Help desk
< March 14	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 16 >

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.

March 15

slavery stats

Could I ask for some comments on the inclusion of slavery stats at Talk:Dominican Republic#Slavery.--Moxy (talk) 02:06, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Moxy, you could also leave a note at Wikipedia:WikiProject Dominican Republic. Lourdes 03:36, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How to Save my Draft Article for my own use without submitting it

I'm writing my first article for Wiki and it says (in the preview section box) that it is not saved yet (I assume no auto-save here), but that I can save (without submitting) by pressing the "'Save page' button" below. But there is no such button, only a button saying "Publish page," which I'm not ready to do yet. What should I do? I don't want to have to keep this document open all night. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Art George (talk • contribs) 03:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Art George, copy the article into a page like https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Art_George/sandbox&action=edit if you don't want to publish right now. And don't worry, pushing the "publish" button in the sandbox edition won't bring the article to the online world's view. Lourdes 03:39, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

... or you could just "publish" (i.e. save) the draft if you intend to do further work within the next six months. Dbfirs 08:40, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are among an increasingly large number of people who have been confused by the fact that the WMF chose to change the label on the button from "Save page" to "Publish page" without the relevant instructions being changed. You can save your draft in draft namespace with the "Publish page" without it being actually published as an article to mainspace. To submit it later for review for publication, add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft. --David Biddulph (talk) 03:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @Art George: The "Save page" button has been renamed to "Publish page" without updating all documentation yet. The new name hints it's possible for others to see the page but not that the page becomes a part of the encyclopedia. If the name starts with "Draft:" or "User:Art George/" then just press publish page and work on the page another time. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:48, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Art George (talk • contribs) 04:05, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unverifiable Facts

Hello,

What is Wikipedia's policy on facts that cannot be verified? I have looked for a source on a particular statistic on a page, but have been unable to find it. The page is Chocolate-covered raisin, and the claim is that this is the second-largest selling candy in US History. Mysteriously, several editors have changed this number from third, to first, and back to second, over the years, but I have no clue where their source may be. Thanks in advance! ChunyangD (talk) 03:50, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ChunyangD. The policy is Verifiability. Content that cannot be verified after a careful search for sources should be removed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:57, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I have removed the unverifiable statement. ChunyangD (talk) 04:00, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that was the right thing to do. In cases like this it is a good idea to also add a section on the talk page to explain the research you did. This is not required at all, but it can streamline the WP:BRD cycle. -Arch dude (talk) 04:50, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cliffe Castle Museum

Refs number 5 and 6 are the same - but number 5 is done without the proper PDF link. Can ref number 5 be altered to be the same as ref 6 using the right PDF (in blue) to indicate that it is the same ref. please? Thanks 175.33.22.145 (talk) 08:09, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done.

There are, arguably, too many images in that article. But some of them are clearly too large. If I have time, I'll aim to replace them all by standard-sized thumbnails. Maproom (talk) 08:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Malta Europe.

Dear Sir, I would like to bring to your attention regards Maltese villages. In Wikipedia list of Maltese villages one will not find HAZ - ZEBBUG village. Though when you look through it is found and specified. But in the Maltese Islands, there are two villages named one ZEBBUG that is situated in GOZO and the other is HAZ-ZEBBUG which is situated in MALTA. In The list of villages, ZEBBUG is shown while HAZ- ZEBBUG is not shown. One has to keep in mind that ZEBBUG is in GOZO while HAZ- ZEBBUG is in MALTA. This mistake must be adjusted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.232.201.117 (talk) 08:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@85.232.201.117: - we have Żebbuġ and a redirect Haz-Zebbug that points to it; and we have Żebbuġ, Gozo. Each of these has a disambiguation header that directs readers to the other one, should they have come to the wrong article. List of cities in Malta contains Żebbuġ (i.e. the one on the main island) but not Żebbuġ, Gozo, because the latter has never received the appelation "città", which is the inclusion criterion for that list. Hence, it seems as if everything is as it should be. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:01, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata number appearing in page display name

I created a new article via a redlink, and have ended up with the subject's wikidata number included in the displayed title. The page is Eliza Emily Donnithorne (Q21537250). Is it possible to remove the number from the displayed title? If not, is it OK for it to stay like this, or will the page need to be deleted/replaced? Thanks in advance for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Runciblehon (talk • contribs) 09:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would move your article to Eliza Emily Donnithorne – but that already exists, as a redirect to Miss Havisham. I can't just get rid of the redirect, that would require powers I don't have. Maybe an admin can take care of this? Maproom (talk) 09:54, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. You made me realize what I hope will be an OK solution: I have moved the article text to Eliza Emily Donnithorne (replacing the redirect to Miss Havisham, and turned my incorrectly named original into a redirect to the correctly named article. I hope this works as a temporary fix. I'll also flag the misnamed page for deletion. Thanks for your help. runciblehon (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks are also due to PrimeHunter, who has tidied this up properly. Maproom (talk) 11:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Runciblehon: That was actually a wrong solution. Cut-and-paste moves are not allowed and require cleanup. I have fixed it. It's sometimes complicated but fortunately there were no edits after the cut-and-paste move so here it was relatively easy. You should have used {{db-move}} or Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting technical moves. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:44, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@PrimeHunter: Ah, apologies - I should have waited - but thank you for your help. Noted, for next time. Runciblehon (talk) 11:52, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Warren Smith (Artist)

Good day WIKI team

After publishing "Warren Smith (Artist)" I search for it on google and do not find it.

I still have to do the same with 2 bands and need this resolved so I can continue. I am new so maybe it is something i am doing wrong. Note: After clicking publish it says published and show green — Preceding unsigned comment added by Warren Smith (Artist) (talk • contribs) 10:00, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Warren Smith (Artist): Hello, what you have created is User:Warren Smith (Artist) (and also User:Warren Smith (Artist)/sandbox) neither of which are Wikipedia articles but drafts in your userspace. It also looks as though you are writing about yourself or subjects to which you have a close connection. Please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY together with WP:COI and WP:PAID and make any disclosures that are necessary. The first of the pages would not be acceptable as a Wikipedia article as, everything else apart, it does not contain a single reference. It would also need quite a lot of work to make it acceptable. With regard to your other queries, the 'publish' button actually only 'saves' the text, it does not publish to the encyclopedia in this instance. Furthermore, new articles once in mainspace are not indexed by search engines for 90 days or until they have been reviewd, whichever is the shorter period. Some useful links have been left at your talk page. Eagleash (talk) 11:48, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has no article Warren Smith (Artist). You have chosen "Warren Smith (Artist)" as your user name, and used your user page to write what you intended to be an article. It is not acceptable as an article, as it provides no evidence that Warren Smith is notable; if it were converted to an article, it would soon be deleted. Please do not try to create any more articles. Maproom (talk) 11:47, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please note that your user page must not be made to look like an article. See WP:FAKEARTICLE. Dbfirs 14:13, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The user page draft (but not the sandbox) has now been deleted as promotional. Eagleash (talk) 17:06, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a template to highlight faulty images

This image in the Tironian notes article is incorrectly cropped, but the thumbnail in the image page is correct. I'm not sure what has happened, but how can I highlight this to editors? -- Q Chris (talk) 10:24, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Chrome problem. It looks fine to me in Firefox and Internet Explorer via a Windows 7 PC. But Chrome only shows the top 30% of the image. - X201 (talk) 11:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Q Chris: It's a Chrome version problem. I updated Chrome to the latest version and it now displays correctly. - X201 (talk) 11:34, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @X201:, how odd - I updated Chrome and it looks fine! -- Q Chris (talk) 08:37, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Takwene

Dears,

Why my article "Takwene" is not published and how link this article with wikidata what am missing?

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.49.41.8 (talk) 11:07, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An article Takwene has been published, though it shouldn't have been, as it provides no evidence that its subject is notable. Maproom (talk) 11:52, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Content 1986: You moved Draft:Takwene to Takwene seconds before I was going to save some guidance and changes to the draft. Now it may be deleted instead per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#A7. No indication of importance (people, animals, organizations, web content, events) or Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). PrimeHunter (talk) 11:55, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

how to publish an article

Hi I have created an article Draft:Patrick Zelbel and another Draft:Chess Classic how do I publish them?--Michael Campbell (talk) 11:55, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael Campbell: I have added boxes with a submit button. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:01, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure they are good enough @PrimeHunter--Michael Campbell (talk) 12:03, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael Campbell: The button will only submit them for review by an editor. I don't work with reviews but at first sight they look better than typical draft submissions (although that doesn't say much). If they should be declined then you get a chance to improve and resubmit them. They may lack independent sources to satisfy Wikipedia:Notability. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:11, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

thx--Michael Campbell (talk) 12:12, 15 March 2018 (UTC)h[reply]

(edit conflict)} @Michael james campbell: I have tidied the Chess Classic article somewhat: I believe the subject is likely to be notable but it could probably benefit from more references for verification; and please see WP:REFB for a guide to correctly adding references. If you submit to review you will receive feedback from the community as to where improvements may be needed. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 12:17, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael james campbell: Was any content copied from elsewhere in Wikipedia or anywhere on the web? Copying within Wikipedia is acceptable subject to certain conditions. Please read WP:CWW and make any attributions which may be necessary. If content has been copied from elsewhere on the web, it is likely to be copyright and will quite possibly be deleted. Adding copyright material can easily lead to loss of editing prvileges. Thank you.Eagleash (talk) 15:10, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Eagleash It is a translation of the German version.--Michael Campbell (talk) 15:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael james campbell: That's fine, but you must read WP:TFOLWP and make the necessary attribution. There's a template in that section which should make it simple to complete. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 16:09, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Hey one of the most important pages of Wikipedia - The Wikipedia Wikipedia:Privacy policy had been lying vandalised for 5 days. I have reverted it, but please note it is getting continuous vandalism. 180.151.92.20 (talk) 13:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted also recent changes to Jürgen, made by the same IP user 217.162.164.222. --CiaPan (talk) 13:54, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing it. The page had not been edited in 10 months so I wouldn't call it continuous vandalism. Wikipedia:Privacy policy gets very few page views. The "Privacy policy" link at bottom of all pages goes directly to wmf:Privacy policy which gets 2000 times more views. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:26, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Querying notability

Hello, fairly new here and have come across an article whose subject I think is insufficiently notable. It's this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gayatri_Nair. How can I mark it up as such?

Thanks UKCW — Preceding unsigned comment added by UKComedyWikis (talk • contribs) 14:53, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done I have created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gayatri Nair based on this question and my review of the page. Thank-you for raising this question. Legacypac (talk) 15:34, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do User subpages have to be reviewed

My CSD log is not indexed in the search engine. Is that normal? Do user subpage have to be reviewed? L293D (☎ • ✎) 15:15, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your CSD log should not be indexed. Ideally we would review all userspace WP:ABANDONED but no one is reviewing CSD logs for problems other than checking accuracy of CSDs over time. I've found my User:Legacypac/CSD_log extremely helpful to silence editors that complained I was making many mistakes because they disagreed with one or two CSDs. Legacypac (talk) 15:26, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Userspace has noindex by default to avoid indexing by external search engines. See Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing. Our internal search engine only searches articles by default but at top of search results pages you can choose "Everything" or "Advanced" to search other namespaces. See Help:Searching. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:35, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New hidden category

I have thought up of a new category which can identify exactly which pages have incorrect formatting in dash lengths between scorelines. At the moment it is empty and I am not sure if it is working or not. Iggy (Swan) 17:13, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Title would be Category:Pages with incorrect dash length in scorelines. Iggy (Swan) 17:14, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Iggy. A category remains empty until editors/bots add it to articles (and then the articles start showing up in the category list). Is this what your query is referring to? Thanks, Lourdes 17:53, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes - I'd imagine that a bot scans through Wikipedia to search for pages with that incorrect syntax (such as the ones listed on the depreciated image syntax page), that shows a lot of random pages from random topics. This could be the wrong method of finding them as it is an imagination. Iggy (Swan) 17:57, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, without commenting on the actual relevance of your newly created category or its naming, I'll suggest that you should wait for editors to manually add this category to articles for it to get populated, or hope someone creating/operating a bot or creating a template would find your new categorization interesting and add it to articles containing this issue. Broadly, nothing that you can do here, except attempting to add the category yourself to applicable articles. Lourdes 18:03, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Although the category says "Pages are added to this category by Module:InfoboxImage", I don't believe that this is true. If not, that statement should be removed from the category page. --David Biddulph (talk) 18:08, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The relevance would be that Wikipedia uses them to separate the scores from each other - just using the hyphen can cause readability/access problems which would not be MOS:DASH. Also, I did not realise that I left the 'Module:Infobox Image' there. Iggy (Swan) 18:12, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

One extra comment - if a page from a hidden category has been edited to correct an issue (e.g. fix ref errors), the modified page gets removed automatically without a human editor doing it. That's how I would imagine that a bot would be used to run that tracking category. Iggy (Swan) 18:18, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The category doesn't seem to be useful without a bot to identify the articles. I think there is already a spelling bot that finds pages in the category and presents them for manual correction. Chris the speller is one of the experts who might advise. Dbfirs 20:18, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, can't help. I know nothing about these bots. Chris the speller ^yack 20:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to bother you. I knew you used a productive tool to make such corrections, but it's not a bot. Dbfirs 21:18, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve nominated it for deletion as an imaginary solution to an unreal problem. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:42, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong link

Hi,

On the page of the city of Utrecht, there is a link to the flag of the province (which has the same name but is not the same) in the introduction box (under the flag). Does someone know how to remove it? Thanks.

WhatsUpWorld (talk) 18:54, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In the infobox, it says

 Country   Netherlands
 Province  Utrecht

with what I assume is the flag for the province of Utrecht. Isn't that right? I could remove the province's flag if you persuaded me it would be an improvement. Maproom (talk) 19:05, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that the article Utrecht is about the city, and the flag (the red and white one that's bisected from top left to bottom right) displayed is the city's, but the link under the flag goes to Flag of Utrecht, which is a redirect to Flag of Utrecht (province). The image of the flag itself is correct, as it is the city's flag. I've had a play around with the {{Infobox settlement}} template and it seems that, absent use of the flag_link parameter, it auto-links to an article named Name of image (without the image's filename extension). Therefore, I set flag_link to :File:Flag of Utrecht.svg, since there is no article for the city flag. tubedogg (talk) 23:29, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That is right. Only the link under the city flag is problematic since it sends the viewer to the province's flag. WhatsUpWorld (talk) 04:44, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see. It's the link from the word "Flag" that's wrong. That word, and its link, are as far as I can tell generated by the "Infobox settlement" template. I guess the place to report this is Template talk:Infobox. Maproom (talk) 16:23, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use images on Draft pages

I currently have a draft page which is very much a work in progress at the moment. My question is, am I allowed to insert fair use images (with appropriate rationale of course) onto the draft page prior to it being reviewed? Mojo0306 (talk) 20:15, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mojo0306. Fair use images are only allowed in published articles. You can use them once the draft is moved to mainspace, provided they meet our non-free content criteria, but you will have to wait until then. GMG ^talk 20:17, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@GreenMeansGo: Thanks very much for the quick response and clarification. Mojo0306 (talk) 20:21, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Title wrong/need help with citations

I just created an article on the Schuman document, however, the title should be Schumann document, as is explained within the article. I don't know how to change it though. Also, as you will find when visiting the article, the sources still need the proper formatting, which I am unable to do.

Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crampton16 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved it to Schumann document, and used "named references" so that the two sources you cite are listed only once each. Maproom (talk) 20:38, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"SOAP" or just some subjective bias

Hello, dear Wikipedia contributors! My name is Lidiia, I'm a graduate of foreign languages and journalism. Editing BLP is a good practice for me. I stumbled some interesting situation and need your help. Recently I've made some changes in Naveen Jain article. The changes were about the Moon Express company. I used Elon Musk's article as a pattern to make the same company's (Moon Express) description as about SpaceX in Elon Musk's personal article. Used The New York Times as a source to confirm Jain's statements. Editor Ronz removed my edits and claimed it's "SOAP". Dear people, please explain me why it's "SOAP"? Lidiia Kondratieva (talk) 22:37, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This editor and their edits are already being discussed at WP:COIN. The discussion is Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Just_odd. I suggest it is inappropriate for the editor to try to start a discussion here until those discussions are resolved. The editor should focus on providing answers to the questions already posed to her at the Noticeboard, which she has not yet done. General Ization ^Talk 22:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree, but it is usually considered polite to link your wiki-speak, in this case WP:SOAP. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:52, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to mention an editor, much less make accusations about them, it's polite to let them know.

WP:SOAP, the use of Wikipedia for promotion.[1]. In no way is this just about Naveen Jain, but most of your editing as far as I've looked. --Ronz (talk) 15:59, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ronz, I don't see any promotion in the context. Please point it out. Thank you, Lidiia Kondratieva (talk) 20:45, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dear General Ization, I asked for nothing else, but help. Thank you, Lidiia Kondratieva (talk) 20:36, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]