Help desk
< August 27	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 29 >

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.

August 28

Accessibility question

Greetings! I had a question and I really have no clue where to ask it -- so please feel free to point me in the right direction if this isn't the place.

A lot of SpaceX related articles (List of Falcon 9 first-stage boosters, Vandenberg Space Launch Complex 4, SpaceX Dragon 2) use the "chasing arrows/recycling symbol" (♺) in tables to denote that a piece of hardware has been reused from a previous launch.

My question is this... is using the ♺ symbol problematic from an accessibility perspective? Do screen readers properly parse these symbols? Does it matter if they don't?

Some guidance from experienced editors/admins would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance. -- RickyCourtney (talk) 00:22, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. That is a good question. I am not an expert in this area but my understanding is that is a Unicode symbol. And Steve Faulkner, who is an accessibility expert has made a list of which Unicode characters two of the major screen readers can view. JAWS supports 5400 symbols including that symbol. NVDA supports 3400 symbols and does not include that symbol. I am not sure if those pages are up to date but they do seem to imply that there is uneven support. I am not working in a Windows environment but someone who was could download the latest version of NVDA and see if this still holds true. I've reached out to Steve and will see if he has feedback. Jessamyn (my talk page) 00:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RickyCourtney The symbol is used in a data table. Its meaning can only be determined by opening a note in the table's header row. I don't regard that as accessible. If the information is seen to be important then it should be in its own column where it can be represented by a standard {{yes}} template or similar, and marked sortable. I may be WP:BRD and implement that myself to gauge reaction. Bazza 7 (talk) 08:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RickyCourtney and Bazza 7: I'm here from a pointer at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Accessibility where this was brought up. As a screen reader user I agree the solution in the above message be a good idea. I can reproduce those results with JAWS and NVDA. Graham87 (talk) 14:58, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bazza 7 I would support you suggesting whatever bold changes you think are necessary. -- RickyCourtney (talk) 15:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RickyCourtney and Graham87: I have made changes to the first article, List of Falcon 9 first-stage boosters and added a note to its talk page about this conversation, which is where I think any further discussion should take place.

Pushpin map

Hi, is there anyone who knows how to create pushpin maps? If so, can someone please tell me how I can make one for my draft Draft:Malmsbury Youth Justice Centre, same as the one used on Melbourne Youth Justice Centre. TYIA — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MaxnaCarta. Sometimes the best thing to do in a case like this is to go and check to see how the pushpin map was created in the other article. So, go to Melbourne Youth Justice Centre and click on "Edit" at the very top of the page. In the editing window that opens up, you should see the syntax that's being used to create the map. It looks like it's being done using parameters for the template {{Infobox prison}}. Copy-and-paste that infobox syntax into your WP:USERSANDBOX and play around with the parameters by replacing the information for Melbourne with the corresponding information for Maimsbury. Once things look the way you think they should look, you can then copy-and-paste what you did into your draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:37, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Banner shell format

What does "1=" do at the end of banner shell on Talk pages? e.g. WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|1= Orygun (talk) 05:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Orygun. If this is not explained in the documentation for Template:WikiProject banner shell, then I think it's just a way of telling the template that everything following the parameter |1= is just an embedded Wikiproject banner template. It might not even be needed for the banner shell template to work, but some people just add it out of habit since such a parameter is sometimes needed in other templates. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Orygun: |1= can be placed anywhere in a template call and specifies the value of the first unnamed parameter. It's necessary if the value contains an equals sign. See the second bullet at Help:Template#Hints and workarounds. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:19, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I read referenced section, but still don’t understand what this code does. Here’s what I was looking at … Talk:Hillsboro Health District station … Does this need a 1= to link banner class with project importance?Orygun (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Orygun: Simple test: add the |1=, click "Show Preview" and see what happened. If nothing appears to have changed, then it probably doesn't matter whether it's used; if, however, a whole new world suddenly appears, then perhaps it does. Please note I'm neither a template expert in real life nor do I play one on TV.

All joking aside, though, templates seem to essentially work based on what their parameters are and how information is entered for these paramater; so, I think PrimeHunter's answer above hit the nail on the head. Since templates tend to have multiple parameters, the paramters are often given specific names like |class=, |importance=, |listas=, etc., or are "unnamed" and use integers like |1=, |2=, |3=, etc. The {{WikiProject banner shell}} template doesn't have have a parameter named |Individual WikiProject banners go here= but instead uses |1=, and it's documentation says that's where to add the individual WikiProject banner templates.

Problems seem to happen when you try to use a combination of the pipe character | and just an ordinary equal sign in a template like {{Wikiproject banner shell|=}}. The pipes divide the templates into parameters and when all the parameters have specific names, it matters not which order they're added because the template will always display them in their intended order. Problems happen, however, when the template doesn't know what information belongs to which parameter, and it has no way of figuring that out itself. In the case of the banner shell template, the template which of its parameters have specific names and which one is unnamed. It also knows the "unnamed" parameter is where the individual Wikiproject banner templates go; therefore, when the template sees an empty pipe, it just assumes that's supposed to be |1= and treats it as such. It's probably more correct to use |1=, but it doesn't seem to matter because the template is able figure out that's what you mean. Now, if you add something else beside WikiProject banner template after that empty pipe (e.g. a string of text), then the template will just display that string of text where you'd expect to find WikiProject banners.

Anyway, that's how I understand things. I'm sure someone more experienced in templates will correct me if I'm wrong, but often messing around with templates in your user sandbox is a good way to see how the work. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:51, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Orygun: |1= is usually only needed if the value has a "free" equals sign. That's rarely a problem with {{WikiProject banner shell}} but often with some other templates which can for example have url's in parameters. Try previewing Talk:Hillsboro Health District station with this where I inserted a url with an equals sign which counts as free by MediaWiki:

{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|
{{WikiProject Oregon|importance=Low}}
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hillsboro_Health_District_station&action=history
{{WikiProject Trains|Stations=yes|importance=low}}
}}

It fails badly with a very confusing preview warning about an unknown parameter with a bizarre name. MediaWiki locates the first free equals sign (which happens to be inside a url) and thinks that everything to the left of the equals sign is a parameter name which is assigned the value to the right of the equals sign. In this case the parameter name becomes {{WikiProject Oregon|importance=Low}} https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title, and the value becomes Talk:Hillsboro_Health_District_station&action=history {{WikiProject Trains|Stations=yes|importance=low}}. Mediawiki allows parameter names to be the result of template calls so {{WikiProject Oregon|importance=Low}} is evaluated before MediaWiki decides what the parameter name is, causing the bizarre name in the preview warning. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:47, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To all editors above...thanks for taking time to explain how this code is used!Orygun (talk) 04:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coding problem

Hello. I can't figure out why the second navbox on the user page won't format. The coding works on both (I tested the reverse order and the same thing, the first one shows and the second one doesn't). Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 09:49, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Randy Kryn: The page is in Category:Pages where post-expand include size is exceeded - there are so many sub-templates in each navbox that the software is not prepared to process them all. See the category description for more detail. -- John of Reading (talk) 10:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks John of Reading. The first navbox works even though it contains many navboxes, so is there anyway of including all the navboxes in collapsible parent navboxes? The topic seems like an all or nothing deal. An idea, can there be a White House subpage which can contain all of the navboxes and then link to it in the navbox section? This would work around the software restriction:

Randy Kryn (talk) 10:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Randy Kryn: I'm not sure what the MOS has to say about mainspace sub-pages like that one. I see that at {{Navboxes}} there's a warning about the post-expand include size, and a suggestion about using {{Navboxes top}} and {{Navboxes bottom}} instead, which may help you to squeeze the original collapse list into the article. -- John of Reading (talk) 11:23, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking so much time to check details. I'll look at the links and hope I understand them (my tech understanding is in the negatives). Randy Kryn (talk) 11:27, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tried the coding as I understood it and nothing showed when the 'open' tab was pushed, so lost the links using that coding. Taking my coding sense into account I probably did it wrong. Someone marked the 'White House/Residents' subpage for speedy deletion, saying it was a duplicate of the 'List of United States presidents' page, so I removed the speedy. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:40, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Randy Kryn: Please always save your broken code somewhere if you request help with it. You didn't save it so I cannot say what you did wrong but this works. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:18, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PrimeHunter, if I do coding it's usually wrong, but thank you! That looks good and may solve the problem (I'll try it on the White House page). Much appreciated. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:23, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not in MOS, but I think this would be the third entry in Wikipedia:Subpages § Disallowed uses. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Randy Kryn, mainspace cannot have subpages; the slash is a (rarely) permitted character in a title, and is just a slash. They usually end up as redirects instead of in the title of the main article, e.g.: AC/DC (electrical), The Hobbit (2012/13 films), Miami/Fort Lauderdale area, Matthew Murdock/Daredevil, NPA/Nxx, P-Celtic/Q-Celtic hypothesis, Terry Pratchett/Discworld, Yin/Yang and so on, but sometimes they remain in the title, if that is really how it is known, e.g., AC/DC. HTH, Mathglot (talk) 03:00, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mathglot. The namespace article with the slash has already been deleted. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many W's

Hello. On the articles

there are a bunch of section headers that start with a "w" for the women's events. I do not see the point, is that a convention I am unaware of? Polygnotus (talk) 14:08, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Trackinfo: pinging Trackinfo who made these changes here with the mysterious editsummary "sorting". Polygnotus (talk) 14:11, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a workaround for a problem I do not know about, perhaps a better workaround can be found? Polygnotus (talk) 14:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would make more sense to simply describe each as "men's..." and "women's..." in my opinion, but I don't know if there was a reason for this formatting. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:18, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah if you look at, for example, 2001 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships then its just "men's..." and "women's...". It seems like these specific years are different, for some reason beyond my understanding. Polygnotus (talk) 21:38, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Polygnotus and Trackinfo: The guideline MOS:HEADINGS says section headings should be unique within a page, so that section links lead to the right place. I guess it was done to satisfy that, but the implementation looks bad. Adding "Men's" or "Women's" to every heading would be better but give a lot of redundancy. I sometimes just ignore this guideline when there is no good way to implement it. If there are two sections called "100 meters" then 2000 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships#100 meters links the first, and the second can be linked with 2000 NCAA Division I Outdoor Track and Field Championships#100 meters 2. Few editors will realize that and it's not done in automatic edit summaries for section edits but I still think it's the best option here. The table of contents will work correctly by adding "_2" to the section link. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was produced as a means to force locating when linking results from other articles by making the women results uniquely titled from men's results in the same article. At the time, and still now, the "_2" does not function frequently, taking a link to the wrong place, confusing readers.Trackinfo (talk) 17:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know the Phabricator ticket number? Polygnotus (talk) 18:22, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think ideally, that including headings above it in the structure should work, so something like [[2017 NCAA Division I Indoor Track and Field Championships#Women's#100m]] would be useful.Naraht (talk) 18:43, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

question re category role

hi. could someone please tell me, what is the purpose of Category:Wikipedia categories named after English musical groups? my head is spinning, in trying to figure this out.

isn't it better to simply use the actual category, namely Category:English musical groups? could someone please help me out here? please ping me if you reply. thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 14:34, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sm8900:

I guess Category:English musical groups contains English musical groups.

And Category:Wikipedia categories named after English musical groups contains Wikipedia categories that contain articles about English musical groups.

So once a band gets really big and multiple articles have been written about them, for example The Beatles, then a category is made.

Category:The Beatles is then listed in Category:Wikipedia categories named after English musical groups

Hope that helps.

Polygnotus (talk) 14:40, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ok yes, i can see how that would make sense. so the main category is for articles on bands, and the category "wikipdia categories named after..." is for categories named after bands. ok, yes that helps. thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 14:54, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia inaccuracies

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Nothing is going to happen here. The original post is a rant, and we don't need to spend more time or attention on this one. Cremastra (talk) 23:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen hours of videos from a large number of sources, and they refute nearly all discussions from Wikipedia and its sources. Thus I have declared that Wikipedia is not a viable source of accurate information, and is being removed from my information sources. If Wikipedia wants to call the Jan. 6 protests an INSURRECTION, it does so knowing that the FBI had stated that the Protests did NOT incorporate elements of,the definition of an insurrection. Thus Wikipedia stating or restating that,Jan 6 was in insurrection, is deemed to be Election Interference. 172.115.207.14 (talk) 14:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you checked if your sources are reliable? Polygnotus (talk) 14:45, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, by the sound of it, you'll be happier not looking at Wikipedia. Have a good day. ColinFine (talk) 14:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor. Wikipedia does not claim to be a reliable source. Readers are expected to be able to assess the sources it cites. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:48, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

if there is an encyclopedia anywhere else that provides separate articles for every Egyptian pharoah, every Roman emperor, and every King of England, let me know and i will take a look. as far as events within the last five years, that's not necessarily where wikipedia's greatest strengths are. Sm8900 (talk) 15:11, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you bother to actually read January 6 United States Capitol attack, you will see that the article does not call the attack an "insurrection" in Wikipedia's voice. The only place that the word "insurrection" appears in the lead section is in describing Trump's articles of impeachment. Much later in the article, in a section about terminology, the article discusses the various words that media organizations used to describe the events of January 6, but does not conclude in Wikipedia's voice that January 6 was an insurrection. As for the FBI, we often hear from Trump's supporters that the FBI is a thoroughly corrupt deep state institution that cannot be trusted because it is biased against Trump. Now, we hear that the FBI is the ultimate authority in determining what is and is not an insurrection. Both claims are false. Cullen328 (talk) 19:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Declare away. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång I thought the exact same words. Cremastra (talk) 23:10, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Editing Under Categories

Hello my name is Brian. I am new to editing in Wikipedia, and I was wondering if someone can help me on how to add new info to pages in categories? SaberPhoenix01 (talk) 16:52, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SaberPhoenix01 It would be relatively unusual for newcomers like you to edit the category pages. These are present to allow readers to navigate to articles. Hence Category:Hybe Corporation singles lists the articles which are songs from Hybe Corporation. You might reasonably want to edit these individual articles, or even add an article about a new single which you would add to that category by using a tool like WP:HotCat on the new articles page. See also Help:Category. If I have misunderstood what you want to do, please explain in more detail here and someone will help you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Brian. You add an article (or other page) to a category by editing the article, not the category.

So, to add Eve, Psyche & the Bluebeard's Wife to the category Category:Hybe Corporation singles, you would insert

[[Category:Hybe Corporation singles]]

into Eve, Psyche & the Bluebeard's Wife, usually at the bottom.

(Having said that, I'm not sure why you were trying to add that single to the category, because it appears it was by a different band, though with some of the same members. But I haven't looked into it closely). ColinFine (talk) 18:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to the article, that single was written by a collective including the person who founded the Hybe Corporation. Whether that makes it one of their singles and thus a relevant member of that category, I leave to experts in the music of Korean girl groups. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding adding relationship information to "Personal Life" section of page

Hello, I'm asking for assistance on behalf of Charles Fleischer and his wikipedia article page. He has been in a relationship since July 2023, but I have no way to add a citation for this besides his facebook relationship status. How else can I cite information about his updated relationship with his partner? Thank you. Elwoodziggurat (talk) 20:50, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Elwoodziggurat.

First of all you must read about editing with a conflict of interest, to understand what you should and should not do. You are strongly advised to make a formal declaration of your connection with Fleischer on your user page. If you are in any way employed or remunerated in connection with this, you must make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor.

In answer to your question, I'm afraid that you can't. Wikipedia articles should be based 100% on information verifiable from reliable published sources. If Fleischer's relationship has not been discussed by indepedent reliable sources, then it should not at present go into the article. ColinFine (talk) 21:09, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with ColinFine's interpretation of policy here. The relevant policy language can be found at WP:ABOUTSELF. If there is no reasonable doubt about the authenticity of the Facebook account, the relationship can be mentioned and referenced to the Facebook page. The other person should not be mentioned by name. Cullen328 (talk) 21:19, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New page submission

I'm an old lady, and I really want to submit this page for CC Lane. I attended a book club where she spoke. As a 70 year old retiree, she began a new career writing romance novels and is doing really well. We all love her new success. I've submitted some of the links I found. I have copies of press releases, but I don't have the links. What else can I do. LenorWilliams (talk) 21:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! The links you added prove that CC Lane exists and that she published books, but they don't prove that she's a well-known author who has been written about by major newspapers or studied by academics. Wikipedia has notability requirements, so a certain amount of independent press is needed before someone qualifies for an article. It's also worth noting that it's not always fun having an article about yourself. Once they're created, they're public and out of your control. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:12, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LenorWilliams.

The first thing I will say is that writing a new article is an extremely challenging task for a new Wikipedia editor, and most editors who attempt it before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works have a disappointing and frustrating experience. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.

The good news about your sources is that neither links nor copies are required: as long as you can provide bibliographic information (author, title, publisher, date, page number etc), that is enough. If a legal copy is available online, then you can also provide a link to it, but that is a convenience to the reader or reviewer, not an essential part of the citation.

The bad news is that press releases won't help. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. That is the sort of source you require, and unless you can find several such, no article is possible. ColinFine (talk) 21:17, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LenorWilliams, if you are, as you say, an old lady, I expect that you'll have some recollections of one or more among World Book Encyclopedia, Encyclopedia Americana, and Encyclopædia Britannica. None of these would have so freely used language such as "fascinating romance novels", "talented writer", "incredible emotional and passionate journeys", "fresh perspectives", "captivating tales", or "amazing romance novels"; and certainly none would have used "you" (either for an undefined person or for the reader). Wikipedia too is an encyclopedia, and in the dispassionate nature of their language, encyclopedias have changed little during the last century. (Of course, if you can specify the reliable source that talks of "amazing romance novels", in those words, it may be appropriate to quote that source.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]