would be possible to be revalidated? Keplerbr (talk) 03:45, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To request an evaluation of a Good Article in decline, you can post it at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment. The best outcome, of course, is if the article can be improved without losing GA status. Altamel (talk) 04:41, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I could not find that page. My English is not good enough to write in one article, so I can not improve it. Keplerbr (talk) 04:55, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chemistry

In editing an article, I misspelled its title: "5-Hydroxyeicosatetraenoic acid and 5-oxo-eicosatetreaenoic acid" should have been "5-Hydroxyeicosatetraenoic acid and 5-oxo-eicosatetraenoic acid." That is, there is a incorrect "e" in the name of the 5-oxo compound. Also, how do I add a chemical diagram of the pathways of metabolizing these compounds? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joflaher (talk • contribs) 15:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Near the top of the article page, you should see a "More" to the left of the search box. Click that and select "Move". The rest should be self-explanatory.

I can't answer your second question. ‑‑Mandruss (t) 16:31, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Joflaher - try asking WP:WikiProject Chemistry for help with the second part of your question. That's where the subject specialists can be found. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

sources of other language

Shoud we cite the sources brought to the discuss or items in 'English Wikipedia' from the books or thesis written English only? Is it impossible to cite the sources from those written in other languages? -- JARA7979 (talk) 01:14, 21 October 2014 (KTC)

Where suitable sources in English are not available, non-English sources are acceptable, see WP:V#Non-English sources. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:20, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Converting Word formatting to Wikipaedia

Hello, I'm new to this and I'm trying to convert information, equations and diagrams created in a word document for inclusion in a new Wikipedia page I'm trying to create. Is there a simple way of doing this. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonhuwmac (talk • contribs) 16:46, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:WordToWiki. -- Gadget850^talk 17:00, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Jonhuwmac. I see that you are new to Wikipedia, so welcome! If you are creating a Wikipedia document out of an existing document, be sure that it was not previously published or posted somewhere else even if you wrote it, for copyright reasons. Don't forget that you are licensing the rights to that text and/or images to Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:Copyright violations) and you will thereafter have no control over what other editors do with (or to) it. Good luck with your project.—Anne Delong (talk) 18:16, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Change Ayn al arab to kobane

this is not a approved work done by wikipedia and please revert it.i reverted but daikamasu change it again i will be soon blocked by this mad man. wikipedia should have a policy to cover any country's sovereignty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isuruwe (talk • contribs) 16:57, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See also this legal threat by the OP. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:04, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A list and a template - is it appropriate to have both?

Dear editors: I was looking through my subpages today and found this: User:Anne Delong/List of bluegrass music festivals (I'd forgotten about it.). However, there is also this: Template:Bluegrassmusic, which has the same list of festivals. Is it appropriate to have both? —Anne Delong (talk) 18:05, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Anne Delong: Check out Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and navigation templates. The existence of a an overlapping navigation template should not be the sole reason for not creating a list. Categories, lists, and nav templates should complement each other. Assuming the list is appropriate for inclusion, don't let the existence of a navigation template stop you. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 18:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, SuperHamster, that link was just what I needed. I went ahead and created the list. Hopefully it will grow, because there are several large, long-standing festivals that don't have an article yet. —Anne Delong (talk) 19:54, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Question about citations

Hi, I'm new here so I wanted to ask a question about citations. I came across a page Chris Alexander (editor). It contains a bunch of citations that don't exist from a website that doesn't exist. When I removed them i got threatened by another editor. I understand that links will disappear through time and can be found on archive sites, but in this case since the website is dead and no longer exists and there is no archived versions of these links I simply removed them. I find citations that redirect readers very fraudlent and since there is no evidence that these cites every existed in the first place, I don't see why they can't be removed since they simply mislead readers. If the wikipedia is to be trusted should there not be valid citations rather than empty redirecting links?Cthwikia (talk) 18:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Link rot. -- Gadget850^talk 18:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gadget is correct, and there does seem to be evidence from Google searches that the pages in question did exist. Some, at least, have some content mirrored elsewhere, so the deadlinks do give a clue where to start looking. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:57, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Right, all it took to find complete or partial copies in seconds was to copy-paste the titles you deleted to the search box in my browser. If your browser doesn't have one then try https://google.com, but if you don't know how to use a search engine then you are completely unqualified to determine whether an archive exists. Do not remove citations again just because the current link is broken. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And you were not being threatened. You were merely being informed of Wikipedia's policies & practices. Look at the links, such as WP:DEADLINK and WP:KDL, and you will understand why we do it the way we do. We'll welcome your help in tagging the relevant links with {{deadlink}}, and (if you feel so inclined) in looking for where the information can now be found. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:02, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added the sources and I can vouch that they did exist at one point in time. For many of the reviews, they're hosted at another website that captured all of the FearNet reviews for Scott Weinberg after Chiller ate FN. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:53, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From someone who donates!

I'm not saying that because my company makes donations time to time to Wikipedia, there should be special treatment, but I've been going back and forth with Elkman (Grayfell) for days now and he refuses to leave up the information that is true and with correct citations on our client's (Lissa Lauria) page. From something as simple as my putting "also known as" he has to put "sometimes stylized as". That's not correct. She is 'also known as' Lissa. It seems that he just like to go around and cause issues, because I just can't get him to see that what he is omitting is not "promotional" just FACT. Is there anyone I can speak to about this? It's very, very frustrating to have a Wikipedia page up for years and then someone comes along and removes most of the information that had links to places like the New York Times! Also, he changed the photo. I'd like to change it. Does that mean if I change it, he will change it back? Honestly, feels like I'm in jail and he holds the keys. Who can I speak to about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dd865dd (talk • contribs) 22:20, 20 October 2014 (UTC) Dd865dd (talk) 22:21, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Second, it appears (based on what I see on the article) he is not saying her name is sometimes stylized as Lissa, he is saying her name is sometimes stylized as LISSA (in all uppercase). I would presume that she is most commonly referred to simply as Lissa and her name is only in uppercase on YouTube, iTunes, etc. If you are trying to add that she is more commonly referred to simply by one name (rather than by her full name), then you might be hitting a gray area, because her single name is not a stage name, it's merely her first name (compare Beyoncé Knowles). Unless her mononymity is a crucial part of her persona (compare Cher), there is really no point in changing the intro to reflect this little nuance. However, if you still disagree with the way she is presented on the article, feel free to take issue with it on the article's talk page and be bold.

I also suggest that you take a glance at WP:COI, as it seems to be relevant here. Scarce2 (talk) 23:06, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dd865dd. I'm sorry to break this to you, but not only do you and your company not own the Wikipedia article about the company, your conflict of interest makes you one of the least appropriate people in the world to edit the article. And whether or not you donate makes not one whit of difference to this. --ColinFine (talk) 22:38, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural question regarding references

I've edited multiple articles where the "|work=" , "|agency=" the "|publisher=" fields are used all used for the same information when referring to a website citation. Is there a difference between the three? If so, what is the difference? Thanks in advance, David O. Johnson (talk) 23:59, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the documentation for {{cite web}}. |work= or |website= is the name of the site. |agency= is the news agency (wire service) that provided the content. |publisher= is the company that publishes the work being cited. There seems to be a lot of confusion about website and publisher. -- Gadget850^talk 02:15, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@David O. Johnson: They should generally not repeat the same and often you only need work or publisher. Have you seen the documentation at Template:Cite web? I don't know why agency is an alias for series. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:10, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I read through the documentation. David O. Johnson (talk) 03:39, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: 'agency' is not an alias for 'series'. I verified and fixed that in the doc before I answered above. -- Gadget850^talk 09:51, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]