Help desk
< January 4	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 6 >

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 5[edit]

page warning[edit]

I have created a page of well-famous person of Marrakesh namely Mohamed Dekkak. there is a caution to have at least 1 authentic source to remove the red caution. I have add in external links his live interviews on media sites. Can you please guide me further if there is need any further changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thisimran1 (talk • contribs) 09:41, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than external links, Wikipedia needs references (see WP:Referencing for beginners). Note also that to demonstrate notability the references need to be to published reliable sources independent of the subject. Wikipedia isn't intetrested in what the subject says about himself, but instead wants to know what reliable sources such as reputable newspapers or books say about him. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:06, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a draft article[edit]

Hi there, I am tryng to create a draft article throught the article wizard process. When I click to save the article, I do not get a confirmation of submission, I get this:

Your edit includes new external links. These may be much welcomed links to references. Please note that the nofollow HTML attribute is applied to external links in Wikipedia, instructing search engines to ignore these links when computing page ranks. For information on our standards for adding links, please see our External links Guideline.

I have tried giving the 'live chat' the name of the article I would like to submit but because it will not let me save it there is nothing to view.

I would be very grateful if I can get some assistance with this. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sw2016 (talk • contribs) 09:51, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Sw2016, this is...a bit of a pickle, since I can't see what you are trying to put into the draft, and neither can anyone else. Have you tried maybe creating the draft with only the first sentence (no links, no refs, no nothing) and then adding the rest incrementally to try to narrow down what might be the problem? TimothyJosephWood 14:26, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is just reading between the lines. If the OP was to compose their article in their own sandbox first, we could all see it and help.--Aspro (talk) 15:30, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Both, TimothyJosephWood, Aspro I have tried both of your suggestions and still getting the same message up. Even if I submit the first words! I havee tried logging out and logging in again but nothing appears to be working. Really don't understand where I am going wrong?

I see that you managed to create an empty user sandbox. Are you saying that you get the message about external links if you just add a word or two to that sandbox, without any external links? The message apparently comes from MediaWiki:Fancycaptcha-addurl. From previous reports of problems involving that message, it is something which happens for editors who are not autoconfirmed, so hopefully it'll go away when you are past that hurdle. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:23, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How do I delete a wikipedia draft page that I created?[edit]

How do I delete a wikipedia draft page that I created? I created a page for a colleague that has been rejected, though the page remains in draft. It would be good to be able to delete this and begin again. How do I do this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elvp2016 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You should be able to tag it with {{db-author}} Siuenti (talk) 13:41, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There were contributions by editors other than the OP, so {{db-author}} does not apply. The draft can't be deleted at your request, as the conditions of your edit were that "you irrevocably agree to release your contribution". You can, however, continue to modify the draft. I have reinstated the previous feedback & comments which you deleted, as the routine is that this feedback remains for the benefit of yourself and subsequent reviewers, unless and until the draft is accepted for publication as an article. --David Biddulph (talk) 13:47, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Brigham Young two edits I placed yesterday ??[edit]

please excuse my ignorance in placing edits on an article you have...yesterday I had placed two very factual edits under Conflicts and Doctrinal position ,,,I was refused and didnt understand how to have the proper headings or what you required.Are my edits still present?If so,how can I place them into this article?Thanks DrRFunk — Preceding unsigned comment added by Honduras4321 (talk • contribs) 15:23, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit was in the article history. It was malformatted and unsourced, and this was explained in the edit summary of the revert. It was also most clearly not a minor edit, though you had marked it as such. Are you saying that the later edit by the IP editor 75.169.217.58 was also you? That edit removed sourced text, so obviously that too was reverted. If you have concerns with the current content of the article you can start a new section on the article talk page, but you will need to cite reliable sources to support your views. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:37, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)The changes that you made were reverted as good faith changes rather than vandalism. The edits made broke the formatting including adding the start of a reference without an ending which made both the text that you added and other early parts of the article to be moved. As for the actual text, the Mountain Meadows Massacre is already mentioned and there is actually an article on Brigham Young and the Mountain Meadows massacre which goes into a fair amount of depth. A referenced mention of Nancy Rigdon (daughter of Sidney Rigdon) might be appropriate, but actually if it was part of Sidney Rigdon's dissatisfaction with the remainder of the hierarchy, might be more appropriate on either the List of Brigham Young's wives in some way or the chronology on the page about Sidney Rigdon. Also see Help:Referencing for beginners in terms of referencing Wife19.Naraht (talk) 15:43, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As an additional comment, Wife No. 19 while certainly a published source is about as far from a Neutral Source as I can imagine, and as such I'd be hesitant to use it without other sources. (Did John Cradlebaugh issue a report?)Naraht (talk) 15:55, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

how to respond to talk box?[edit]

Judyarnall (talk) 15:49, 5 January 2017 (UTC)Judy Arnall[reply]

Hello, please clarify what it is that you need help with. If you wish to reply to a message at your talk-page, you can either type a reply below the message (indent by typing a colon (:) at the start of your reply), or you can click on the word 'talk' after an editor's signature to go to their talk-page and leave a reply there. To respond to a message at an article talk-page, it is best to reply at that page. Eagleash (talk) 18:05, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

getting a start. articles I can write[edit]

Where can I find articles that have not been created yet? Thank you. --Dongrasgym2020 (talk) 16:36, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If you are looking for topics on which articles have been requested, try WP:Requested articles, but before you try to create an article you ought to get some experience editing existing articles. Also, please read WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:00, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can I submit an article[edit]

Hi I am the Executive Director of the Leukemia Research Foundation. I would like to see a description added to Wiki about the LRF. However, your instructions suggest avoiding posting about yourself, your company, etc. I get that. At the same time it would be written solely as reference and carefully worded so as not to be an advertisement. Can I do that and submit for your editors or is that a waste of time? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kradelet (talk • contribs) 18:12, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Although we advise very strongly against members of organizations creating articles about themselves, you appear aware of the dangers of having a conflict of interest and most probably can ovoid most them. LRF to my mind is notable, so suggest reading this: Wikipedia:Your first article and going through the steps. If the article gets accepted, then stand back and wait for other editors to contribute, otherwise you will fall into the trap of being a 'single purpose account' promoting your organization that you are connected too. It might still not work out well but at least you have tried. Suggest you use (say) Leukemia & Lymphoma Society as a guide to laying out the article. Remember, if it gets accepted it will be an article about LRF and not an article that the LRF owns. You must declare your COI when submitting. So, don't think it is a waist of time. Do other editors agree this is a notable org that we just haven’t got around to creating an article for?--Aspro (talk) 18:52, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. One last an important thing. As you are the Executive Director you may be too busy to do this yourself and task it to someone else. They really must create their own account here and declare their conflict of interest as well. Please do not under any circumstances create a Wikipedia account that any of your staff can use. We do not allow joint accounts that can be used by more than one individual. Or you can try asking for such an article about LRF to be created at Wikipedia:Articles for creation which helps nullify the conflict of interest issues. Other than that... happy editing.--Aspro (talk) 19:05, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And if you really want to dot the i's and cross the t's, follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:56, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

English vs. British[edit]

Could someone explain the difference here to a stupid Yank? --†dismas†|^(talk) 20:31, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

English and British are both nationalities. England and United Kingdom are both countries. What's so confusing? <g> ... and btw this happens all the time. WP:UKNATIONALS is here to help. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 20:57, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In general usage, their distinction is very blurry. Technically, there is a collection of islands called the "British Isles". The largest of these is called "Great Britain", often shortened to "Britain". For an American analogue, Hawaii is a chain of islands, the largest of which ("the big island") is known as "Hawaii". Most of the countries of England, Scotland, and Wales are on the island of Great Britain. Politically, the island is part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The U.K. is a sovereign country that consists of four countries — England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. There - is that clear now? No, I didn't think so, and that's why even people who live there often use the terms interchangeably.--Gronk Oz (talk) 01:23, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oops - forgot to ping Dismas. --Gronk Oz (talk) 01:24, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dismas: I don't want to drag this on, but it's worth noting that these things change. As recently as 2014, Scotland held a referendum to determine whether they would stay in the UK or not. It was defeated. If it had passed, I imagine that Scotland would still be located physically in the same place on the big island, but their citizens would no longer have been classed as British citizens (as they are now). --Gronk Oz (talk) 01:36, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all. I've just watched this video and it makes a bit more sense. So, basically, the edit makes things a bit more... precise? †dismas†|^(talk) 02:01, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To confuse things further, there is a language called "English", which is spoken not only in England, but in Scotland, the US, and many other countries. Maproom (talk) 09:43, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if precise is the best description.. British nationality has a defined legal status, whereas English nationality is more subjective and much harder to verify. I guess in some ways, being English is like being a Texan, or Hawaiian, or Puerto Rican. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 10:08, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Being English is nothing whatsoever like being Texan, I'm glad to say. DuncanHill (talk) 12:44, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DuncanHill: Well, there is one similarity: there is a class of aggressively English hooligans who are a similar embarrassment to all their neighbours. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 19:20, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they are English at all. DuncanHill (talk) 00:51, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Dismas: Another good example is your term "Yankee". Although inhabitants of other countries might not get the distinction, Mr. Good Old Southern Boy remembers that Yankees were the guys his greatⁿ-grandpappy fought in the Civil War, and calling him a Yankee is still fighting words. (And the history of conflict between England, Scotland, and Wales goes back ten times further than the Civil War.) 71.41.210.146 (talk) 19:20, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Best way to respond to an archived thread?[edit]

I show up late to many wiki-discussions. Just wondering what is the practice if one wants to add a post to an archived thread. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 21:06, 5 January 2017 (UTC)please ping me[reply]

What is the point to adding to an archived thread? The discussion is finished. When it isn't, it gets re-posted. --Aspro (talk) 22:35, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See also Help:Archiving a talk page#Continuing discussions. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:56, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Aspro: re: What is the point... I wholeheartedly disagree, but this is not the time and place to discuss this since ithis thread will soon be archived. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Verbs[edit]

I have an article of an establishment that recently closed. The verbs have not been edited to be changed to past-tense, so I am wondering, is there a sort of tool that is available to change all of the verbs in the article, or do I have to do it manually?

Thanks.

Beejsterb (talk) 22:51, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which pronouns have a past tense? I thought that tense was something that applied to verbs? --David Biddulph (talk) 22:55, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Beejsterb: To actually answer your question, no: there is not a program or bot that will change tenses within an article. The few automated updates are things such as birth dates. Everything else (pertaining to grammar) is manually changed and adjusted by editors: i.e. if a subject dies. Hope this helps; and happy editing! Best. Maineartists (talk) 23:50, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]