Help desk
< November 2	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 4 >

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.

November 3[edit]

Beighton Cup[edit]

I did not get the publisher of this reference (number 7) - it is from a journal from 1921. Please fix and leave in quote. I have gotten the page number incorrect too - the placing of it (it should say "p" - not the actual page number, that is correct. I hope this makes sense. Sorry - thanks 115.70.23.77 (talk) 04:06, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Volunteer[edit]

I'd like to help help improve the encyclopedia. Where should I spend my time to do the most good? STEMinfo (talk) 06:54, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @STEMinfo, welcome to Wikipedia.

Ultimately, we're a encyclopedia, so content is our most critical aspect. It's also really help to do even if you find something else of more interest (as I have). So, I'd first take a read through Help:Intro (the "visual editor" pathway is probably best), especially the editing and referencing parts.

Then find some articles that interest you (I imagine STEM ones would be a good place to look?) but could use some improvements.

Unclear? Rewrite. Unsourced? Add a reference. Straight up wrong? Find the references to confirm it and then change and source.

Your Homepage tab should also suggest a few edits to you.

Best of luck! Nosebagbear (talk) 09:47, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Using russian version of Chornobyl is incorrect[edit]

Hi! Wikipedia is using russian spelling of Chornobyl. "ChErnobyl" spelling is russian and incorrect. You should use either ukrainian version or create a new english one. But using russian spelling in English is incorrect. Chornobyl page is blocked from editing, so please correct it. Thank you. Taras 91.245.223.50 (talk) 10:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chernobyl is best known for the nuclear accident in 1986. At that time, the spelling in news stories was Chernobyl which has become the WP:COMMONNAME. Since then, there have been attempts to rename Chicken Kiev to Chicken Kyiv because Russia is off the Christmas card list. The article Chernobyl also notes the Ukrainian spelling of Chornobyl in the opening sentence.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 10:34, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) Hello, Taras. The question is not "which name is correct", but rather "which name is commonly used". The town became widely known in the world, in the English–speaking world in particular, due to the accident in the nuclear power plant. That happened when Ukraine was a part of Soviet Union, so the vast majority of first-hand information available was written in Russian, the SU official language. Hence the 'Chernobyl' transcription from Russian language got recorded and still exists in most of written sources, while the 'Chornobyl' transcription from Ukrainian language remains much less known. Wikipedia does not try to set any standards or judge on correctness, but rather just summarize and report what reliable sources say. When the use of 'Chornobyl' prevails over 'Chernobyl' in English–language TV news, newspapers & books, then Wikipedia almost surely will change it, too. --CiaPan (talk) 10:47, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Taras: The correct place to have this discussion is at Talk:Chernobyl. What you're going to need before your proposal gets any traction is a a series of reliable sources that show that the change has happened in English that you describe. It can happen, Kyiv has only become the standard English spelling in the past 2 years, but not before then. It doesn't seem like the spelling of Chernobyl to Chornobyl has happened yet in a preponderance of English sources, but maybe it has. Make the case on the article talk page and see what happens. --Jayron 32 16:04, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Plymouth[edit]

problem has been fixed. It doesn't need any additional help --Jayron 32 18:07, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion 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.

Famous Janners:

Missing is

Robert George 'Bob' Downes born in Plymouth 22 July 1937, flautist, saxophonist and composer in the fields of jazz, rock and ballett — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.4.63.66 (talk) 15:49, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have added them to List of people from Plymouth. Thanks for the suggestion. In the future you can just do this yourself. No need to ask for permission. --Jayron 32 16:08, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. First of all, Wikipedia is read and edited by people all over the world, and most of them have no idea what "Janners" means (I'm English, and I didn't know until I looked at the article Plymouth and searched for "Janners". Given this, it is very unhelpful to use the word in a request. In fact, another editor removed your request entirely, because they couldn't make head or tail of it. I restored it, in order to answer it.

It appears that Bob Downes is the subject of a Wikipedia article, and so could be added to List of people from Plymouth (like most lists, this is a list of Wikipedia articles, not of people who come from Plymouth but might or might not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability)).

But the artile Bob Downes is almost unreferenced, and in particular there is no reference given for his being born in Plymouth. By Wikipedia's rules I am entitled to remove that information (and lots of other unreferenced information) from the article; but I have chosen instead to tag it with {{BLP sources}}. But only if the fact is sourced should he be added to the list article. ColinFine (talk) 16:09, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry too much about it, Colin, I already took care of it. No need to fret over such a small thing as not knowing something like what Janner means. There's things we all don't know. We don't all feel the need to advertise it though. It takes a strong person to admit to their own ignorance. --Jayron 32 16:29, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mebbe. But Blaze Wolf removed the whole question because to them it was gibberish, and if I hadn't tried to reply to it and got "this section does not exist" and got looking, maybe nobody would have noticed or replied to it. Perhaps Blaze Wolf jumped the gun; but to them I can't even understand what they're asking, and using an obscure local word is part of that. ColinFine (talk) 17:29, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That was indeed part of it. "Famous Janners:*paragraph break* Missing is*paragraph break* Robert George 'Bob' Downes...." made absolutely no sense to me. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:48, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are all missing the point. It really doesn't matter if you didn't understand it. You don't need to respond to things you don't understand. Even doubly unnecessary in your comment is I've already fixed the problem. I fixed the problem before anyone else commented. You don't have to tell the world you didn't know how to fix the problem after someone has already fixed it. If someone has a broken pipe, do you wait until after the plumber has done their work, then go up to them and say "Honestly, mate, I had no idea how to fix your pipe"? If someone's car isn't working, do you wait until after the mechanic has fixed it to say "Honestly, cars are a mystery to me. I had no idea how to fix your car". If you do, that's weird. If you wouldn't do that, then why do it here? Seriously. Problem fixed. It doesn't need you to say you couldn't have fixed it. --Jayron 32 18:07, 3 November 2022 (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.

Terminology edit?[edit]

If a template says someone need to find references for particular phrase (not a catchphrase, but a spelled-out acronym) would I just look for reputable sources using it in their writings or is there something else? Manyetana (talk) 15:52, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Manyetana: Something like a dictionary or other reliable source for words or terminology defining the term explicitly. Merely showing people using the term is probably not sufficient, you need to show that other reliable sources have explicitly defined it. --Jayron 32 16:10, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please tell us which article you are talking about. It is hard to give helpful advice when people are not specific. ColinFine (talk) 16:13, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help with a template problem[edit]

Hi, I was trying to fix what I think is a mistake and now have myself confused, so I hope this makes sense. I think there may be a problem with a redirected template and can't figure how to fix it. Basically an editor was adding the template {{Contract Research Organizations}} to articles resulting in the entire article Contract research organizations appearing at the bottom instead of the template like this edit here. I went and changed all the ones I could find to {{Contract research organization}} which fixed the problem, like this edit here. After fixing them, I found a redirect here that appears to be the cause of this, it looks like the editor redirected the first template I mentioned to the article instead of the second template I mentioned, so anytime the first template is added, the article appears. If my explaination makes any sense, can someone check this. Like I said, the articles are fixed, but I have no idea what can be done with the redirect. Cmr08 (talk) 17:26, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the edits to the template. I haven't time at the moment to discuss this matter with Fostera12, who made the change. ColinFine (talk) 17:34, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect should have been to Template:Contract research organization. I fixed that at this edit. At about the same time Editor ColinFine recreated Template:Contract Research Organizations from a previous version. Both templates were authored by Fostera12. I suspect that Template:Contract research organization (singular sentence case) is the preferred template title since that is where the attempted redirect was created.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 17:44, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I had myself confused over something easy. I was actually trying to edit the wrong template page. I also think the redirect was meant to be to the lower case template, and the editor leftout the template part. Cmr08 (talk) 17:52, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Beighton Cup[edit]

ref number 8 is all wrong . I cant work out how to put the page number in correctly, and there is a problem with the date - but I think I have got that part correct. Please fix and leave in quote - thanks 115.70.23.77 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:04, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There was an unneeded comma in the date field which generated an error message. I removed it. The page number seems to be OK. Cullen328 (talk) 23:14, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]