Help desk
< July 23	<< Jun \| July \| Aug >>	July 25 >

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.

July 24[edit]

Wiki window disappears on a Google search.[edit]

When I search on Google, a Wikipedia window appears on the right side of the page, with an illustration. Lately, it very quickly disappears again, before I have time to read it at all. How can I restore the full function? 79.64.120.111 (talk) 08:27, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's not actually a function of Wikipedia, but of Google (who we're not affiliated with). Have you recently changed your browser or installed any add-ons? Is your browser up-to-date? Have you checked your computer for malware? Ian.thomson (talk) 08:33, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's presumably the Google Knowledge Graph. I don't know why it disappears for you. There may be a paragraph of running text from Wikipedia. All other parts may be unrelated to Wikipedia. It's assembled by Google. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:51, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just a hunch, but if you have an ad-blocker, turn it off for Google search pages.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:52, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, this has been resolved by my brilliant genius son; by removing the 'Download any picture' extension. He is the best. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.64.123.22 (talk) 13:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

how much info is too much info ?[edit]

Hello again!

I have been going all around Wikipedia trying to figure out how to make it a lil bitter and while I was doing that I started to wonder what exactly each article needs? how much info would be too much info ? are we going for a website that tells you the history of something or a website that tells you everything you need to know about something.

let's say I want to edit the article Mosin–Nagant and to do that i make a video of myself opening the gun up cleaning it and then putting it back together. would that be relevant to what Wikipedia needs to be or would it be too much information?

Thank you for your time.Kou~ (talk) 10:56, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Koupip, it can be a grey area. Guidance like Wikipedia:Summary style and WP:NOTGUIDE may give you some insight. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:33, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Koupip, Thank you for wanting to improve Wikipedia. We can't have too much information, but it must be credited to a reliable source. Click that link for more details. Wikipedia summarises what reliable sources say about a topic. Reliable sources do not include home-made (or most Youtube) videos, so your suggestion would not be acceptable in Wikipedia and would probably be deleted.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:08, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, we can have too much information. See WP:WEIGHT. "Undue weight can be given in several ways, including but not limited to depth of detail, quantity of text,. . ." What information is due and undue is an editorial choice, but there are times where an article is unnecessarily detailed and really needs trimming. Plot sections in articles about works of fiction (books, tv shows, movies, plays, etc) are usually great places to look if you feel like trimming excessive and undue detail. Also, see Wikipedia:Coatrack articles ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:48, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Generating a trendline in a scatterplot[edit]

Is there a way I can generate a linear regression line in this scatterplot that uses Template:Graph:Chart? Or is it an as-of-yet missing feature? Regards, Inimesh (talk) 10:56, 24 July 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Not a trendline maven, but isn't it so that different methods can produce (at least slightly) different results, depending on the method used? If so you would need to find a published trendline in a reliable source. Then the reader can judge for herself if she trusts that source to provide a correct trendline. She's not supposed to trust us. (If I'm wrong and making a trendline is a purely mechanical exercise, that's different.) Herostratus (talk) 21:07, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A linear regression produces a specific trendline in a deterministic way. There are other types of trendline (which are not straight lines, unlike linear regression). AFAIK, no trendlines are supported by Template:Graph:Chart. Also, a linear trendline may not be appropriate for the linked graph. Danski454 (talk) 21:17, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Danski454: Of course, just a linear trendline would be of little value to the linked graph. But a linear trendline with the R-squared value (and perhaps also r) by the side would provide some idea about the degree of correlation between the two variables. Should I make a request for this feature in the template's talk page? Inimesh (talk) 02:45, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decision template[edit]

Dear all, I want to create an article "decision template" similar to the German article. I find 420,000 search results on Google. Is the lemma notable enough?

Thank you --F.Blaubiget (talk) 10:59, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@F.Blaubiget: the google hit count is a good hint, but it is not part of our decision critera for notability. See WP:N. The subject should have an article if it is notable. To establish notability, find several (two or more) reliable sources with the correct characteristics. The sources in the German article may suffice. See WP:NERROR for how to evaluate the sources. -Arch dude (talk) 14:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You need to have enough sources to support a decent-size article that's worth reading -- couple good paragraphs or so, at the least. I can't read those German sources and they're not in text format so I can't machine-translate them either. If you can, they're a good start it looks like. It's OK to include German sources in our English articles.

Anyway only a few sentences of the German article are sourcedd. You probably need a bit more material to make a proper article. So for finding your own sources, Google and Google Books and Google Scholar is a place to start. I'd be really wary of any commercial sources -- organizations that are trying to sell you something. I won't say "never use", but I'd steer away. Herostratus (talk) 21:23, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Arch dude:, @Herostratus:, Thank you very much for the constructive and concrete help. I very much appreciate this. All the best! --F.Blaubiget (talk) 11:00, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Opinions written as facts on Wikipedia.[edit]

I was researching a topic regarding slavery and came across a line where the contributor wrote "X person detested Y person". I wanted to see the reference so I followed it to a book where the same line was written. There was no explanation or reference in that book explaining where this information came from. I went further and read reviews on the book from critics. Many of them stated that the author is a known liar. Therefore, it is safe to assume that this was an opinion and not a fact.

Why is it that this opinion, from a singular author with no references, is allowed on Wikipedia as a fact? Could I not similarly write a book saying "Rick Ross ate gold for breakfast" and then use that as a reference to write it on his Wiki page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sh11ftyshah (talk • contribs) 12:27, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sh11ftyshah, The challenge with references is that not every editor is as assiduous as you in following them to the end of the trail. It gets interesting when critics refer to the author as known liar. My thinking here is that either

the reference is a dud and should be removed along with talk page rationale for removal
the reference should be qualified as the opinion of the author, with further citations to show that this opinion is challenged

I prefer the second approach since it creates a fuller picture

As an editor here you are as entitled as any other to make alterations that are within policy that add clarity to articles, and you are encouraged to do so Fiddle Faddle 12:33, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sh11ftyshah: You shouldn't necessarily assume that because something appears in a Wikipedia article that it's "allowed on Wikipedia". As you'd expect of a volunteer project with six million articles, none of our articles are perfect, and very few are even close. We rely on editors to be bold and fix problems with articles when they see them; as Timtrent says above, that includes you. If you don't feel comfortable editing the article yourself, you should specify which article you're talking about so others can take a look. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 21:49, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Logo Update[edit]

HI,

I hope someone can help me with our page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaminade_College_Preparatory_School_(California) I would like to update the logo. The current logo displayed is an old logo. We have had a new logo for many years.

I also want to change the name of our school. The school's name is Chaminade College Preparatory I would like to remove the word "school" the word (California) can remain as there are several schools named Chaminade in the USA.

sincerely

Patricia Fernandez Communications and Marketing Director Chaminade College Preparatory — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chaminadeadmin (talk • contribs) 16:00, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Chaminadeadmin: We can hekp, but you need to do two things right away. first, change your user name, or simply abandon this one and create a new one. Each user name must b for an individual, not a position in an organization: see WP:USERNAME. Then for your new user name, declare your paid status (see WP:PAID) to void violating our terms of service. After that, make your request on the talk page of the article and ask for someone to make the change by adding {{edit request}} to your request. Come back here if you need further assistance. -Arch dude (talk) 20:33, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Link within square brackets[edit]

How would I, in an article's wikitext, add a link to a different page using double square brackets, within square brackets? If I try to use three square brackets, [[[, the link doesn't work. Andysmith248 (talk) 16:10, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks in advance. Andysmith248 (talk) 16:12, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Andysmith248: Use two brackets to make a link. [[Fire truck]] becomes Fire truck RudolfRed (talk) 16:23, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@RudolfRed: Hi, I want to know how to write a link with double square brackets, within a set of square brackets. Andysmith248 (talk) 16:37, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Try [ Link text ] - note I put a nowiki tag around the first bracket ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 16:26, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@El cid, el campeador: Hi, is there a way of doing it without it displaying a space between the link text and the square brackets? Andysmith248 (talk) 16:37, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I don't know why I included that space, you can just remove it, as such: [Link text] Cheers ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia ^talk 16:45, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant, thank you. Andysmith248 (talk) 17:36, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ad[edit]

need a ballpark estimates for add on Sunday half a page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.85.205.193 (talk) 19:46, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but this is not a general help desk, but a place to ask about using Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 19:48, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's sounds like you're asking about a newspaper ad- you would need to ask the company directly. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:49, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. You seem to be in the wrong place. If you are talking about showing your advertisement on Wikipedia, then I must tell that Wikipedia, more specifically, the Wikimedia Foundation, does not support any advertisement or commercial activity. Field Marshal (talk) 19:50, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Information cooperation[edit]

I do a lot of research in AfD and my resources are largely US-based. Is there a place where someone like me could ask someone with access to British Newspaper Archive (which I've seen cited in some articles) to look up certain things and participate in article sourcing? If there isn't a place to ask, is it ok for me to ask someone who has used this archive if they'd be interested in participating in the article improvement, or would this be viewed as canvassing? I don't want to canvas, but I'd appreciate some help. If it would be viewed as canvassing, do I ask the editor not to vote or something? Hope my questions make sense. (I'm working on the article Ronnie Bird, but I've wondered this about other articles.) Thanks. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 19:56, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DiamondRemley39: Try WP:RX. I have not used it myself, but it seems to be exactly what you want. If that fails and you must resort to asking individual editors, then I do not think it violates the spirit of the "canvassing" prohibition, for several reasons. -Arch dude (talk) 20:24, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, miles off canvassing. If you said "X article is notable, help me find sources", then maybe. I think RX or LIBRARY are the places to go. Good luck. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 22:05, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]