Help desk
< January 12	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 14 >

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.

January 13

How to edit the PageName

Hi, I can't find any edit function to change the PageName on Eighth United States Army. Would you please change the title as 'Eighth Army (United States)'? Eighth Army doesn't use the 'Eighth United States Army' anymore. It is wrong name. If you visit their official website(8tharmy.korea.army.mil/), you can recognize what is a correct name.

Thanks.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Chinson.kim (talk • contribs)

@Chinson.kim: In order to rename an article, you need to move it. Moving an article can only be performed by autoconfirmed users, that is users who have been a member for at least four days, have made at least ten edits and have confirmed their email address. Please note, however, the move you are proposing may be controversial as it would break consistency. See the following articles (a brief list of examples):

First United States Army, Second United States Army, Seventh United States Army, Ninth United States Army, Tenth United States Army

--Adam ^{talk - contribs} 03:38, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confirming an email address is not a requirement for autconfirmed status, see WP:AUTOC.--ukexpat (talk) 03:47, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ukexpat: My apologies, I assumed from the name it was a requirement. I confirmed my email when I signed up for my account and assumed when I became autoconfirmed it was one of the requirements. --Adam ^{talk - contribs} 04:47, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed it probably would be controversial: According to the move log it was intentionally moved the other way. —teb728 t c 05:50, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The name used for a Wikipedia article should be whatever its subject usually called. For example, the article on the country is United Kingdom, rather than its official name. Maproom (talk) 14:08, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

is it okay to put links to Spotify in a discography page?

Is there any problem with putting links to Spotify in a discography page?

E.g., put a link to the Spotify recording of an album next to (or immediately below, etc.) the album title in the Wikipedia discography page for that artist or band.

If this is okay, is there a particular format that should be used?

Thanks for reading/responding.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdquirke (talk • contribs)

@Jdquirke: That would not be allowed, as that would be spamming. Mlpearc (open channel) 02:35, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlpearc: Thanks, but could you please elaborate? I visited the link you cited and do not see how this would qualify as any of the 3 types of spam mentioned there ("advertisements masquerading as articles; external link spamming; and adding references with the aim of promoting the author or the work being referenced"). Jdquirke (talk) 05:34, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jdquirke: Because Spotify is a commercial website, any links to a commercial site are considered spam. Maybe @Drmies: or @Materialscientist: (or anyone) could help explain further. Mlpearc (open channel) 17:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mlpearc: What's the basis for the blanket statement that "any links to a commercial site are considered spam?" I don't see anything that broad at the Wikipedia spam page. Jdquirke (talk) 18:21, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We've allowed (in GAs and FAs too, I suppose) links to Amazon, for instance, to verify such things as catalog numbers and release dates. I've done it on Terry Riley: Cadenza on the Night Plain and a bunch of others; it's the last couple of references in that article. I don't like giving such links, but sometimes that's all you got. Spam problems arise in two ways. One, if it's clearly an attempt to move people toward the commercial site. That's hard to judge, of course, but sometimes it's clear. Two, and this is related, if the site in question focuses on the selling more than on the informationproviding. Amazon isn't so bad; iTunes, IMO, is worse, delivering less information and more sales opportunities. K-pop and J-pop articles do it in the worst way possible. Anyway, Spotify--don't you have to log in to get anything in the first place? I don't see the kind of pages for albums etc. that Amazon has: all I see is Sign up. If you have to sign up to get the information you want verified by Spotify, it's pretty much useless for a lot of people even if the info on Spotify is good. Drmies (talk) 18:51, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pippa Middleton

Please check ref number 5 on this page - and also if you can, please check the last 3 refs added on this page- are they OK Thanks so much 101.182.146.167 (talk) 06:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the link in publisher parameter error. If the refs queried are those for James Matthews/Eden Rock the Telegraph is ok, the other 2 may not be quite WP:RS. Eagleash (talk) 06:55, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removing "unreviewed" tag

I asked this on 2015 December 31 and the problem still is not solved. Neither have I received an answer to my question. If someone knows the answer, please help out (not just removing the "unreviewed" titles but answering my question in view of future incidents: Is it permissible for me to remove the "unreviewed" sign after hearing from editors that they have reviewed my article?
I have archived notices that my following articles have been reviewed, but all of these still have the "unreviewed" tag on them:
Cristo Rey Jesuit High School Milwaukee
Cristo Rey Dallas College Prep
Arrupe College, Harare
Loyola Academy, Chennai
St. Xavier's School, Behror
St. Xavier's College, Ahmedabad
May I remove the tages since I received a "reviewed" notice on all of these?Jzsj (talk) 09:17, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The template does say "The template should be removed manually by any editor except the person who created the page ...", so that seems to say that you shouldn't remove it yourself. By what means did you receive the notification that the pages had been reviewed? Presumably not on your user talk page? Where have you archived these notices? I guess that the sensible thing is to reply to the person who has told you that they've reviewed the page and remind them that they should remove the template. Perhaps another editor can point us at any specific instructions to editors about the reviewing process? (I can see a process for reviewing edits on articles with pending changes protection and one for reviewing pending articles through the AFC processes, but not one for reviewing newly created articles.) --David Biddulph (talk) 10:53, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jzsj! The type of reviewing being talked about here is the reviewing done with the Page Curation tool, and there is a way to check if a page has been reviewed using that tool. Go to one of the pages, click "View history", and then right below the title on the history page click "view logs for this page". For example, here's the log for Cristo Rey Dallas College Prep: [1]. That page has indeed been reviewed by a user other than the page creator, so I don't see anything wrong with you removing it. Please note, however, that not all of your articles (at my time of writing) *have* been reviewed: this one for example, so you should not remove that tag just yet. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 20:37, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Howicus! Thanks for the answer to my question. I'm away from home now but when I return to my notes at home I'll recheck the Notifications page where I thought I found the notifications on all these reviews archived. I have removed the "unreviewed" tags where the logs justified it.Jzsj (talk) 22:24, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.184.187.72 (talk) 10:03, 13 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

The first error message says: "Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page)", and the words "help page" are in blue to indicate that they are a wikilink, in this case to Help:Cite errors/Cite error ref no input, and the other says "Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page)", with the help page link to Help:Cite errors/Cite error included ref. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:06, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

traduction d'une petite lettre du francais a l'hebreu merci

messieurs vous avez retire de l'argent sur ma carte Visa leumi pendant des mois sans mon autorisation,pour des programmes que je n'ai jamais demande sur mon telephone aussi j'ai annule a ma banque mon compte et mes cartes Visa leumi pour vous dire que aujourd'hui il vous faudra me rembourser totalement le prejudice commis a mon encontre je ne paierais pas mon telephone tant que je n'aurais pas obtenu mon remboursement de ces fautes graves qui sont attribues a des vols purs et simples Sinon,je mettrai mon dossier entre les mains de la justice par l'intermediaire de mon Avocat voila pour un premier avertissement merci beaucoup pour la traduction

S'il vous plaît noter que ce site est Wikipedia en langue anglaise, une encyclopédie libre en ligne que tout le monde peut modifier, et cette page est seulement pour poser des questions liées à l'utilisation ou de contribuer à Wikipedia. Nous regrettons de ne pas fournir un service de traduction, sauf pour contribuer à Wikipedia elle-même: Noyster (talk), 13:49, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Translation of a small letter of the Hebrew has french thank you

Roughly translated

Gentlemen
you withdraw money on my Visa Leumi for months without my permission for programs that I have never asked my phone I was also canceled my bank Visa My Account and Leumi Card to tell you that Today you will have to pay me totally committed to my prejudice against I would not pay my phone as I could not get my refund of these errors which are attributed to severe outright flights Otherwise, I will put my case in the hands of justice through the intermediary of my Lawyer for here is a first warning thank you very much for the translation

Please note that this website is Wikipedia in English, a free online encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and this page is only for ask questions related to the use or contribute to Wikipedia. We regret not to provide translation services, except for contributing to Wikipedia itself

Translated by: Google & Mlpearc (open channel) 18:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eden Rock, St Barths

ref number 5 is all wrong - thanks for your help101.182.146.167 (talk) 13:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, the error message is clear. It says " Check date values in: |access-date= (help)", & the "help" wikilink is to Help:CS1_errors#bad date. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused! The date seems fine to me (sorry for my confusion) why is there the red writing? Please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.146.167 (talk) 13:28, 13 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

If you think that "14 January 21066" is a valid date, you are definitely confused. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:35, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to 13 January 2016...Jokulhlaup (talk) 13:45, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar

Am I correct by saying It's with the apostrophe in my recent edits on the Eden Rock, St Barths page ? Thanks for your help 101.182.146.167 (talk) 13:30, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No. "It's" is short for "it is". The possessive pronoun "its" has no apostrophe. Rojomoke (talk) 13:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me with the Eden Rock, St Barths page Is this grammar (use of apostrophes) correct?: The resort's owner is also its artist-in-residence 101.182.146.167 (talk) 13:42, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Uh, Rojomoke already answered this. No it's its. To expand slightly on the answer, anytime you see it's, and question its use, say to yourself: "would it is make sense here instead of it's?" If not, the apostrophe is wrong.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:57, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

University of Leeds

ref 73 is faulty - I did not do this mistake. Thanks— Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.182.146.167 (talk • contribs)

I've fixed it. Note that right next to the red error message was a blue link for the word "help" that went to a help page targeted to the error and explaining how to fix it.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:07, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected or deleted article?

Can't find an article for former beauty queen Marina Harrison. The page now redirects to Miss Maryland USA page. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Harrison Help? Thanks.

The article was turned into a redirect on 25 December 2015 with an edit summary "not notable outside the win so per NOPAGE" which refers to our guideline WP:NOPAGE.
People only famous for one thing, such as winning a beauty pageant, often do not have their own page, but entering their name into Wikipedia will redirect you to an article on what they were famous for.
If you think Marina Harrison merits her own page, you could discuss this with User:Legacypac, who turned the article into a redirect, but I note that that editor is currently blocked for "persistent disruptive editing", so you might do better to explain your reasoning here. - Arjayay (talk) 15:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clinton

This is not a complaint about Fox News but I was just wondering why Politicians continue to complain about the costs associated with the Benghazi Investigation when there is never a dollar amount discussed in reference to locating the Clinton emails - emails that should have already been part of the public record!

As it states on the edit screen "This page is only for questions about using Wikipedia, not for general knowledge questions" - do you have such a question? - Arjayay (talk) 15:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

General knowledge questions may be asked at the Reference Desks; however, this does not appear to be a general knowledge question but a request for an opinion, and those are not appropriate for the Reference Desks either (and are likely to be viewed as trolling). Robert McClenon (talk) 21:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New article - Michal Cander: polish artist

Helllo, Could I ask you for check my new article which I have added. I saved it as a draft. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Micha%C5%82_Cander

The new article is an English version of first article which was created in polish: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micha%C5%82_Cander

Thank you in advance for your support! ZBIK89 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zbik89 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 13 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

I have looked at it, and tidied up the grammar, linking, etc. From the draft, it seems that his main claim to notability is that he has painted a "portrait" of a possibly fictitious person. I find this unconvincing as evidence of notability. Maproom (talk) 16:06, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for our reply. I know that my gramma is not really good :-) The portrait of Satoshi was the first visualization of ficitous person. This painting is well known in Bitcoin societity. Moreover, artist is famous in Poland. His paintings are recognizable in Poland. Mr Cander is respected painter in polish art community. He is a son of Krzysztof Cander, one of the most popular Polish painters in XX century.

Could you advice me what should I do with the article to make it more "encyclopedic" ? Should I find some more links, or should I add more information about prizes? I think that Wikipedia will be vared if we add article about Mr Cander in Eglish version.

I think that what the article needs most is one or two more independent references that establish his notability by writing about him. I have failed to find anything in English, but references to published Polish books, newspapers etc. would be acceptable. Maproom (talk) 17:04, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for information. I very much appreciate your comments. I hope I will make the article better.

Dear @Maproom, I have write more in my draft about M.Cander. Please have a look. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Micha%C5%82_Cander — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zbik89 (talk • contribs) 14:53, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help: How do I define my identity so I can edit an article on "Herbert Gutman"?

How do I define my identity so I can edit an article on "Herbert Gutman"? I am the cofounder with Gutman of the American Social History Project and made some minor edits in the Gutman entry.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevebrier (talk • contribs) 16:48, 13 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the comment tags around the text in your question to make it visible, & added the signature which you forgot. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:55, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your identity isn't any help to Wikipedia in the matter of sourcing information. Your edits (which I have reverted) seemed to be suggesting that your personal knowledge counted as a reliable source for the purpose of referencing, but it would count as original research. What Wikipedia needs as sourcing is something that has already been published by reliable independent sources, so that it can be verified. The only extent to which your identity is relevant is that if you are discussing a subject with which you have had a close involvement the guidance on conflict of interest comes into play. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:03, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hello, Steve. I'm not sure quite what you mean by "define your identity", but I'm guessing that you think that by establishing that you are connected with the subject of the article this will give you permission to edit it. I'm afraid that Wikipedia doesn't work like that, and in fact roughly the opposite is true. Anybody in the world can edit (nearly) any article; but if you are closely associated with the subject of an article you are discouraged from editing that, because your possible conflict of interest may make it difficult for you to edit it in a sufficiently neutral way. As it says in the link I just included, what you are invited to do is to post any suggested changes on the article's talk page - preferably with citation to independent reliable published sources for the information. Please note that unpublished information, whether documentary (eg letters) or from your personal knowledge, is not acceptable as a source for Wikipedia articles, and if a piece of information is not backed up by a reliable published source, it should not be in the article. --ColinFine (talk) 17:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New article - Skulpt : fitness device

Hi! Can you please check a new article I have written, particularly the references. Not sure if I have done something wrong but i am getting error messages on each of the retrieval dates. I am following same format as previous articles and had no issues previously Many Thanks - link to article Skulpt — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garymonk (talk • contribs) 16:53, 13 January 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - looks good now :-)

Garymonk (talk) 18:40, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How to define my identity so I can edit Wikipedia entry

I am trying to do minor edits to an entry ("Herbert Gutman"). Apparently I need to define my identity, but I'm unclear how to do that on Wikipedia. Steve Brier ("Stevebrier")

@Stevebrier: What do you mean, exactly "How do I define my identity" ? Mlpearc (open channel) 17:06, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a duplicate, probably because Stevebrier accidentally put the text inside an HTML comment the first time. See two items above. ColinFine (talk) 17:14, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No-one has asked you to "define your identity". You have been told, correctly, that personal knowledge is not acceptable here as a source of information, as you apparently believed when you type "<ref name = "Stevebrier" />". That form of reference is used in Wikipedia, but only when the name has been defined, preferably as a reference to a published work, in a previous reference in the same article. Maproom (talk) 17:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you know any authors who have published books about a topic, then you can cite their book as a reference. Dbfirs 18:14, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As a slight clarification, any such books need to be properly edited and published by a reputable publisher, some Wikipedia editors try to use self-published and other non-reliable "published" sources - often written by themselves - these are NOT acceptable. - Arjayay (talk) 20:43, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I should have made that distinction. Dbfirs 00:40, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

page

How could I do a page on someone? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Frank w Reid (talk • contribs)

@Frank w Reid: I've left a welcome message on your talk page which should help answer this question. Dismas|^(talk) 18:13, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yale Materials Handling Corporation Information

Could someone please edit this page Yale_Materials_Handling_Corporation to remove the last sentence, AND remove the NACCO Industries list of subsidiaries at the bottom of the page since they have nothing to do with Yale any longer. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.219.241.154 (talk • contribs)

Done - has been changed in the meantime by a new account. I have also removed the 2 involved companies from the underlying navigation template. However, this fact, and the whole article, could use some independent reliable sources to verify its information, and to establish the company's notability. GermanJoe (talk) 19:33, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That article should be merged with and redirected to NACCO Industries because it does not appear to be independently notable.--ukexpat (talk) 20:47, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template parameter resolution

Resolved

When I gave someone a barnstar, I simply copied the content of the "What to type" column from Wikipedia:Barnstars, as intended. But to my surprise, my whole message just got displayed as "{{{1}}}" - in other words, parameter 1 was unresolved. As usual, the solution was explicit parameter assignment, in this case, prefixing the message with "1=".

To prevent others from running into this problem, I want to insert the "1=" prefix in the the "What to type" column. However, that column uses two templates, {{Tlxs}} and {{Tlsp}}, which of course assume that the "1=" is meant for them. The workaround given is to escape the "=" with "&61;". Unfortunately, that doesn't get replaced by the "=" sign: {{subst:The Original Barnstar|1#61;message ~~~~}} How can I make an "=" sign appear? — Sebastian 19:41, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@SebastianHelm: Try adding "2=", since you are trying to place an equals sign within the second unnamed parameter of the {{tlxs}} template: {{subst:The Original Barnstar|1=message ~~~~}} [look at the coding] -- John of Reading (talk) 19:53, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, great idea! Thanks a lot! — Sebastian 20:10, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your first attempt failed because the html entity is not &61; but =: {{subst:The Original Barnstar|1=message ~~~~}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:26, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tracking categories

Do you know maybe why is an article or category (page) added to each of the tracking categories? Can you thoroughly explain, for example, when is an article added to Category:Commons category with local link different than on Wikidata when to Category:Commons category with page title different than on Wikidata and how to remove it from those categories? When is it added to Category:Commons category without a link on Wikidata, and why is it not added to Category:Commons category with local link same as on Wikidata? I localised template to sr but categories that should be full are empty and vice versa. I would like to see explanation on a raw example... --Obsuser (talk) 23:34, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why is 2016 placed in Category:Commons category with page title different than on Wikidata when pagename (2016) is not different than on Wikidata (I don’t even know different from what: category name for sr, or pagename...) --Obsuser (talk) 23:48, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I altered your category links to be readable. The {{cl}} template is very useful for that, but only works within this Wikipedia. To your first question: I see that you asked that at Template talk:Commons category, which seems an excellent place to ask, but you removed it again. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:56, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{{commons category}} compares {{#property:P373}} against {{PAGENAME}} or against {{{1}}}. No doubt your answer lies there. I don't know what {{#property:P373}} is.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:12, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Property:P373 in Wikidata is Commons category. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:18, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It may be an issue with Wikidata properties for Wikipedia languages with script variants like Serbian and Chinese. I tried to preview this code in different Wikipedia editions of 2016:

{{#property:P373}} and 2016 are {{#ifeq:{{#property:P373}}|2016|equal|not equal}}

I don't work in languages with script variants but I would naively have expected {{#property:P373}} to always return the same four-character string "2016" from wikidata:Q25245#P373, and always produce "equal" in the above code. At sr:2016 and zh:2016年 it says "2016 and 2016 are not equal". In all other tested languages it says "2016 and 2016 are equal". I don't know what to do about it. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:34, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Redrose64: Which "category links" you altered? I posted there first time but problem is not only related to that template but {{#property:P373}} i.e. Wikidata and Commons.

@PrimeHunter: Can you try to figure out why it is not possible to form wikiling using {{#property:P373}}? [[{{#property:P373}}]] and [[{{#property:P373}}|text]] returns [[value of {{#property:P373}}]] and [[value of property {{#property:P373}}|text]], respectively. Link cannot be formed and square brackets remain where they are, so I had to make link to Commons using external https:// link, not wikilink. I guess this can be helpful to resolve this if resolvable.

Could you "filter" somehow {{#property:P373}}’s output using other template or module so it is converted into plain text? It would be impossible then for "2016" to be different from "2016".

And generally: When is an article (raw examples) added to Category:Commons category with local link different than on Wikidata when to Category:Commons category with page title different than on Wikidata and how to remove it from those categories? --Obsuser (talk) 17:35, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See this edit. I altered your [...] syntax to {{cl|...}} and used the actual Cyrillic characters instead of those impossible-to understand percent encodings. --Redrose64 (talk) 17:57, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redrose64 referred to altering category links in your post here.[2]. As mentioned, the reported problem appears to only occur in Wikipedia languages with script variants (see mw:Writing systems#LanguageConverter). [[{{#property:P373}}]] produces a working link (actually bolded text because it's a link to the page itself) in the English 2016 but not in the Serbian sr:2016 or Chinese zh:2016年. I don't know what to do about it. You could try Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). English articles are added to Category:Commons category with local link different than on Wikidata and Category:Commons category with page title different than on Wikidata by code in {{Commons category}}. The code compares to the Wikidata item like wikidata:Q25245#P373. It works correctly at the English Wikipedia but not at the Serbian so you can disable the corresponding code in sr:Template:Commonscat to avoid the unwanted categories. Just comment out the categories with  if you don't want to mess with the testing code. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:16, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know that what template is doing but category classification on .sr is not logical at all. I will post question to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) too. Thank you.Obsuser (talk) 22:16, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This oddity caught my curiosity in passing, so I had a little play around in page preview on sr:2016. It looks like the problem goes away if you do the comparison inside Lua, instead of in the MW parser. The following seems to be successfully matching P373 against PAGENAME on SR-WP:

{{#invoke:WikidataCheck|wikidatacheck|property=P373|value={{PAGENAME}}|category=:P373/PAGENAME|namespaces=0}}

N.B. I jammed a colon at the start of the category parameter to deliberately break the normal behaviour of generating an invisible category membership not-a-link. I'm not suggesting that Module:WikidataCheck is the correct thing to use in this case, it was just a very convenient way of quickly testing what happens if you do it in Lua, without actually needing to make any Lua changes or add any new module code. It produces "[[Category::P373/PAGENAME same as Wikidata]]" on both en:2016 and sr:2016, and will say "different …" if you introduce an extra character to the value parameter to create a deliberate difference. Maybe it should be done in the existing WikidataCheck, or maybe it should be a new module for this purpose, I'm not taking a position on either side of that.

So, there's a bunch of things to look at which may enable creation of a working solution. Very limited testing by me, just a quick hack, no warranty, use at your own risk, some assembly required, not suitable for small children due to choking hazard.

--Murph9000 (talk) 05:45, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the bug is in the #property parser function, then. It displays the right result in those languages, but when it is used to compare values something goes wrong. Is there a bug in Phabricator for this yet? — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 07:11, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not as far as I can see.Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:07, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Murph9000: I’ve just applied your due-to-choking-hazard dangerous solution and it seems good for now (bad categories are losing articles, good ones are filling up; just have to wait the end to check if categorization is properly being done, and if template link leads to the place it should). You (or someone else if he faces the same problem later) can check links if you want: sr:Модул:WikidataCommonscat and sr:Шаблон:Commonscat. Thank you. --Obsuser (talk) 03:04, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]