Help desk
< March 8	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 10 >

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 9

SVG map of US states that is easily updatable

See discussion: Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Illustration workshop/Archive/Mar 2023#Map of US minimum wage by state. Am I imagining that there are plug-and-play SVG maps that are easily updated by pasting in a text list? I thought they existed. I have done a lot of editing of tables, and see various state and country lists that have data that would be more useful if the numbers were on the map for each state or country. Especially when combined with a color bar legend.

I edit Help:Table and Help:Sortable tables, and so I know how to convert the data from a column to a text list. With the state or country names to the left of the data. So a multi-purpose USA SVG map could be used for many topics: Minimum wages, cumulative Covid death rates, incarceration rates, rate of uninsured, and much more. With the data on the map. Not just a color bar legend, and coloration of states or countries. --Timeshifter (talk) 04:21, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Positions

Good afternoon. I would like to bring to your attention these three pages: Naples, Jakarta, and Pretoria; the positions of the first caption of the "Naples" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naples) page are correct, while the positions of the "Jakarta" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jakarta) and "Pretoria" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretoria) pages, in my opinion, are incorrect (e.g. on the "Pretoria" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretoria) page, "Loftus Versfeld Stadium" should be the second-to-last in clockwise order from top to bottom, while, in the caption, it is not the second-to-last). JackkBrown (talk) 13:36, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't agree. Assuming Loftus Versfield Stadium is the rugby field, then that would be the fifth one clockwise from the top, which is where the caption has it. AndyJones (talk) 13:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PS I don't know much about Naples but it looks to me as if it's Naples that has the order wrong. AndyJones (talk) 13:53, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@AndyJones: I had thought of the order differently, and therefore incorrectly; I apologise. In any case, I have fixed the positions of the first caption on the "Naples" page ✅. JackkBrown (talk) 14:25, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How to write a new article about my company

How to write on Wikipedia about my company . Mysubtube had achieved its goal and had helped many new comers get a hipe in social media. The agency had become an integral part of the digital marketing world and had become a household name in the industry. Josmy joseph (talk) 16:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome. First, you'll need to ensure that the company meets the notability requirements listed here: Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Secondly, I would suggest reading the following: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, to ensure you know the rules in those areas. Now, to the meat of your question, you should be able to just type what you want to call the article in the search box and you'll be told that it doesn't exist. You can click on the red link to create the page. Alternatively, you can click on the "create a draft and submit it for review" link in order to create a rough draft of the article. This would buy you more time in fleshing out the page and other people would be able to help you, such as making suggestions, before the article goes live. Useight (talk) 16:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Useight Users with a clear conflict of interest should be encouraged to submit drafts via WP:AFC, not to directly create an article(usually such users aren't autoconfirmed anyway). 331dot (talk) 16:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good point. Useight (talk) 17:51, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A quick Google clearly suggests that Mysubtube is unlikely to be a household name anywhere outside its own front door. Not that it matters, since Wikipedia is not an advertising platform, and only has articles on subjects who's notability can be demonstrated through significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Where such sources exist, articles are expected to be encyclopaedic and neutral, and editing by contributors with a conflict of interest is strongly discouraged. Contributors who have a financial stake in a subject are required to make a declaration to that effect. I suggest you concentrate on making your company live up to your hype - if and when it ever does, no doubt someone will consider it worthy of an article. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Josmy joseph The short answer is that you don't. Wikipedia articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the topic, who take note of coverage of a topic in independent reliable sources and choose to write about it. Please read conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 16:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Josmy joseph Have any newspapers, magazines, or independent websites published information about Mysubtube? David10244 (talk) 11:52, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Pogradec

There is a battle in Category:Battles of the Greco-Italian War not included. Battle of Pogradec. How can I add it? It does not help me edit pages etc there. Also it can be included in the main article of the war, where it refers to Pogradec being captured. PhoenixBrmnzo (talk) 16:47, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PhoenixBrmnzo I moved it for you; it had been in the parent category about the war, not the one you suggested about battles of the war. To add or remove an article to or from a category, you have to edit the article you want to add or remove--not the category page. Go to that page and go into the edit part; at the bottom, you'll find the categories in double square brackets. Use those as a pattern. Uporządnicki (talk) 17:03, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but please could you put in the correct letter? it should be to [P]. PhoenixBrmnzo (talk) 17:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@PhoenixBrmnzo Also done, and I'm thoroughly mortified that you had to ask me to do that. 90% of my Wikipedia "career" has consisted of making just such edits as that. I must, however, humbly thank you for calling me on it so promptly! Uporządnicki (talk) 17:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. PhoenixBrmnzo (talk) 17:27, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

English Essays

Impact of rainy 41.116.242.103 (talk) 18:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

English essay

Rainy days 41.116.242.103 (talk) 18:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you are asking for help in writing an essay, you have come to the wrong place. This is the help desk for people interested in using or editing Wikipedia, nothing else. You might find some helpful ideas if you read the article rain - or you might not. ColinFine (talk) 19:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Along with Mondays, they always get me down. --Jayron 32 15:34, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jayron32 Yes, but that voice.... David10244 (talk) 11:55, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Need an Article on Versaladder

Versaladder is/was a company that made various types of ladders - folding, etc. They may possibly be out of business now but if they are it would be good to know what company, if any, took over their operation.

I cannot find an active website for them but can find their products in various places. N4hmrham (talk) 18:21, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You may be right that they are out of business; I am not sure. However, if anyone is interested in writing an article about them this article in the July 1998 issue of Popular Mechanics would be a good source, as would this from Christian Science Monitor in 1986.

Versa Products, Inc. (the manufacturer of the Versa ladder) was still in businesses as recently as 2004 when they were the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit reached a decision in Crump v. Versa Products, Inc..

It looks like their trademark on the name expired in 2006.

That's what I've been able to find so far. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@N4hmrham: Wikipedia notability is not temporary; in other words, if you establish that this company meets WP:NCORP, then it matters not that it no longer exists. Non-existing might make it a bit harder to find the required significant coverage typically needed to establish the Wikipedia notability of a company, but reliable sources don't need to be available online or be recent for them to be considered reilable. You can try to create such an article yourself if you want; however, I suggest that you first create a draft. Once you feel you've clearly shown that the company is Wikipedia notable, you can submit the draft to WP:AFC for review. For some general information on creating Wikipedia articles, please take a look at WP:YFA, WP:REFB, WP:42, WP:NOT and WP:BACKWARD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:14, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accessible way for newbies to follow diffs

Is there an accessible way for newcomers (i.e., students) to follow the diffs that happen on their contribution without having to leave and return to the history page? For myself, I use both Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups, which will show a diff view on hover over "previous", and User:Writ_Keeper/Scripts/inlineDiffDocs, which allows the diff to unfold beneath the history items.

I might be able to ask the students to do the first, but the popups can be a little touchy and distracting. Newbies won't be able to reliably to install script.

Are there other alternatives? Reagle (talk) 19:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most browsers allow you to open a link in a new tab or new window. Will that not help? ColinFine (talk) 19:41, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ColinFine, not quite. :) Reagle (talk) 21:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Reagle: What ColinFine suggested is probably the best thing to do, as the popup will truncate diffs if there's been a lot changed. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:45, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Public Wikipedia site

how do i put my page to a public wikipedia site Guykhandjian (talk) 20:20, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If this is about the content on youruserpage and in your sandbox, the short answer is, you don't. Please see Wikipedia:Do not create hoaxes for more information. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 20:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comma or not?

Good evening. I would like to ask: when specifying the country, for example: "... Lax K'abit in northwestern British Columbia, Canada", should the comma be added after the name of the nation, or not? I will pass you a sentence: "The Nisga'a villages of Lax Ksiluux and Wii Lax K'abit in northwestern British Columbia, Canada were destroyed by thick lava flows during the eruption of Tseax Cone in the 1700s."; in this sentence, in "British Columbia, Canada", should the comma be added after "Canada", or not? JackkBrown (talk) 22:21, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JackkBrown: Welcome, and yes a comma does follow Canada in your example. See MOS:COMMA for more info. RudolfRed (talk) 22:26, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@RudolfRed: thanks for your help, I finished fixing the Lava page by correcting these errors. JackkBrown (talk) 22:35, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You could also omit the ", Canada,". A reader who does not know where British Columbia is (or which British Columbia is meant) can click on the British Columbia wikilink to find out. Maproom (talk) 22:49, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How do you interpret MOS guideline on first sentence of lists?

Hello, and hope you're well. MOS:FIRST says: Similarly, if the page is a list, do not introduce the list as 'This is a list of X' or 'This list of Xs...'. A clearer and more informative introduction to the list is better than verbatim repetition of the title. I see many lists that do not do this, and I'm starting to see a pattern where I change the first sentence per MOS:FIRST and am reverted. So, I was wondering if there's a nuance to interpreting this that I'm missing. How do you determine how to implement this part of MOS:FIRST? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:37, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rotideypoc41352, I'd take it to mean what it says. Could you name a couple of these list articles? Then somebody (perhaps me) will take a look, and comment on the specifics. -- Hoary (talk) 00:15, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most of these are pretty old—I just pulled up a list of my edit summaries containing "first" and went through them. Way back in 2020, I started a talk page discussion at Talk:List of ancient Greek and Roman roofs#MOS:FIRSTSENTENCE—my diff is linked there. That discussion discouraged me for a while (despite success at List of Roman basilicas). I then returned after...well, concluding what you did: that the policy seemed pretty straightforward. Sometimes the constructions were reverted for being too awkward, as at List of ethnic slurs. Others had theirs redone for reasons unrelated to MOS:FIRST, like List of women aviators. List of active Indian military aircraft seems to have fallen victim to persistent vandalism-fighting—the hatnote got chewed up and spat out, resulting in the nonsensical second sentence. But going back to the awkward prose issue: I thought I did an okay job at List of Republicans who opposed the Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign and less stellar ones at List of owners of English football clubs and List of Malayalam films of 2022—all three of them now have the "list of" construction on the first sentence all the same. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 03:53, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I chose List of Republicans who opposed the Donald Trump 2020 presidential campaign. This had started This is a list of Republicans and conservatives who declined to endorse blah blah. You changed this to Republicans and conservatives have declined to endorse blah blah. (As this was in August 2020, the choice of tense was appropriate.) ¶ You're invoking a valid interpretation of a sentence whose subject is an indefinite plural noun phrase -- however, though valid, it's less likely. I suspect that a typical reaction would have been "No they haven't! Only some outliers: Susan Collins, George Conway, and uh...." ¶ I'd have written A number of Republicans and conservatives have declined to endorse blah blah. ¶ Lima Bean Farmer reverted the change, with the edit summary Same as the article from 2016 about Republicans who oppose Trump, to which my reaction is "Consistency is a good thing, but only when it's consistency in being good". -- Hoary (talk) 04:37, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your time and feedback! Good to know that if there are any issues, it's my wording, and that I understand MOS:FIRST correctly. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:38, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]